WEDNESDAY, 07 NOVEMBER 2007 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:06.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Dr S M VAN DYK(DA): Speaker, I hereby give notice that I intend moving the following motion:

That this House resolves to debate the state of affairs at the SA Airways. Thank you.

Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Speaker, on behalf of the ACDP, I give notice that I shall move:

That the House-

(1) notes that 31 October is an important date on the Christian calendar, as it was on this day in 1517 that Martin Luther made a courageous stand which opened the way for the Word of God to powerfully impact every area of life;

  2) acknowledges those heroes of the Christian faith who have impacted
     society for the good in establishing solid foundations which have
     resulted in the many freedoms we experience today. Thank you.

Mr L B LABUSCHAGNE: Speaker, I give notice that I shall move that the Cabinet and ANC MPs who jumped on the winning Springbok World Cup bandwagon remain on that bandwagon for the Springbok team until the next Rugby World Cup in four years’ time.

                 CELEBRATION OF DEEPAWALI BY HINDUS

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr R B BHOOLA: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

(1) notes the celebration of Deepawali on Friday, 9 November 2007;

(2)     further notes this celebration of light is enjoyed by Hindus
     world wide;


(3)     conveys a happy Deepawali to all celebrating this auspicious
     occasion; and


(4)     further conveys its wishes that it be spent in great festivity
     and in the company of loved ones.

Agreed to.

            HELEN SUZMAN’S NINETIETH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I move without notice:

That the House -

  1) notes that Helen Suzman celebrates her ninetieth birthday today, 7
     November 2007;


  2) acknowledges the significant contribution she made to the
     realisation of democracy in South Africa by fearlessly fighting
     against the apartheid government during her time in Parliament;

  3) recognises that the courage she has shown throughout her political
     career has earned her both national and international recognition
     leading to her being awarded 27 honorary doctorates, being
     nominated twice for the Nobel Peace Prize, being made a Dame of the
     British Empire and former President Nelson Mandela awarding her the
     Order of Meritorious Service (Gold) in 1997;


  4) further recognises that since her retirement as an MP she has
     remained both committed to and outspoken in the cause of democracy;
     and


  5) wishes her a happy birthday and best wishes for the upcoming year
     and many more to come.

Agreed to.

                        MOTION OF CONDOLENCE


                   (The late Zipporah Noisey Nawa)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I move:

That the House -

 1) notes with a deep sense of loss and profound sadness the passing
    away of hon Zipporah Noisey Nawa, who was a member of the National
    Assembly, on Monday, 5 November 2007;


 2) recalls that hon Nawa was a committed educator and was truly
    dedicated to teaching and learning through her 14 years of unbroken
    service as a school principal;


 3) further recalls her sterling work in the struggle for the
    emancipation of women and that she was a member of and served in
    various capacities on the ANC Women’s League Ramotse Branch;


 4) recognises the important role that hon Nawa played in the trade
    union movement and the working class struggle and that she was a
    member of the Executive Committee of Sadtu between 1990 and 2006;


 5) acknowledges the great contribution that hon Nawa made as a member
    of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services and the
    Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development; and

 6) conveys its deepest condolences to the Nawa family, her loved ones
    and the African National Congress.

Debate concluded.

Motion agreed to, members standing.

Ms M L MATSEMELA: Hon Speaker, hon members of Parliament, the Bible, in Genesis 1:23, says that during the creation of a man God saw that a woman should also be created. I think by then, as the Bible says that when a woman was created, God made Adam to have a very deep sleep so that at the end of the day a woman should appear as we are today.

Allow me to speak on the late Comrade Ms Zipporah Nawa, whom I have categorised under the following: She was a cadre who met the challenges of the 21st century; she was a professional and she was a parent. Comrade Ms Nawa was born on 1 March 1945 in the rural village of Lebotlewane in Moretele 1. In adulthood she retained the fondness for the countryside that had also contributed to her education.

She had experienced the dust blowing in her face, heard the whistling of the wind when it travels through the air, slapping her in the face and on the legs, where the skin would dry up and these tiny missiles would sting. On cold days, I assume, she would sometimes kick a stone and stub a toe. I suppose many of us would understand why she joined the ANC.

I suppose those who have knowledge of the countryside understand all this. Comrade Ms Zipporah Nawa served the public in the second decade of freedom so as to meet the needs of the poor. President Thabo Mbeki once said:

As government we believe we have a clear understanding of what the national agenda is and are determined to do everything possible to pursue it, working together with the people and all their representative formation in the people’s contract to advance the vision of the Freedom Charter.

Indeed, the late Ms Nawa was a cadre who was politically committed to taking the masses to higher levels of human development. She was a cadre who understood matters that measured human development and continually analysed the indicators to improve the delivery of social, political and economic services to the masses. She was a cadre who learnt to make decisions which were not detrimental to society, a cadre who had mastered all modern skills of accessing knowledge - some of these include the traditional method of acquiring knowledge through experience – and a cadre who possessed the flexible thinking process that is required of us to compete in the extremely volatile 21st century global economy. However, a flexible mind must not be confused with flexible principles. She was also a cadre who had human relations.

We have been four comrades in this regard who have been deployed in the Moretele constituency office. It was I, Comrade Chris Molefe, the late Comrade Ms Nawa and Comrade Moseki.

We used to work very well in that constituency office. Comrade Nawa was also a cadre with a source of stimuli for the creation of responsible citizens. She was a cadre who at all times projected what was best for the ANC, and by so doing, stimulated the masses to be organised, patriotic, disciplined, modest and honest, and have a strong sense of social conscience.

Earlier on I said that when God created a man and a woman, that creation on its own, for instance, in the case of the late hon Nawa, made her to be a very strong woman, because when you read the book of Genesis, it will tell you about God telling the woman how she would labour; very bad. And again, that on its own I took as making us women very strong, because the late Comrade Nawa was also a mother.

As a professional, she started teaching in 1993 until 2006 at Lefofa Primary School, from where she resigned as the principal to become a Member of Parliament in 2006. As a mother, she is survived by her two sons and a daughter. May her soul rest in peace. Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: Madam Speaker, hon members, the hon Noisey Nawa died suddenly and unexpectedly over the weekend. Like all who knew her, we are in a state of shock and sadness.

We recognise that, indeed, she was a true daughter of the soil; someone whose life became a testament to what can be achieved by the human spirit when dedicated to the task of securing freedom based on considerations of human rights. Her role in the political struggle for liberation and the realisation and establishment of democracy is well recorded and documented.

She worked tirelessly for securing the rights of women, and also committed over 14 years of her life towards the educational upliftment of the community to which she belonged in Temba where she served as a principal of the Lefofa Primary School.

Furthermore, she was an extremely kind and caring person who felt deeply about the social issues facing our country. She was also a very conscientious Member of Parliament and was also dedicated to her constituency and various organisations to which she belonged, particularly as a member of the Portfolio Committee on Correctional Services. She was also distressed to see how many young people were incarcerated, often with very long sentences, and constantly suggested ways in which this vicious cycle could be broken.

Towards the middle of the year, she developed a chest complaint that made it difficult for her to talk. Despite this, she attended two weeks of intensive oversight inspections in Gauteng and in KwaZulu-Natal in late July and early August. On occasions, she could scarcely speak. Yet, she still put her questions to the officials by writing them down and asking colleagues to read them out. That is the sort of dedication and commitment that made her so special.

We, who knew her professionally, saw one side of her and deeply miss her. One can imagine how much more her loss will be felt by her organisation, the ANC and by her friends and family. We extend our deepest condolence to all of them - but in the knowledge that her example and legacy will live on. We in the DA wholeheartedly support the motion of condolence. Thank you.

Mrs S A SEATON: Madam Speaker, the IFP, in supporting the draft resolution of the majority party, wishes to share the sentiments of the ANC. We share the shock and the sadness that you feel at the loss of such an important person. I say important because she is obviously someone who has done and achieved a great deal within the ANC and certainly within the committee in which I have worked with her - that is the Correctional Services committee.

The hon Nawa has been a very committed member of the Correctional Services Portfolio Committee, as you have just heard from our hon colleague. I was with her in those two weeks when she was so ill. Her sense of humour never left her. She always continued with an incredible sense of humour and a total dedication to the Correctional Services Portfolio Committee and the work of the committee.

She continued to work throughout the time she was ill and was really and truly a committed member. I am sure that the ANC is going to miss her greatly. It is said that only the good die young, and obviously this was indeed a good person that has died young. She was obviously a good person. We wish to extend our condolences to the family, the ANC and the loved ones. May her soul rest in peace. God bless her. Thank you. [Applause.]

Nksz S N SIGCAU: Somlomo obekekileyo, baPhathiswa abahloniphekileyo namalungu abekekileyo ephela, kwakhona namhlanje sihlangene apha ukuza kuthi ndlela ntle kwelinye ilungu lale Ndlu. Isela elikukufa sele lisithathele kwakhona. Kubonakala ngathi sele sidibana rhoqo ngomba ololu hlobo, yaye loO nto iyadanisa.

Esi sisikhumbuzo esibalulekileyo sokuba ixesha lethu apha emhlabeni lifutshane, kwaye sinomsebenzi ekufuneka siwenzile kwaye siwuphumezile imihla ngemihla kweli ziko, ngoba asazi ukuba singabizelwa nini na edingeni.

Umbutho ohloniphekileyo i-UDM wothukile kakhulu kukuva isithonga sokuwa kwelungu lale Ndlu. Kusapho lwakwaNawa, kwizihlobo, nezalamane sithi: Thuthwini! Lalani ngenxeba, akuhlanga lungehliyo. Okwenzekileyo kudaliwe, kwaye kuyintando kaThixo. Nathi siyaya ngaphesheya. Lala ngoxolo nkosikazi yakwaNawa. Wanga uThixo angawusikelela umphefumlo wakho. Enkosi. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa speech follows.)

[Ms S N SIGCAU: Chairperson, hon Ministers present here and all hon members, we are gathered here today yet again to pay tribute to another member of this House. Like a thief, death has come again and snatched one of us away. It seems as if our meetings to mourn a colleague are becoming too regular, and that is disappointing.

This serves as an important reminder that we are on this earth for a limited time only, and that each day we have work to do and to complete in this institution, because we don’t know when we will be called up to meet our Maker.

It was with great shock that the UDM received the news of the passing on of the member of this House. To the Nawa family, their friends and next of kin, we say: Don’t despair! Let her soul rest in peace. What has happened was the will of God. We are also going to join them when our time comes. Rest in peace, Mrs Nawa! May God bless your soul! Thank you. [Applause.]]

Mr H B CUPIDO: Madam Speaker, the ACDP joins this House in conveying its sincere condolences to the family and friends of the late hon Mrs Nawa, especially to her political party, the ANC, and to all the other organisations she represented in our society.

It is our sincere hope that they have the assurance and confidence that she has gone to be with her Maker, and we pray that they will experience the peace of Jesus Christ at this time.

We acknowledge the high esteem in which the hon Nawa was held in terms of the role she played in the struggle for nonracialism, nonsexism and a united and democratic South Africa. We commend her for her commitment to democracy and social justice in our country, and we pray that God Almighty will sustain those who mourn her passing. Thank you.

Dr C P MULDER: Agb Mevrou die Speaker, die Vryheidsfront Plus assosieer ons graag met die mosie wat voor die Huis dien. Die agb lid Nawa was persoonlik as lid nie aan my baie goed bekend nie. Sy was nie baie lank lid van hierdie Huis gewees nie en sy was maar vir bietjie meer as ‘n jaar ‘n lid van die Parlement. Maar uit haar currikulum vitae en uit dit wat haar kollegas van haar gesê het, is die belangrike rol wat sy gespeel het spesifiek met betrekking tot vroue, baie duidelik. Die bemagtiging van vroue het haar baie na aan die hart gelê, saam met haar betrokkenheid by die onderwys haar hele lewe deur.

Ons dra graag ons medelye oor aan haar familie en haar naasbestaandes, asook aan haar party, wat ‘n kollega verloor het, en ons wil hul graag sterkte toewens en ons vertrou dat dit met hulle goed sal gaan op die pad vorentoe. Baie dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, the Freedom Front Plus gladly supports the motion before the House. The hon member Nawa was not personally known to me. She has not been a member of this House for very long and she was only a Member of Parliament for little over a year. From her curriculum vitae and from what her colleagues have said about her, the important role she played regarding women is very evident. The empowerment of women was very close to her heart along with her involvement with education throughout her whole life.

We would like to sympathise with her family, her next of kin and her party who have lost a colleague. We would like to wish them all the best and we trust that it will go well with them on the road ahead. Thank you very much.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Hon Speaker and hon members, I may not have known the late hon Zipporah Nawa in person, but as a human being, I believe that all persons have been created in the image of God and that she therefore deserves love, respect, service and understanding.

That she was unknown to a good number of us means she was not controversial. She had a quiet disposition that allowed her to do her work without seeking attention by sometimes speaking for the sake of it.

That she towered and rose among the ranks to become a school principal, speaks volumes about her to follow instructions and carry them out. It is not easy to run a school these days. That she did so for over a decade, she definitely deserves an honour.

Having been a member of her party’s Women’s League in Ramotse gives a good picture of who she was. Ramotse is, by the way, one of the slum areas in the Hammanskraal area. Having been able to be elected to office in that area means that Zipporah was made of sterner stuff.

Her response to a call to higher service prompts us in the UCDP to pay homage to her, her family and her political party, the ANC, and to say that that is the way of all flesh. Let us all take solace in the hope that her soul will rest in peace. I thank you.

Ms S RAJBALLY: Madam Speaker, I come to the podium today to sadly bid farewell and pay respect to the beloved ANC MP, Zipporah N Nawa. Our sincere condolences are extended to the bereaved family and friends of the deceased. This condolence is especially extended to the loving sons and daughter of Mama Zipporah. Nawa was a great comrade in the fight against apartheid and active in her contributions as an ANC MP. We express our sincere condolence to the ANC on the loss of a great comrade and a defender of human rights.

Our condolences are further extended to the royal house under the auspices of the chieftaincy of Chief Simon Molathlegi, who has a strong bond to the family through Nawa’s late husband.

Hon Zipporah Noisey Nawa, we salute you. May you rest in peace in the gardens of Heaven, knowing that you have sacrificed for the people and that your strength, hope and zeal, shall live on in our democracy for centuries to come. Rest in peace. I thank you.

Mong M T LIKOTSI: Spikara, rona re le ba mokgatlo wa APC re re re ikamahanye le mekgahlo yohle ka ho isa matshediso lelapeng la ha Mme Nawa ha ele mona a re siile lefatsheng le ka kwano. Matshediso ana, re a fetisa a tswa botebong ba dipelo tsa rona mme re re lelapa la hae, metswalle le mokgatlo o a neng a o rata haholo wa ANC ba tshedisehe. Ha ba hlaelwa ke se sa hlaheng, lefu ke ngwetsi ya malapa ohle. Re tshepa hore ka lefu la hae, ditho tsa mokgatlo di tla sebetsa ka matla, mme di tswelle ho tloha moo a ileng a siya teng, ba ntshetse pele boitseko boo re ntseng re le ho bona, eleng ba tokoloho.

Ba iqallotseng lehlakoreng la tsa thuto ba tiise haholo lebitsong la hae hore thuto e nne e tswele pele. Ba lehlakoreng la basebetsi jwalo ka ha ene ele moitseki wa basebetsi, le bona ba eme ka maoto ba tswelle pele ka boitseko ba basebetsi, e le ha re hlompha senatla sena se robetseng. Ke ona matshediso a rona ao, mme re re moya wa hae le moya wa badumedi bohle ba falletseng o phomole ka kgotso. Ke a leboha. (Translation of Sesotho speech follows.)

[Mr M T LIKOTSI: Speaker, we as the APC associate ourselves with all the other parties in sending our condolences to Mrs Nawa’s family since she has departed from this earth. We are sending these condolences from the depth of our hearts and we say to her family, friends and the party that she loved so much, may they be comforted. What has happened to them is nothing new, since death touches us all. We hope that through her death members of her party will work harder and continue with the struggle that we are in, which is that of struggling for our freedom.

The educational experts should work even harder on her behalf so that education can continue to develop. Those who are on the side of the workers, since she was an activist, should also stand up and continue with the workers’ struggle in honouring the icon that is no more. These are our condolences and we say may her soul and that of all the departed believers rest in peace. I thank you.]

Mr S SIMMONS: Madam Speaker, the NA supports the motion of condolences in respect of the late hon Z Nawa as it appeared on the Order Paper. We want to express our sincere condolences to the Nawa family, friends and the ANC.

The hon Nawa served in this House for a short period of time, but had to do her work in a difficult portfolio committee. We wish to thank her for her services to all South Africans in all ways that she contributed. May her soul rest in peace. I thank you.

The SPEAKER: Hon members, I take it that there are no objections to the adoption of the motion by the House, and I only wish to add the feelings and the views of the Presiding Officers of this House - the Deputy Speaker, myself, the House Chairpersons. We will convey all the sentiments expressed in this House this afternoon to the family.

Before we proceed with the rest of the business, we now wish to ask the House to rise to observe a moment of silence in memory of the late hon Nawa.

The condolences of the House will be conveyed to the Nawa family.

              ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATIONS AMENDMENT BILL

                       (Second Reading debate)

The MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS: Madam Speaker, hon members of the House, ladies and gentlemen, the amendment Bill before us arises out of the recent experiences we have had of our inability to significantly lower the cost to communicate, of increasing access to, and the affordability of information and communications technologies.

One of the challenges South Africa and many other African countries faced was that sufficient investment in the infrastructure was not occurring. At a summit held in Kigali, Rwanda, on Connect Africa, sponsored by the African Union and the International Telecommunications Union - ITU - at which seven heads of state participated, it became abundantly clear that 55% of the unconnected population of the continent will not become connected unless we create new models and especially have governments intervening.

This was in line with our thinking as expressed in this amendment Bill. While the World Economic Forum readiness index had found our policies to be some of the best among our peers in developing countries, the World Economic Forum found we were low on uptake and usage of ICTs. This amendment Bill facilitates the intervention by government to ensure that strategic infrastructure investment is provided to extend access to and affordability of, information and communication technologies services. It also provides a framework for Icasa - our regulator - for licensing a public entity to achieve the strategic intention of reduction of costs and the extension of access and affordability.

This thinking is a paradigm shift in the sector not only in South Africa but throughout the continent. Throughout the continent, several questions have arisen to which this proposal responds. The questions that were asked were provided by the private and public sector, as well as by the regulatory bodies. The questions are: What is it that we must do, given that rural areas are usually not seen as a market for private sector investment?

Satellite coverage is a possible solution for these areas. But satellite is too expensive. So, what should we do? The kind of partnership and funding models and mechanisms for absorbing whatever funds we have, have not been appropriate. What is it that we can do?

The overwhelming answer and consensus of all the different stakeholders, those from the private sector, namely operators, satellite providers, IT equipment and device manufacturers, etc, to the Development Financial Institutions as well as governments, was: African governments should invest in the building or provision of broadband infrastructure, including wireless broadband and especially the most efficient and less expensive.

Government should provide frameworks for sharing common infrastructure, access points, spectrum, devices, content and knowledge, especially in poor and underserviced areas, in order to meet our Millennium Development Goals. That government should help to reduce the costs of doing business and improve affordability by all while not suppressing but encouraging competition.

This amendment Bill does just that. It does not suppress competition but allows for strategic intervention by government, where the market fails while providing a framework for licensing in such circumstances.

The shrinking pool of investment capital and the failed initiatives by the private sector to address the issues of costs to communicate, has led us to these critical steps of amending the Electronic Communications Act in line with the concept of a developmental state.

The process within the parliamentary committee has been very thorough and I thank all members of the portfolio committee for diligently engaging with the amendment. I also thank the ICT sector operators and the regulator for giving opinions, advice that generally was not violently opposed to the Bill and for accepting the principle of the need for strategic government intervention that can spur competition in the expansion of ICT access and services. I thank, particularly, the new chairperson of the committee, Comrade Vadi for his demonstrated leadership in steering this Amendment Bill through in such a tight schedule, especially in an area he had not been as familiar as the previous chairperson.

Finally, I’d like to thank my departmental staff, especially Ms Mashile Matlala and the policy section under which she has worked very closely with my deputy. They have worked round the clock to ensure the passage of this Bill.

I would like to urge this House to pass this Bill, which will assist us in bringing the advantages of ICTs closer to our people and achieve some of the Millennium Developmental Goals for our country. I thank you.

Ms M SMUTS: Madam Speaker, South Africa would not, in fact, have had a problem with a lack of competition in the infrastructure layer if the Electronic Communications Act had not contained the one section that we opposed in that law. The Electronic Communications Act is Parliament’s law. It is also our law.

We reconceptualised the Convergence Bill as it was, to deal not only with convergence but also with competition. The absence of competition that has slowed us to a snail’s pace was – let it be said – the product of policy failure, which gave Telkom too long an exclusivity period and then tried to introduce a duopoly under adverse conditions.

Legislating in a policy vacuum in 2005, we threw the sector open to competition, except for that one section. Section 5(6) prevents Icasa, the Independent Communications Authority of SA, from issuing invitations to apply for network licences above a certain scope.

A properly empowered regulator applies its expert mind precisely to such matters – how to stimulate and create incentive investment and competition in areas where it is lacking. The Electronic Communications Act, however, contains a red robot: Everyone has to wait until our hon Minister issues policy directions in terms of which Icasa can issue an ITA, invitation to apply, not only for the big networks but also for any licence for in which a state-owned entity holds 25% or more. The light remained resolutely red.

Then enters the hon Public Enterprises Minister to turn the light from red to green. Unfortunately, he did so, of course, using the only entities over which he holds sway – the SOEs.

I would like to say that the DA, like every party in nearly every country in the world, is opposed to a return to state telecoms, and I mention that because our hon Minister described a paradigm shift in Africa, which, I think, we must be really careful about.

The case for liberalisation in telecoms is conclusive, but our telephone minister number two - as I nicknamed the Public Enterprises Minister - made proposals that sounded as if they had, in fact, the potential to break the bottleneck in terrestrial backbone facilities provided, of course, that they remain limited to a wholesale, cost-oriented offering to operators.

Infraco, in other words, had the potential to serve the goals of the pro- competitive Electronic Communications Act. Now, Infraco could not simply be deemed a licence under its own Act, for legal reasons and also because it must fit the logic of the Electronic Communications Act. It had to be brought into Icasa’s domain. Regrettably, the amending Bill tabled by our hon Minister brought it firmly into her own domain, rather than the regulator’s.

The DOC, Department of Communications, leapt at the opportunity to introduce an effective parallel licensing regime under which it could license its own SOEs to perform strategic infrastructure interventions - and we are talking here only about infrastructure interventions. Sentech, of course, already is supposed to play such role – one wonders.

However, such a provision as the one tabled, unconstrained, was far too vague and broad. Our communications committee has instead placed this provision within the Electronic Communications Act’s policy direction- making section, where it is automatically subject to checks and constraints. It is the logical place to put it since that makes it the extension of section 5(6), which is essentially exception to the general Electronic Communications Act prohibition on ministerial influence upon licensing decisions.

Let me say that it remains regrettable that this amendment does not open the ITA - which is to follow - to private sector entities that do wish to build infrastructure.

It is no more than a form of damage control against the ambitions of both telephone Ministers. However, because it goes someway to achieving such damage control, we will, today, support it. As our colleague, the hon Manie van Dyk, supported Infraco but made many warnings, we echo those very same warnings.

We do warn against the return to state telecoms. What we need is not the competition between two Ministers, which we are going to get. They are already competing with each other on undersea cables to the east and to the west of our continent. What we need is real and open competition. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr S E KHOLWANE: Madam Speaker, hon members, ladies and gentlemen, indeed, it would be important for me to appreciate the well-calculated decision by the Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises to ensure that they do refer this matter to the Portfolio Committee on Communications, so that we deal with this matter of the amendment of the Electronic Communications Act accordingly.

When we were debating the second reading of the Infraco Bill, I said - and I will repeat it again today – that across the political spectrum, we are all in agreement that the cost of communication services in this country is too high.

All the stakeholders that appeared before the committee on 31 October 2007, during the public hearings, shared the common objectives of government, that is to expand access to information, communication and technology infrastructure and services and, furthermore, to make strategic interventions in infrastructure investment.

However, we all differed on how government should achieve these objectives. Most of the submissions, with the exception of a few, suggested that normal processes of licensing should be followed. However, we are moving from the premise that indeed government should play an important role in ensuring that we do bring down the costs of telecommunications.

We also acknowledge that some of the presentations were informed by the fact that most of those who made the submissions were against intervention by the state. They suggested an approach where the state does not intervene in this industry.

Of course, they based their argument on the fact that government intervention through Telkom could not yield the expected results and, therefore, government should fold its arms, watch and rely on the goodwill of the market to provide solutions – a fact we disputed and still do even now. Our view is that we should learn from what happened with Telkom and ensure that it does not happen again.

The Bill provides an opportunity for government to intervene on infrastructure investment whenever deemed necessary in order to enable government to address some of the significant challenges, such as improving on government service delivery and supporting the objectives of the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for SA, Asgisa, and to provide the much-needed bandwidth for strategic projects and consumers at large in order to fast-track development.

We should accept that we could not find the logic to limit this intervention only to Infraco, whilst we all agree that ICT, Information and Communication Technology, is a dynamic industry. However, we should note that the current provisions of the principal Act do not cater for the facilitation of strategic intervention by government in the ICT sector, hence the proposed amendments.

In order to ensure that the Minister intervenes in accordance with the strategic objectives, the Minister needs to consult or get Cabinet’s approval before initiating and facilitating intervention. This would ensure strategic infrastructure investment and also provide for the framework for the licensing of a public entity by Icasa in terms of chapter 3. Indeed, it is regrettable that my colleague in the Portfolio Committee on Communications thinks that the Minister wants to usurp the powers of Icasa, which is not true. In fact, we confirm that Icasa has to deal with licensing. The Minister provides the framework for licensing so that Icasa could perform its task without any fear or favour.

We should also emphasise the point that during the Infraco debate, we indicated that there is a need for both Ministries to ensure that they develop policy to regulate both Infraco and Sentech, because if they are not regulated, we might find a situation where there are duplications. Linked to that is the matter of scheduling, which Sentech has continuously raised. We think that it is a very important matter that we need to take up.

As I have indicated, we are of the view that as a developmental state, we must intervene. Whatever happened with the Telkom intervention, we must acknowledge and learn from it as we move forward. Since I arrived here, I have heard people talking on this platform, still complaining about the Telkom issue. I wonder when that matter would be left in the past. Maybe at one point, it will be so that we can focus ahead in a manner that would be productive for our society at large.

In conclusion, one would like to extend one’s appreciation for the industry on the input it has made during the public hearings, which were robust and challenging. We would also like to extend our appreciation to the state law advisers, committee researchers and the department’s officials who have made sure that our work became easier in terms of co-operation and so on. Without any hesitation and doubt, the ANC will support this Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]

Ms S C VOS: Chairperson, once again the Portfolio Committee on Communications has turned the potentially problematic drafting of law into acceptable law and the IFP will support these proposed amendments to the ECA.

It is a pity that the ECA, in fact, had to be tinkered with as all of us in the committee realised that it was a finely-tuned piece of legislation.

However, as you have heard from hon Ms Smuts, we now have what appears to be two Ministers operating in the sphere of communications – in some kind of parallel ICT universe. And, we all know that attempts to deal with the licensing of Infraco via public enterprises travelled a very long and winding road which led directly to the door of the Communications Committee.

Infraco can now be licensed. We indeed hope that all the hype that Infraco will reduce the cost of access to ICT infrastructure will come true and very soon - to its credit - the Communications Committee under its new chairperson, I hope hearings on what were initially purported to be minor amendments which they most certainly were not, and we are indebted to the industry in general for their outstanding contributions.

The amendments before us today protect the Regulator – Icasa- from direct ministerial intervention as is required by our Constitution. But like Ms Smuts in the DA, the IFP is concerned about any attempts to entrench state- owned entities in the ICT sector. Thank you.

Mr H B CUPIDO: Hon Chairperson, the ACDP supports the Electronic Communications Amendment Bill before the House today.

Electronic Communications has taken the world by storm in recent years and has changed the way people in all spheres of life communicate with one another by using computers and cellphone connections; the world has become a village called a global village.

According to the 2006-07 South African Survey, in 2004, 82 out of 1 000 people had access to a personal computer and 78 out of a 1 000 were Internet users. I am sure that three years down that line these numbers must have been doubled by now, at the same time the UK had 628 per 1 000 Internet users and the USA had 630.

The competition among service providers has drastically increased with more and more mind-blowing products and unique facilities coming onto the market. The ACDP has no doubt that the explosion of electronic communication technology is of great benefit to South Africa and African markets as a whole. We need to be informed and in contact in order to keep up with the rest of the world.

The ACDP welcomes the investment and the possible reduction in infrastructure cost, the improvement in service delivery and the support that will flow forth through Asgisa and the benefits consumers will receive in general. Thank you.

Dr P W A MULDER: Voorsitter, die opwindende aspek van hierdie Minister se werk en departement is dat dit haar taak is om seker te maak dat Suid- Afrika nie agterraak by die ongelooflike tempo waarteen die kommunikasie, tegnologie en telekommunikasiewêreld vandag orals ontwikkel nie. Dit maak dit opwindend aan die een kant, maar aan die ander kant plaas dit vreeslike druk op elkeen van ons, ook in die komitee in hierdie Parlement om te sorg dat ons bybly met alle ontwikkelinge.

Suid-Afrika is die ekonomiese reus van Afrika en Suid-Afrika word gesien as een van die sewe opkomende ekonomieë in die wêreld. Ons goedontwikkelde infrastruktuur is een van die hoofredes vir Suid-Afrika se ekonomiese posisie in Afrika en in die wêreld, daarom durf ons nie agter raak wat dit betref nie.

Die VF Plus gaan hierdie wet en die wysiging aan die oorspronklike wet steun, omdat ons geensins die indruk wil skep dat ons in die pad staan van ontwikkeling op hierdie terrein nie. Wat wel waar is, as mens na die wêreld kyk met wie ons kompeteer en as ons kyk na ander lande met wie ons ekonomies kompeteer, dan blyk dit dat mededinging en kompetisie die beste metode orals is om wel tred te hou met hierdie ontwikkelinge sover dit gaan. Ons durf nie daardie les nié leer nie.

In hierdie geval is die regering besig met die strategiese ingryping wat nie die ideale wyse is nie, maar dit lyk in die lig van omstandighede dat daar nie ander oplossings is nie en daarom sal ons dan wel hierdie wet tans steun. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)

[Dr P W A MULDER: Chair, the exciting part of this Minister’s work and that of her department is that it is her responsibility to ensure that South Africa does not fall behind on the incredible pace at which the communication, technology and telecommunication world is developing all over today.

It is exciting on the one hand, but on the other hand it also places immense pressure on us individually in the committee of this Parliament to ensure that we keep up with all the developments.

South Africa is the economic giant of Africa and South Africa is seen as one of the seven upcoming economies in the world. Our well-developed infrastructure is one of the main reasons for South Africa’s economic position in Africa and in the world, therefore we dare not fall behind regarding this.

The FF Plus will support this Act and the amendments to the original, because, by all means, we do not want to create the impression that we stand in the way of development in this area.

There is truth in the matter, when you look at the world that we compete with and if we look at other countries with which we compete economically, it is clear that rivalry and competition are the best methods to keep track of these developments as far as it goes everywhere. We dare not attempt not to learn this lesson.

In this instance the government is busy with a strategic intervention, which is not the ideal way, but in the light of circumstances, there are no other solutions and, therefore we will currently support this Act. Thank you.]

Mr R B BHOOLA: Chairperson, in view of the telecommunications situation in South Africa, and noting that Telkom has for a very long time been the sole service provider, a standard cost has been established. With the introduction of Infraco, we hope that telecommunications services will receive a more competitive and lower costing.

At the end of the day, one of our country’s challenges is making services more accessible and affordable so that those hampered by poverty may enjoy them too, and in turn contribute to social development. This factor of social development is paramount in every faculty of government and business. This statement must not be misconstrued. What we are saying is that quality services need to be made cost-effective for everyone.

From this amending Bill we gather that even if Infraco remains a government entity, there is no guarantee that costing in telecommunications shall decrease or that we will not end up with a situation similar to that involving Telkom.

Telecommunications is used for a variety of reasons and it contributes greatly to our progress. Today’s technology has privileged us with the opportunity to succeed at the press of a button. I do not intend wandering into the aftermath of apartheid, but reality is that we are challenged to bridge the divide between the haves and the have-nots, and this can only be done by increasing accessibility.

The MF acknowledges that the powers offered to the Minister in this Bill may be criticised as a sign of excessive state intervention and as infringing on the jurisdiction of Icasa, especially with regard to licensing.

We sincerely hope that this will not be the case and that an amicable agreement on co-operation can be reached between the two to fulfil the mandate of providing efficient and effective telecommunications in South Africa. The MF will support the Bill. Thank you.

Mr R D PIETERSE: Deputy Speaker, hon members, allow me to offer best wishes to two special women on their birthdays: our Deputy President, who celebrated her birthday this past Saturday, and hon Helen Suzman, a special lady who celebrates her 90th birthday today. Best wishes to them, and may they stay young for a very long time.

Agb lede, baie, baie jare terug het agb Dene Smuts, in samewerking met agb Sue Vos, in ons komitee onder voorsitterskap van Ned Kekana, baie keer aangevoer, en soms gesmeek, dat daar gekyk moet word na die hoë pryse van telekommunikasie. Natuurlik was dit somtyds gemeng met destydse DP-politiek en vandag se DA-politiek, maar niemand kan ontken dat dit die waarheid was dat die pryse te hoog was nie.

Dit was ook meer as eenmaal aangehaal deur ons President. Ek onthou dat die President ten minste drie keer in sy staatsrede die hoë Telkompryse aangehaal het en gesê het dat dit moet verminder as ons enige direkte buitelandse beleggings wil hê, en ook binnelandse kompetisie wil stimuleer. So die President het dit baie keer genoem, maar niemand het blybaar aandag daaraan gegee nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Hon members, many, many years ago in our committee chaired by Ned Kekana, the hon Dene Smuts in co-operation with the hon Sue Vos, many times argued and sometimes pleaded, that the high prices of telecommunication should be looked into. Of course it was sometimes mixed with the then DP politics and today’s DA politics, but nobody can deny that it was the truth that these prices were too high.

It was quoted more than once by our President. I can remember that the President in his opening address quoted the high prices of Telkom at least three times and said that it must be lowered if we want any direct foreign investments, as well as stimulate domestic competition. So, the President mentioned it many times but apparently nobody paid any attention.]

Neotel and Usals, the underserviced area licences, were there, but still very little downward movement was seen in terms of prices. Neotel on its own experienced, and is currently experiencing, serious challenges and hopefully the differences between Neotel, the Department of Public Enterprises and the Minister will soon be resolved.

We need state intervention to ensure that we drive down prices aggressively and further stimulate competition. But most importantly, we need to take infrastructure and services to the poor, the rural and the marginalised.

Nou is die tyd om ‘n beter lewe, ‘n lewe op ’n ander vlak, aan al ons mense te gee, ongeag ras, kleur, seks of gestremdheid. Ek wil graag beklemtoon wat Telkom nie doen nie, veral in ander gebiede soos die platteland en die armer gebiede van ons land.

Suid-Afrika is ‘n land van baie moontlikhede. Ons mense lewe in ‘n periode van hoop en ek kan waarlik sê hul hoop staan nie beskaamd met die staat se tussentrede nie.

Die vraag wat ek graag wil vra, agb Minister, is: Is Infraco die voertuig wat die uitdaging moet aanvat en aanpak? Ek dink daar is ‘n deel en daar is plek vir die privaatsektor. As hulle saam met Infraco hierdie kwessie kan aanpak, sal die goed baie vinniger gebeur en teen baie goedkoper pryse. My probleem is dat, as ons net na Infraco kyk, gaan ons moontlik nie die mas opkom nie.

Hierdie voorgestelde wetgewing gee die Minister tyd om gouer aan sekere uitdagings aandag te skenk, veral na samesprekings met en goedkeuring van haar kollegas in die Kabinet.

Namens die groot en magtige ANC hou ek hierdie voorgestelde wetgewing voor. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Now is the time to give a better life, a life on another level, to all our people, irrespective of race, colour, sex or disability. I want to emphasise what Telkom does not do, especially in other areas like the rural and the poorer areas of our country.

South Africa is a country of possibilities. Our people are living in a period of hope and they can truly say that their hope is not in vain with the government’s intervention.

The question that I want to ask, hon Minister is: Is Infraco the vehicle that will undertake and tackle the challenge? I think there is a part and place for the private sector. If they undertake this issue together with Infraco things will happen much faster and with cheaper prices. My problem is that, if we only look at Infraco, we might not make it.

This proposed legislation gives the Minister time to look at some challenges sooner, especially after the discussions and approval of her colleagues in the Cabinet.

On behalf of the mighty and powerful ANC, I hold before you the proposed legislation. [Applause.]] The MINISTER OF COMMUNICATIONS: Chair, I would like to thank all the hon members of the House and the parties that have supported the passage of this amending Bill.

In part, the reasons for us going this route, have nothing to do with the objections that have been mentioned, for example by the opposition member Dene Smuts. Hon members will remember that we changed because everyone had asked that we do certain things in our policies and in our laws. These include such things as number portability, pre-selection and allowing everyone to provide facilities.

Ka Sesotho, ke sa ntse ke eme. [In Sesotho we say: I am still standing.]

Ek wag nog. [I am still waiting.]

They have not provided those facilities in the private sector. It is the failure by the private sector to provide those facilities that have created the kind of problems that have been mentioned. Now that they are doing so, there are instances of encouragement.

The most important thing for us to do is to make sure that this country, which is a developmental state, pays attention not only to two sectors of our population - the business and urban sector – but also to the rural areas. Nobody has been paying attention to the rural areas.

We know that the cost of communication also has something to do with the bandwidth that goes out of or into a country, who controls it and what their costs are. If that bandwidth is high, the cost will always stay high. This is what many developing countries have found out and we can learn from those developing countries.

Look at India. Because their bandwidth was provided by people from outside India, particularly for the businesses of the United States, the prices came down. But in any other country that is not the case, and we have proof of that. This resource is necessary in order to be able to extend ICTs to rural areas.

The second area is that there were conditions placed on Telkom when it was first partly privatised, and those conditions favoured the private sector. I could not change the shareholders’ agreement between Telkom and the then parties that were involved in Telkom. Neither could I unilaterally change the shareholders’ agreement between Telkom and Vodacom.

Today we hear that it is government or it is me or this part of government that did that. In fact, what pushed for this situation was that everyone in government had been told that it was important that the private sector took over. But, we saw what the private-sector-driven policies and practices have done with regard to the cutting off of telecommunications in many of our rural areas or underserviced areas.

The hon Pieterse asked whether Infraco is the only way to intervene? It certainly is not, but is a strategic way for government to intervene. Since we have taken that policy decision to have government intervene by setting up a company like Infraco, many other companies want to come to the fore because there is actually quite a lot of business that can run on this infrastructure.

So, the intention is not only to have Infraco, but particularly to make sure that international bandwidth, which is one of the reasons why our costs are high, can actually be brought down.

I now come to the issue surrounding the licensing conditions. The Bill certainly does not make any difference in the relationship. It is Icasa that will issue the licence for Infraco and for any other entity that government deems a strategic intervention. It is Icasa, and not the Minister, that sets the conditions of that licence. So there is no reason to fear excessive intervention in the work of Icasa. On that basis, Icasa itself has supported this Bill.

I would like to say that I would be very happy if the House could pass this Bill so that we can get down to the business of making ICTs possible or available to the most disadvantaged people of our country, whom these have not been able to reach. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Bill read a second time.

  CONSIDERATION OF SHORTLIST OF CANDIDATES FOR APPOINTMENT TO MEDIA
               DEVELOPMENT AND DIVERSITY AGENCY BOARD

          (Report of Portfolio Committee on Communications)

Mr I VADI: Deputy Speaker, the term of office of the four board members of the media development and diversity agency comes to an end in December this year. In terms of the Media Development and Development Agency Act of 2002, the NA must call for nominations from the public to fill these vacancies. It must compile a short list of candidates and this House must recommend the appointment to the President.

The Portfolio Committee on Communications has complied with these legal prescripts. It had received 23 public nominations and interviewed eight of the candidates. Having done that, the committee is pleased to recommend the following list of candidates for appointment by the President to the media development and diversity agency - MDDA board: The first person that we are recommending is Professor Guy Berger. He is the head of the school of journalism and media studies at Rhodes University. The second candidate is Ms Nomonde Gongxeka, of Yizo Yizo fame, actress and currently employed at the SABC. The third candidate is Mr Siviwe Minyi, a media trainer and facilitator from the Western Cape. The last one is Ms Gugu Msibi, former political journalist and now a media consultant.

The committee believes that the candidates who have been recommended bring with them a range of skills, which will contribute positively to the MDDA. The committee also wishes to express its sincere gratitude to the four outgoing members of the MDDA board. By all accounts, they have discharged their responsibilities diligently, and efficiently.

We wish to thank Ms Khanyi Mkhonza, the current chairperson of the board; Dr Gibson Boloka; Ms Kerry Cullinan; and Prof Govin Reddy, for the enormous contributions they have made to the MDDA board and the agency itself. They have played a significant role in promoting media diversity and in terms of content in the media, the ownership of media institutions, language, cultural diversity in the media and presenting varied perspectives to contemporary social and political issues.

Finally, the committee hopes that members of this assembly will encourage local community radio stations and local newspapers, in their constituencies, to apply for funding from the media development and diversity agency. These funds are there for the development of local media and I am hoping that members of this assembly will encourage their constituencies to take advantage of this opportunity. I thank you.

Question put: That the following candidates be recommended for consideration for appointment to the Media Development and Diversity Agency Board: Ms Gugu Msibi, Ms Nomonde Gongxeka, Prof Guy Berger and Mr Siviwe Minyi.

Question agreed to.

Ms Gugu Msibi, Ms Nomonde Gongxeka, Prof Guy Berger and Mr Siviwe Minyi accordinly recommended for consideration for appointment to the Media Development and Diversity Agency Board.

THE CONCEPT OF SOUTH AFRICA AS A DEVELOPMENTAL STATE, THE SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS TO THE POOREST OF THE POOR, THE IMPACT OF THIS IN THE SADC REGION AND WHETHER SOUTH AFRICA SHOULD BECOME THE HEGEMONIC POWER IN THE INTEREST OF THIS REGION

                      (Subject for Discussion)

Mr M B SKOSANA: Acting Speaker, I am quite aware that the subject itself is very broad, and rightly so, so that we can all have a bite of it. I will briefly deal with the first aspect of it and one of my colleagues will deal with the last aspect of it, namely for the region. Hon members, both the Ministers of Finance and Public Service and Administration dealt with the idea of South Africa being a developmental state some time ago. Today we have heard that the hon Minister of Communications is also joining in on that.

I have often grappled intensely with the question, of whether as a political collective, as public representatives in the House and among the custodians of the Rousseauian contract with the people – the social contract if you like - we have in fact, come to a common understanding of what a developmental state should mean to all South Africans. So far we have accepted and embraced the notions of a constitutional and the democratic state. As a result, we have encountered less difficulty in building the relevant institutions to make these concepts meaningful to the ordinary South African men and women in the streets. I must say that hon members should please take credit for that.

However, the crucial question remains whether we possess the capabilities to do likewise with the ideals of a developmental state, whether we could master the necessary courage and insight to define development in the terms of its normative goals to realise the well-being of the poor and the marginalised. Umer Chapra, in his book “The Future of Economics and Islamic Perspective” argues that these goals may include not only economic well- being but also human brotherhood and socio-economic justice, sanctity of life, property, individual honour, mental peace, happiness, family, as well as social harmony; whereas, Denis Goulet defines development as choices and too often in interstate affairs, the choice is increasingly cruel against the poor nations.

One of the major problems dogging the north-south trade agreements is the variant meaning of development. Obviously, the rich nations of the world understand development to mean the maximisation of wealth and consumption for their own people. Similarly, the poor nations also seek a better life for their own people, but the state of under-development has become their pervasive weakness.

Another author, Ammartya Sen, among other development writers and practitioners, sees development as freedom borne out of the removal of substantive unfreedoms such as poverty, unemployment, poor health, illiteracy and social deprivation. To realise this noble goal, the poor and the marginalised must have full access to political freedoms, social opportunities, economic facilities, transparency guarantees and protective security.

Closer to home, I must also ask: Do we regard development as a tool for distributive justice or has it become, and by default of the people, a concentration of economic wealth and power in the hands of a few? Thirteen years of liberation, and for a people emerging from a society marked by huge wealth disparities, deep social inequalities, racial and repressive legislation, how much progress has the developmental state made in discarding the elements of the post-war, colonial and apartheid economic development planning? It is a historical fact that the primary objective of this economic planning was to maximise wealth and consumption for the white minority to wield political and economic power, imposing in the process a heavy burden of perpetual poverty and hardships on the African majority. To what extent has the development enabled the people to effect a revolutionary eradication of the psychological damages inflicted by the Verwoerdian concept of master-servant education, whose long-term consequences have become an impediment to all forms of freedoms?

Some will argue that, why do you blame Dr Verwoerd when more than two centuries before him, the likes of Herodotus, Hegel and Montesquieu, just to name a few, had laid the foundation of all racial prejudices against the African people for centuries to come? Therefore, the fate of racism for us has been a history of the myth of the European people. Change cannot be realised overnight.

Should it not be historically, theoretically and practically inherent in the developmental state to inject at all levels a radical development paradigm that says the people … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order hon member, a presiding officer should lead by example. The time has expired. [Laughter.]

Mr M B SKOSANA: How many minutes did I have? The DEPUTY SPEAKER: They were six. How many did you ask for?

Mr M B SKOSANA: Well, I did not know it was six.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Okay, it is gone, sir. I am sorry about that. Next time ask for ten. I call on Mr Njikelana.

Mr S J NJIKELANA: Ngiyabonga Phini likaSomlomo. [Thank you, Deputy Speaker.]

The question of whether the state or markets should lead national economic development continues to engulf economic discourse. History has proven that markets alone have failed to address socioeconomic challenges faced by society; hence the role of the state in leading a national development agenda to promote social justice and equity amongst social groups has been strongly advocated.

I would like to take cognisance as well of what Mr Skosana said, particularly that the role of Parliament in moulding a developmental state and its character should be highly recognised and placed at the centre of our work. In keeping with that, I would like to also share what I see as the key features of a developmental state.

Scholars globally have highlighted, amongst other things, that there is an emphasis on market share over profit when moulding a developmental state. They go on to talk about economic nationalism, protection of fledging domestic industries, focus on foreign technology transfer, ensuring that government’s delivery or ability to deliver is effective, alliance between state, labour and industry, glaring scepticism on neoliberalism and the Washington consensus, and prioritisation of economic growth over political reform. The original conception and application of a developmental state, which came from East Asia, was characterized by authoritarianism and, with time, it has evolved to what is referred to as a democratic developmental state. The international community embraced a state-led model of development intended to bring about industrialisation and entrepreneurship through intensive and deliberate effort in state intervention.

Let us then look at our local context. Rene Gradwohl states that the fundamental policy shifts since 2003, using examples such as the 10-year policy review, the National Public Works Programme, the new role of state- owned enterprises, the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa, broad-based black economic empowerment, focus on delivery, the new national skills development strategy, the ongoing review of state capacity by the Forum of Directors-General of South Africa are clear indications for the government of the second Mbeki Presidency seeking to refine the role of the South African state in the process of generating more equally shared development in the country.

However, I would also like to highlight that South Africa is a developmental state in the making, because if you look at the shortcomings of the neoliberal influenced economic policy, they have necessitated that a shift towards a more interventionist government role should be placed. The introduction and the application of Asgisa is one of the tools that indicates the state’s intention to effect shared growth through active intervention but the question still remains: Why a developmental state?

As we engage in debate on the developmental state, it is important to understand that various developmental states were informed by diverse stages in human history; hence we have seen evolvement in the modelling and approach. Once again, Rene Gradwohl argues that widespread disillusionment with failed neoliberal policy and descriptions and the encouragement of efficient and successful states like Botswana and Mauritius paved the way for the conception of developmental states to be hesitantly embraced as an alternative development model for African states throughout the 1990s.

Obviously, amongst other things, is the fact that a developmental state is highly characterized by its responsiveness to a changing environment, which therefore means that, in moulding our state, we should ensure that we are building a developmental state that has the capacity to be responsive to changing conditions and, as such, should lead and manage economic relations.

With regard to the implications and impact, currently, there is an abundance of evidence as to how the state has focused on the indigent through social services such as housing, access to health, and improvement of social security through social grants, with particular emphasis on social cohesion. I would also like to highlight the building of a rainbow nation. Strong patriotism is fundamental in enabling a state to pursue a cohesive and sustained development-orientated policy.

I would also like to share implications around economic issues. I would like to start by saying that successful pursuance of a developmental agenda by the state is contingent upon rapid accumulation and diffusion of social capital and social construction of economic institutions. Recently, we have actually made a breakthrough by formulating the national industrial policy framework.

Obviously that would be coupled with the focus on ensuring that the practitioners in the second economy are empowered through programmes driven by the Department of Trade and Industry as well as programmes driven by all the departments in the economic cluster. Furthermore, the state has ensured, when it comes to international trade, that assisting African countries would in the long run help South Africa in its economic development. Amongst other things, issues such as removal of double taxation have also been addressed.

One of the things that characterise a developmental state is its ability and propensity to deepen democracy. We have seen in the current dispensation the emergence through either legislation as well as implementation of organs of popular power or governance. Reference in this regard is made to ward committees, structures that help and assist ward councillors, community policing forums and school governing bodies as well as the erstwhile community development forums, although in certain areas they are still active. If one takes a look at all these structures, it is quite clear that that is a genuine attempt to ensure that democracy is not only confined to representative character, but is also moved to higher levels which one would call participatory democracy.

Our very Parliament has taken up annual programmes such as Taking Parliament to the People by the NCOP, the People’s Assembly, the Women’s and the Youth Parliament. We know from the executive side that there are izimbizo, as well as public hearings through the parliamentary committees. All those are practices and features that one would have only found in a developmental state in the making.

Whilst one looks with great admiration as to our genuine attempts to have tried to formulate, mould and implement a developmental state, there are also challenges that face us. First and foremost are the ability and the capacity of the state to deliver on its policies and programmes. Our President, in his state of the nation address, has time and again laid an emphasis on this matter, particularly on the improvement of service delivery and the ability of the government to optimally utilise the budgets allocated annually as well as the monitoring of implementation. We need to take note of the extent to which we are able to mobilise people towards a better life for all. It is accepted that although the state has a primary role in upgrading these conditions for the poor, there is ample scope for civil society and the private sector to also play a role.

Focus on rural development is also an area that needs noting. There is unfortunately not much around rural development whilst there is an Integrated Rural Development Strategy. As a result, underdevelopment is still abundant in the rural areas. Inertia from established business together with those who resist change whilst they benefited from apartheid is still a glaring feature. Our ability to respond to environmental changes as a developmental state is an area that needs careful consideration.

Reference here is made to currency fluctuations which are beyond our control in addition to commodity prices which change erratically from day to day, trade imbalances, inflation, and widening wealth disparities. One can even make reference to a recent article by Mr Moeletsi Mbeki, where he warned of South Africa’s industrial decline, which is leaving small islands of wealth in a sea of poverty. Whilst I may not claim authority to such an assertion, it is but an issue that is worth noting.

In conclusion, I would like to highlight that an alliance between the state, civil society and business is a fundamental necessity. The state should take the role of a leader in effecting a developmental agenda. A strong and democratic state with clear objectives, internal cohesion, popular legitimacy and the capacity to control economically powerful factions of the population and direct the use of their resources, can achieve democratic economic objectives much better than the market alone, however defined. I thank you. [Applause.]

            WELCOMING OF DELEGATION FROM SLOVAK REPUBLIC

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I wish to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic, His Excellency Mr Jan Kubis and his delegation. [Applause]. Hon Minister, we welcome you to our Parliament.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, my good friend, the hon Njikelana, and I share some common ground on this issue. He says that we are a developmental state in the process of being built. I am not sure if I agree with that, but we both agree that at this moment we are not a developmental state.

The saying that South Africa is a state crying out for swift and dramatic development is incontrovertible. Can we make poverty a thing of the past? The saying that South Africa is a developmental state is a delusion, and the often-repeated assertion to the contrary does not make it so. We lack too much to qualify.

Jac Laubscher, a Sanlam group economist, wrote the following in Business Day of 18 July 2007: “South Africa does not have an elite, meritocratic bureaucracy that attracts the best talent in the country…” Such a bureaucracy is of fundamental importance for a developmental state - one that I pleaded for earlier this year. In the classic sense, a developmental state enjoys unwavering and consistent government action within a context where all sectors of society are united in a single hegemonic development project. This is patently absent in South Africa.

We focus on redressing the wrongs of the past rather than on addressing a prosperous future for all. The wrongs of the past will be redressed and their effects erased when everyone is given the capability to share in general prosperity. When the focus is on making poverty history, then all sectors of society will unite with the willingness to make the necessary sacrifices.

There has been development over the past 13 years and some very real achievements too - especially in the important, but limited areas of housing, domestic water and electricity supply. But, how do the overall developmental advances measure up against what is actually required to make poverty history? The answer to this is: Very badly.

Revisiting the miserable list of government policy failures - stretching from health to education, unemployment reduction and industrial policy - is unnecessary. They are well documented.

Suffice it to say that the Finance Minister’s economic growth projections indicating a steady decline in growth from 4,9% this year to 4,5% next year before returning to only about 5% per year in 2009 and 2010 gainsays any claim to a successful developmental state. Given a target of 6% growth per annum, we can accept that the target area will not even be challenged by

1. Since the growth target was set with a goal of halving poverty by 2014, we are clearly further than ever from achieving this. If that is development, then all one can ruefully say is: “Some development, some state.”

Should South Africa; or even, can South Africa become a developmental state in the classical sense. The phrase “developmental state” was coined by an American political scientist … [Interjections.]

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Madam Deputy Speaker, would the member take a question? Mr J J M STEPHENS: When I have finished. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will take the question later on.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: … Chalmers Johnson, to describe the economic miracle of Japan after World War II. South Korea and Taiwan later adopted the phrase to describe their similar economic development methodologies. A classical developmental state is one that follows the growth methodologies of these Tigers. Importantly, their growth methodologies were pragmatically developed and implemented in the context of the international regime of the day, as a political economist, T J Pempel says: “It is hard to imagine the economic successes of these three had the United States not been so anxious to assist their economic enrichment.”

Much has changed. Opportunities such as favourable access to the United States markets are not available to us. Import substitution and the protectionism they practised are not feasible under the World Trade Organisation regime.

The 21st century international climate simply militates against our ability to follow the mid-20th century developmental methodologies. Consequently, our concept of a developmental state must be a derivative rather than an emulation of the classical one. Yet, much can be learnt from the Asian successes.

Fortunately, since the unlamented demise of the Washington Consensus, no one seriously doubts the pivotal role of the state in economic development. What the particulars of that role are and how they change over time is our own decision - given our history, our diverse cultures and our predilections. We must seek and find our own third way too.

Joseph Stiglitz says that the term “third way” has attained different and, in some cases, quite specific connotations. But, what I mean, as he does, is that a third way lies between socialism, with an intrusive government role, and laissez-faire economics, with a minimal government role. The South African model must employ market-conforming methods of state intervention and a fixed focus on addressing future opportunities – opportunities equally accessible to all.

In a developmental state of the third way, consensus exists between all sectors of society regarding developmental goals and the means to achieve them. The goals are inclusive and not exclusive and selective. That produces an unconditional commitment by all for the developmental project - a focus on economic growth that disproportionately empowers the poor; not through handouts, but through capability enhancement and opportunity creation. It is not developmental to give people houses, water, electricity or food. It may be charitable, but it is not developmental. It is developmental when government enhances people’s capabilities - allowing them to afford a house, water, electricity and food. It is developmental when you give people quality health care and education in high-grade facilities.

Capability enhancement is the developmental approach pioneered by the renowned Amartya Sen – an approach that the DA fully subscribes to. With him we say: Development is freedom. Freedom, he says, can only exist in an open democratic society. This we must maintain, develop and protect at all costs. That is why the DA embraces an open society – a society where freedom lives.

Democracy by itself is not freedom and does not guarantee freedom. Democracy plus capability, plus opportunity is freedom. An increase in capabilities is an increase in freedom - freedom to escape poverty; freedom to enjoy full social functionality; and the capability to live a life filled with accomplishment, boundless opportunity and the ability to use it. Thank you. [Interjections.] [Time expired.] [Applause.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: He can’t take a question because he went over the time.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: My time has expired?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You have no time left to answer any questions.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: Yes. You can’t ask the question otherwise … [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I did not say that you must take a question. I am speaking on your behalf to the hon Minister to say that you cannot take the question because you have no time left. [Interjections.] So, you should actually be saying thank you, Deputy Speaker.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: I would like to take the question. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, no – for saying … [Interjections.]

Mr J J M STEPHENS: I would like to take the question.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Then you should have actually timed your speech to make sure that there is time for the question. [Interjections.] Will you please take your seat, hon member.

Mr G T MADIKIZA: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the concept of a developmental state implies a certain ethos of a caring government. The ethos is underpinned by a recognition that uplifting the poor and defending the weak among us is the first and most important duty of any truly democratic and just society. It is an ethos that says that those who have will not only give to those who do not have in order to promote their self- interest and protect their prosperity from the eventual wrath of those with nothing. Much to the contrary, it is based on the sort of thing that says that I can view myself as prosperous if my neighbour and his neighbour and everyone of my fellows are also prosperous. That worth is not something that resides purely in an individual but depends on the general wealth and wellbeing of the entire society.

The social, political and economic implications of the developmental state for the poorest of the poor are thus benevolent. If indeed we accept this sort of ethos within the state, then we must also adopt it in the larger context of our nation’s interaction with the outside world, especially our neighbours. It therefore, means that in as much as our neighbours do not prosper, we cannot prosper. As much as they do not succeed politically, socially and economically, we do not.

Thus, it is entirely contradictory to combine this ethos with the talk of hegemony or South Africa assuming such status in the region. It goes without saying that South Africa has not only the biggest economy in the region, but also the biggest on the continent. Indeed, our natural and human resources outstrip those … [Time expired.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, while the concept of a developmental state is used to explain the exceptional growth performances in East Asian countries, the success of a democratic developmental state will depend on the capacity of that state to manage the complex and very delicate balance between growth and social development. Balancing requires trade-offs, with democracy and equity on the one side and economic growth policies and strategies within a demanding competitive global on the other. Capacity and capability are of course conditions for success and these factors present enormous challenges in South Africa.

When we look at the continent of Africa we see a kaleidoscope of rich cultures and historical traditions, but we also see a gap between the poor and the rich that continues to widen. And, in South Africa we are still plagued by inequalities, which are the cause of much tension.

Neither economic growth nor poverty alleviation programmes alone will be sufficient to eradicate poverty. There is no substitute for creating more productive employment and supply and demand for labour must change. While education and skills development are key it will take two to three decades for these sorts of interventions to begin to impact on the situation, so long-term and short-term solutions must go hand in hand.

Some economists do not see South Africa as a developmental state but as a redistributive state, focused on the transformation of the economy and society. Observers, both inside and outside the government, struggle to make sense of South Africa’s role and identity in Africa. Some argue against a hegemonic role for South Africa; others say we have hegemonic power whether we like it or not, largely due to the fact that South Africa is less vulnerable than other African states and presently more politically stable. Dr Adam Habib of the Centre for the Study of Civil Society who supports South Africa in the role of a hegemony, says simply being a pivotal state means that South Africa will be rejecting a role of leadership which is neither in our, nor the region’s best interest.

If being a hegemonic power means being in the forefront of addressing issues of poverty, unemployment, marginalisation and inequality, how bad can that be? Because of South Africa’s precarious First World and Third World qualities, perhaps the argument that South Africa could best be described as a potential hegemony makes most sense.

The ACDP would like to see South Africa’s position, whether hegemonic or not, being sensible and realistic with a view to producing results rather than posturing for position or being overly concerned with our image. South Africa has a responsibility to do its utmost to actively and positively impact the lives of not only the citizens of the SADC region but this continent as a whole. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, hon member. I would just like to make a little correction. I am not an Acting Speaker and I do not want Hansard to be confused in terms of recording proceedings. The Speaker is very much here – just two minutes away from this House.

Ms M M MDLALOSE: Madam Deputy Speaker, the ideology of viewing South Africa as a developmental state is becoming increasingly popular. However, it is important for us to determine if we are a developmental state in the true sense of the ideology. Central to the concept of a developmental state is the idea that a developmental state is focused on a single goal: to achieve the highest economic growth possible. The developmental state is focused on state intervention on manufactured goods, exports to promote economic growth - state intervention has to support the market, and not replace it.

The state does not lead the market, but follows it. In addition, a developmental state also implies a specific institutional set upon which the role of society, and in particular the private sector, is crucial. In addition, in a developmental regime all sectors of society are united in a single hegemonic project, a national consensus regarding the objective economic development together with a willingness to make the required sacrifices to realise the objective.

Madam Deputy Speaker, when one considers all these points about a developmental state it becomes obvious that we would be disillusioned to think that we are one. South Africa is primarily a redistributive state, focused on the transformation of the economy and society. We should concentrate on what the role of government should be in a predominantly free market economy, and focus our energies on the failures of the market by scrutinizing our economic policies.

Our country cannot just focus on pursuing high economic growth when the majority of the people are still poverty-stricken, less educated and less capable. We as a country need to focus on our socioeconomic policies and challenges before we can view ourselves as a hegemonic power in the SADC region. Africa has its own challenges of poverty, low levels of productive capacity, low capita income, low life expectancy, high infant mortality, illiteracy, oppression of women and over-dependence on export earnings and foreign capital, the list goes on, at the end of the day Africa has suffered immensely to be independent. Thank you. [Time expired.]

Mr I S MFUNDISI: Chairperson and hon members, the concept of a developmental state is difficult to agree upon. Suffice it to say that it is generally used to mean a state that drives development in contrast to a free market approach.

According to Chalmers Johnson, a US Asian scholar, a critical element in a developmental state is its ability to mobilise a nation around economic development within a capital system.

The big question to us today is to what extent does South Africa mobilise the nation and neighbouring states to economic development? Is South Africa able to maintain mass support through nationalist propaganda, improvements in living standards for workers and businesses and increase employment as well as paternalistic labour relations in large companies?

If the answer is yes to all the questions, then we are moving in the direction of a developmental state, as defined by Lenin.

A developmental state has to answer the question why the countries of East Asia are industrialised while other countries are trapped in poverty and resource dependency.

For South Africa to get out of the cycle of poverty, the following have to be done: Firstly, government departments and agencies should be provided with a clear mandate to prioritise equitable employment-creating growth and ensure that there is effective co-ordination around all programmes. Secondly, government should export industries based on development of domestic market and other government measures should be built. Thirdly, we have to ensure the improvement of the quality of life of workers by reducing the costs of basic necessities such as transport.

It is a given that the moral standing, the economic and military resources of South Africa make it to look more or less like a hegemonic power in the SADC region.

South Africa has the necessary characteristics of a hegemony as she has a political and socioeconomic vision of the transitional environments and the political willingness to implement such vision. I thank you. [Time expired.]

Ms K R MAGAU: Chair, South Africa is a developmental state. The achievement of democracy provided South Africans with an opportunity to pursue economic growth, development and redistribution, so as to achieve a better life for all.

Our vision of the economic base of a national democratic society is characterised by, among others, a thriving and integrated economy that draws on the creativity and skills that our whole population can offer, building on South Africa’s economic endowment to create employment opportunities for the benefit of all. It is also an economy that is connected to the world - benefiting from vibrant trade relations with North and South, and which is an integral part of a balanced regional economy that contributes to the growing prosperity of Africa. Guided by the preamble of our Constitution, we have committed ourselves to build a united and democratic South Africa, able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the family of nations. SADC aims to promote sustainable and equitable economic growth and socioeconomic development through efficient productive systems; deeper integration and co-operation; good governance, and durable peace and security in order for the region to emerge as a competitive and effective player in international relations and the world economy.

Ours, therefore, is an interdependent region. The linkages among Southern African states include formal and informal cross-boundary human and capital movements; infrastructure networks, and shared natural resources. It is this interdependence among Southern African states that must be exploited for greater regional integration. We should also be mindful that Southern African settler colonialism concentrated extraction and production mainly in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Angola. Therefore, the three became the principal poles of capital accumulation within the region, while neighbouring states became labour reserves, servicing the labour needs of the white settler colonies.

It is this understanding which enables South Africa to prioritise regional integration. Therefore, current negotiations on economic partnership agreements have the potential to reverse the gains we have achieved as a region. These trade agreements we entered into between 1999 and 2002 – what we call the Trade Development Co-operation Agreement, the TDCA - allowed us to have access to the EU markets as much as they had access to our economy. Realising that our economy is linked to that of the region, we have thus taken a decision, as a country, to negotiate as a bloc. Whilst these negotiations are going on, there are issues of dual membership that the region has to deal with, which I have also alluded to. They came as a result of colonial settlements.

The EU has sought to take advantage of such issues as well as the expiry date of the Cotonou Agreement, which is 31 December 2007, to force us, as a region, to agree on terms which are unfavourable to our future economic development as a region, which is very important for us for the achievement of a better life for all and all of our neighbours. Our region should not allow this.

A number of African, Pacific and Caribbean states will find themselves in a difficult trading environment with the EU if the 31 December 2007 deadline still stands as the EU wishes. We are also told that there is no alternative to the EPA negotiations which deadline is 31 December 2007. Even though most parliaments will be in recess during that time for ratification of such an agreement before the implementation of the new agreement, the EU finds it impossible to change the deadlines.

We, therefore, urge the EU to accept that forcing us to agree with the EPA outcomes that will be detrimental to ourselves and the region is detrimental to a developmental state, as well as the region, which is busy integrating itself. Therefore, South Africa, in the interest of the region of which we are an integral part, must reject with contempt the suggestions we have seen in the media recently that we, as a country, are blocking economic partnership negotiation processes.

As a region, we have come a long way to where we are now. We also understand our historical backgrounds and diversity. We should, however, not allow the EU to defocus us from developing our region. We should not allow the EU to push us to a point where we compromise each other’s economies. Together we need to focus on accelerating our integration. United we stand, but if we allow the EU to divide us, we will certainly fall.

We must, in line with our African agenda, protect the unity of the continent and refuse to negotiate alone in exclusion of the region. Even if there are difficult challenges, we need to stand firm whilst working on improving our intraregional trade disparities. Poverty and underdevelopment is still prevalent in our region and in our country and the EU, in possession of EPA negotiations, where they are attempting to also smother the deadlocked Doha negotiations, must realise that that will be an injustice to the majority of the people of our country and our region. We should not agree to that. I thank you. [Applause.]

Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, we might look at ourselves and say we are progressive compared to countries in the SADC region, but we need to bear in mind that we are still a fairly new democracy and before we are to lead the way to democracy for our neighbours we need to first find our feet.

The MF has no objections to us being at the forefront on issues regarding human rights and human development. In terms of the policy and our Constitution, we are on firm footing. A close look certainly shall open our challenges in applying policy and the chaos we have found ourselves in since 1996. This chaos referred to does not imply that our current system has failed, but rather that the legacy that we have been left with has been extremely difficult to transform.

The MF believes that we do have a pivotal role to play in the development of democracy and human rights on the continent. We feel that the mandate for South Africa to run as a hegemonic power in the region remains the mandate of our neighbours in consideration of the interest of all South Africans.

The challenge of poverty on the continent is big and we need to find ways as a new democracy to cross the borders of being classed as a developing state to one of great power and strength. This will only be achieved if we can overcome the strains of poverty and retardation and infiltrate the gap that the powerhouses exhaust themselves with by keeping us out.

If the foreign debt can be written off on the continent as an incentive to correcting the implications of colonialism, Africa would be placed in a very progressive position on the map. We need to endorse a world conscience on the debt of colonialism. This will pave our road to speeding up development and then invite us to lead democracy in the SADC region. I thank you.

Dr S E M PHEKO: Chair, in the wake of third-wave democratisation and neoliberal ascendancy, our conception of the developmental state must be reconfigured. The PAC defines a developmental state as one that has a clear commitment to a national development agenda and does so by including the poorest majority and closing the widening gap between the rich and the poor.

There are many reasons for creating a developmental state that places greater concern on poverty eradication and social and economic liberation of the poor African majority in particular. Extreme social inequality also means that there must be an identity of interests between voters and parties in this Parliament. This means that floor-crossing must be abolished. It is not in the interest of the voters of our country, nor in the interest of development and effective service delivery.

This kind of state must pursue economic integration into the global economy. This it must achieve at its own pace, not at the behest of international pressure. In the post-Washington Consensus era, there is a renewed emphasis on institutional capacity and on states owning their own national development strategies. It would therefore, be anachronistic for South Africa to play a hegemonic role in the SADC countries. I thank you.

Mr L M GREEN: Chairperson, the FD supports the idea of a developmental state if by implication it suggests a caring state. A caring state upholds the rights and privileges of its citizens to access state services that are adequately resourced, easily accessible and available, duly responsive to meet required needs and service objectives as well as efficiently and effectively managed.

One of the basic conditions towards the implementation of a developmental state is for government to improve on service delivery. It does not matter if we call ourselves a developmental state when hospital beds are cut or when the cost of living in South Africa is beyond the reach of the average citizen. There is general concern that although South Africa has had stable economic growth over the past decade there is still the need for an economic miracle to lift our people from poverty and unemployment if you want to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2014.

Although we have had an average growth of around 3% to 5% over the past few years, the current economic climate suggests that unless real disposable income benefits are enjoyed by more and more people, very little turnaround in the fortunes of poorer households will be attained by 2014. Most of the poor are constrained by circumstances, which force them to rely too much on state assistance, even though government has introduced mechanisms such as Asgisa and the Jipsa programmes to empower the unskilled and the indigent.

Finally, a developmental state in the context of our country is one that should redress economic and social inequalities through a blend of market and social forces within a consolidating partnership framework including government, business as well as civic bodies and institutions of higher and further learning. I thank you.

Mr S SIMMONS: Chair, the concept of a developmental state is primarily brought about by the urgent need to address, amongst others, poverty in underdeveloped countries. It works with the assumption, according to leading scholars, that the market can and will address the deliverance and, therefore poverty challenges.

The challenge, therefore, is for the developmental state to become more than a rhetorical concept, but a reality. It therefore begs the question whether an even-handed ratio exists between what the market generates to the state in the form of taxes and delivery to the masses, especially the poorest of the poor.

Markets are most lucrative if conditions internally and externally are favourable. We therefore have considered whether not only our domestic market conditions allow for optimal state resources, but whether the conditions of our subcontinental economic and political environment need an overhaul.

The NA therefore believes that subcontinental customs regulations have to be reviewed to allow for more streamlined economic and trade activities within SADC. This, we believe, could lead to a greater flow of capital and labour among member countries that would bring about greater revenue resources to governments, which would allow for more poverty alleviation. Also, skills specialisation and technological advancement can be achieved in this way.

However, no matter how big the poverty alleviation resources pool is, the ability to channel this to the poor remains the biggest challenge. We therefore, above all, need to seek ways and means of how we will ensure that the necessary skills are in place for the desired distribution infrastructure to address poverty. Allow me to state that the magnitude of this topic begs for greater deliberation than what is allowed for here today. I thank you.

Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson, as we have already heard a couple of times today, originally the meaning of a developmental state was linked to the build-up and growth of Japan as an industrial nation after World War II, which later was also linked to other Asian developing economies such as Korea and Taiwan.

Chalmers Johnson, the American political scientist, explained the role of the developmental state in the modern economy as follows:

A state attempting to match the economic achievements of Japan must adopt the same priorities as Japan. It must first … be a developmental state - and only then a regulatory state, a welfare state, an equality state, or whatever other kind of functional state a society we may wish to adopt.

Jac Laubscher, die groepekonoom van Sanlam, interpreteer dit dat ’n ontwikkelingstaat op ’n enkeldoelwit gefokus is, naamlik om die hoogste moontlike ekonomiese groeikoers te behaal. Die res, met inbegrip van die verdeling van ekonomiese groeivoordele, moet hieraan onderworpe wees. Laubscher beskryf in sy artikel “Die Suid-Afrikaanse ontwikkelingstaat: mite of realiteit?” die eienskappe soos volg:

[een,] ’n klein, maar elite-, meritokratiese burokrasie, wat die staat se nywerheidsbeleid formuleer en uitvoer. Die burokrasie … word gemotiveer deur nasionale belang en nie eie belang nie … [; twee,] ’n politieke stelsel wat aan die burokrasie genoeg ruimte gee om inisiatief te neem en effektief op te tree … [; drie,] … ’n leidinggewende organisasie [is nodig] wat beslag kan gee aan … insentiewe vir die privaatsektor … toegang tot insette waarborg, kapitaal op voorkeurbasis beskikbaar stel, risiko’s verlaag, ’n entrepreneursvisie verskaf en konflik tussen ondernemings bestuur[; vier,] ’n unieke verhouding van interafhanklikheid en simbiose tussen die burokrasie en die privaatsektor [met] voordeel [vir albei; en laastens,] die vervolmaking van markkonformerende metodes van staatsinmenging. [Met] die … fokus op uitvoere … in die bevordering van ekonomiese groei … veroorsaak [dit] dat staatsinmenging … markondersteunend moet wees en nie markvervangend nie …

[Dit bevestig dat] die ontwikkelingstaat … ’n bepaalde institusionele opset [impliseer] waarin die rol van … die privaatsektor, deurslaggewend is.

Ooglopend geld bogenoemde nié in Suid-Afrika se geval nie, en het ons in wese eerstens ’n herverdelende staat wat gefokus is op die transformasie van die ekonomie en die samelewing, en tweedens ’n regulerende staat omdat ons soveel kere spesifieke uitkomste wil bewerkstellig. Suid-Afrika is duidelik nié ’n ontwikkelingstaat nie, en die staat se rol in ons vryemarkekonomie moet eerder verder uitgedaag word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Jac Laubscher, the group economist of Sanlam, interprets it as a developmental state which is focused on a single goal, namely achieving the highest possible economic growth rate. The rest, including the division of economic growth advantages, must be subject to this. In his article “The South African developmental state: myth or reality?”, Laubscher describes these characteristics as follows:

[one,] a small, but elite, meritocratic bureaucracy, which formulates and executes the state’s industrial policy. This bureaucracy … is motivated by national interest and not self-interest … [two,] a political system which provides the bureaucracy with enough space to use its own initiative and act effectively … [; three,] an organisation which supplies leadership [is needed] to settle … incentives for the private sector … guarantee access to inputs, make capital available on a preferential basis, reduce risks, supply entrepreneurial vision and manage conflict between enterprises [; four,] a unique relationship of mutual dependency and symbiosis between the bureaucratic and private sector [with] advantages [for both; and lastly,] the perfection of market conforming methods of state intervention. [With] the … focus on exports … [this] means that state intervention … should be market supporting and not market replacing … in the promotion of economic growth …

[This confirms that] the developmental state … [implies] a certain institutional arrangement in which the role of … the private sector proves conclusive.

Obviously the above does not hold in South Africa’s case, and we essentially have, firstly, a redistributive state focussed on the transformation of the economy and society, and secondly, a regulating state because we want to achieve specific results so many times. South Africa is clearly not a developmental state, and the state’s role in our free market economy should rather be challenged further.]

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, would the hon member care to take a question?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Hon Marais, do you want to take a question?

Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson, may I first finish?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): He wants to complete his speech first, Deputy Minister.

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Could you leave a minute at least to answer my question?

Mnr S J F MARAIS: Beide die SAOG-state en die markte se tekortkominge moet ondersoek word. Pragmatisme is belangrik en dit kry vele kere die oorhand oor ideologie, en daar is baie voorbeelde daarvan in die wêreld. Dit moet ’n les wees waaruit ons moet leer sodat unieke Suider-Afrikaanse ontwikkelingsmodelle geskep kan word vir ons unieke uitdagings en omstandighede. Suid-Afrika is ook in ’n belangrike rol en posisie om wel leiding te kan neem onder SAOG-lande en in die SA Ontwikkelingsgemeenskap. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[Mr S J F MARAIS: Both the SADC states and the markets’ shortcomings should be investigated. Pragmatism is important and many times it gets the upper hand over ideology, and there are many examples of that across the world. It should be a lesson we should learn from so that uniquely Southern African developmental models can be created for our unique challenges and circumstances. South Africa also has an important role and position to supply leadership among SADC countries and in the Southern African Development Community.]

Then South Africa can embrace its assigned role as the hegemonic power in the SADC region.

Ek sluit af met die standpunt van die DA en my nasionale leier dat Suid- Afrika en die SAOG kan ontwikkel en groei indien ons gemotiveerde burgers het wat openlik vrye keuses kan maak en dat die staat die gemeenskap van diens moet wees en nie andersom nie. Dit is van die kernwaardes van ’n open- opportunity society. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[I conclude with the position of the DA and my national leader, that South Africa and the SADC can develop and grow if we have motivated citizens who can openly make free choices and if the state serves the community and not the other way around. These are some of the core values of an open- opportunity society. I thank you.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Hon Deputy Minister, do you want to pose your question?

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you very much, hon Chairperson.

Hon member, just an observation that you have cited both Japan … [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! I must request you to put the question, Deputy Minister.

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF FINANCE: Would the hon member agree or disagree that the apartheid state was a quasi-developmental state that ensured the rapid development, in particular for the Afrikaner and in general of the white people of this country, and if you do agree, to say therefore the task of a democratic developmental state is to address these imbalances created by an apartheid state?

Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson, I do believe that the moment that you talk about a developmental state, and obviously getting results from that concept, you must look forward. And then you must ask yourself what you will need to get to a developmental state.

We know that in the past many things have been done and there can be many arguments whether they were developmental or not, but I do not think that is the objective. I think one must look at the basic principles and say: “We must look forward and at what is required to develop into a developmental state. We must address those issues and forget about the past.” Thank you very much. [Interjections.]

Mr M J ELLIS: Chairperson, may I just say that we are very impressed with the hon Deputy Minister’s interest in DA policy, etc, and if he would like to attend our study groups so he can learn a bit more, he is very welcome to do so. [Laughter.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! That’s not a point of order.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Chairperson, as the debate is already unfolding, I want to welcome the DA’s shift because all along it has been a believer in a free-market system and now it is indeed embracing aspects of a developmental state. Unfortunately, in their embracing of the developmental state argument, their ingredients are unfortunately incorrect. I think there should be a debate, hon Deputy Minister, just to engage on those fundamentals and theories underpinning that particular debate because theirs are more liberal theories and ideologies. We need to then engage on other democratic ones to ask ourselves as to what exactly is working for South Africa.

I do not understand what exactly hon Stephens is saying. Earlier on, he said that delivering free houses in itself is not developmental. Did he visit the people to whom houses were delivered for the past two to four years, and thus checked the qualitative change that has happened in their lives with electricity and refrigerators in their houses? They are now able to sell some frozen items from their houses. One cannot therefore say that is not developmental in nature. It is developmental! [Applause.] I think he is living in another South Africa that I don’t know where it is. [Interjections.] We welcome the shift but the ingredients are wrong. [Interjections.] Am I out of order, Chairperson?

Mr J J M STEPHENS: Chairperson, is the hon member prepared to take a question? [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Are you prepared to take a question, hon Bapela? The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Well, I will take questions towards the end of my speech. Thank you. I therefore hope that the hon member comes back to the real South Africa.

In characterising the international situation, the ANC in its strategy and tactics of 1997 said the following:

The ANC should aim to contribute to the restructuring of the international relations in the interest of the poor and this statement remains relevant as ever …

It continued, and I quote –

… We are moved in this regard by the conviction that, as long as injustice, poverty and conflict exist anywhere on the globe, so long as humanity finds within itself individuals, movements and governments to co- operate in their eradication of such poverty, the ANC is proud to be part of these international forces.

The topic as tabled has four aspects to it and I will focus mainly on the hegemonic power, whether South Africa should become one or not in the interest of the region.

What is hegemonic power? I tried to look up what it could be. It is described as the use of power, usually by those controlling the metanarrative or masternarrative against the other. Other explanations are that hegemony is a coercive control manifested through direct force or its threat. It is also about power, ideology, influence and knowledge, dominance of the ideas and coercion and cultural dominance. “Hegemonic” describes the policies of states, which control or bully those within their sphere of influence. Hegemonic power - the power of hegemony - is primarily through coercion and consent.

These are but a few descriptions and definitions on hegemony and hegemonic power. I raise all these points to later argue and respond to the question raised, whether we should become a hegemonic power in the region or not. Having that in mind, let us look at hegemonic behaviour and tendencies.

Firstly and fundamentally, hegemony is about raw, hard power. Militarily, hegemonic capabilities are such that no other state has, the wherewithal, to put up a serous fight against it. Economically, hegemony occupies a position of economic supremacy in the international system and enjoys a preponderance of material resources and a key factor driving hegemonic expansion.

Secondly, hegemony is about the dominant power ambitions - the purpose for which it is to use its power. Hegemony acts self-interestedly to create a stable international order that will safeguard its security and its economic and ideological interests only. Thirdly, hegemony is about polarity, because of its overwhelming advantages in relative military and economic power. Hegemony is the only great power in the international system, which is, therefore by definition unipolar.

Fourthly, hegemony is about will. Not only must a hegemony possess overwhelming power, it must purposefully exercise that power to impose order on the international system. When it comes to grand strategy, a hegemony practices the adage, “if you have got it, flaunt it” or as the USA said during the Iraq invasion, “coalition of the willing” or “You are either with us or against us”.

The philosophy and fundamentals concerning hegemony are about structural change, because if one state achieves hegemony, the system ceases to be anarchic and becomes hierarchic. Of course, as Robert Gilpin has noted:

No state has complete control over an international system, and thus hegemony is a relative, not an absolute concept.

When a great power attains hegemony, as for example the USA did in Western Europe after World War II, it means that the system is more hierarchic - and less anarchic - than it would be in the absence of hegemonic power.

Implicit in Gilpin’s observation that hegemony is a relative concept is subtle but important although the USA is not omnipotent. Although the US is the most powerful international actor today since imperial Rome, there clearly are limits to its ability to shape international outcomes.

The USA has been unable to suppress the insurgency in Iraq, just as it did not prevail in the Vietnam War and unable to compel either North Korea or Iran to halt their nuclear programmes. Does this mean the US is not an extra regional or global hegemony after all? Clearly not - at least not - if we understand what power is and what it is not. As Kenneth Waltz has pointed out: “Power does not mean the ability to get one’s way all the time.”

Material resources never translate fully into desired outcomes - a point acknowledged by military strategists that when they observe that the enemy has a vote in determining the degree to which one’s own strategic goal will be realised. Rather, a state is powerful if it gets its way most of the time than others do, precisely because the US is an extra regional hegemony

• a marked asymmetry of influence which favours it. In international politics, the US does not get all that it wants all the time. But, it gets most of what it wants an awful lot of time and it affects other states far more than states affect it.

Having defined in a very scientific and philosophical argument about what hegemony is, we in the ANC, reject any notion or thinking that South Africa is a hegemony. Hence, each time in international forums, we do stand and argue against insinuations, such as big brother, the power of the South, the regional power, a bully or imperialist power of Africa, which unfortunately are being ascribed without care and consideration.

One is a hegemony only if one uses the power of one’s economy, the relative military power and if one coerces, forces and dominates, imposes and controls in such a way that one becomes a unilateralist. That is not the agenda or parts of any of our foreign policies in this country and not in the democratic South Africa.

Yes, probably under apartheid we saw such hegemony, of bombing neighbours, in Lesotho, Botswana, Mozambique, and in Zambia under the guise of fighting the so-called terrorists or stopping the expansion functions of the communists. It forced others into agreements, such as the Nkomati Accord and or the Mbabane Agreements, sponsoring and supporting civil wars in Mozambique and Angola. Apartheid South Africa was a bully and hegemonic power in the region. At that point, if one would ask the question whether South Africa should be called a hegemonic state, I would have agreed but not this democratic South Africa.

In the democratic South Africa values and principles of international co- operation are underpinned by multilateralism in international affairs and proactive engagement in conflict management. Multilateralism is a concept of foreign policy and is therefore based on collaboration as opposed to competition.

Countries that pursue multilateral foreign policies avoid acting unilaterally and are generally opposed to foreign policies based on dominance. They tend to preoccupy themselves with issues such as the reform of international institutions, greater collaboration between North and South and a South-South co-operation. Theirs is a vision of an inclusive- based international system that is not discriminatory and where compromise is the norm. South Africa, our country, can safely be placed within that category of countries.

At the same time, in the field of conflict management, which is the other pillar of South Africa’s Foreign policy, the country is becoming increasingly bold and assertive. Despite our commitment to acting within a framework of multilateralism, we have not shied away from taking the lead in offering dynamic and pragmatic solutions to some of the most intractable conflicts on the continent.

What is happening in the Doha Round of negotiations, in the G20 countries and in the EPA’s negotiations, as alluded to by my colleagues, is that South Africa participates and contributes to those collectives and we are not bullying anybody. We contribute ideas for solutions and we look at the benefits of the collectives that benefit everybody.

Responding to the question whether South Africa becomes a hegemonic power in the interest of the region. Our response is no. It cannot be, it shall not be, and shall never be, but it will remain a regional player within a collaborative system of international agreements.

We must as a regional player enable our neighbours and the continent to grow their economies, assist them to address the challenges that they are facing, like the infrastructure, grow our own regional market as SADC within the regional economic communities’ programme. I hope therefore, that the hon Ben Skosana will agree with that approach.

Noting also that our economy has expanded into the region and the continent, our strength and capacity gives us advantages as far as manufacturing is concerned. However, we have an obligation in the region to see to it that other member states produce goods that can also find their way into our markets and trade in South Africa. We also want to see an increase in trade amongst member states within the region.

In conclusion, it is not in the interest of South Africa to become a hegemonic power. I think I have described what hegemonic power is and what is a hegemony. It is a senseless and heartless type of an activity or behaviour. We do not want to become that. We can still pursue our national interests through multilateral as the order of the new world that we are striving to build. As the ANC we clearly state that we want a just and equitable world order and that just and equitable world order is possible. And, we must strive to build it. Amandla! [Applause.]

Mr J J M STEPHENS: Chairperson, the hon member said he will take a question.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Okay, proceed.

Mr J J M STEPHENS: I would like to know from the hon member whether he has ever taken the trouble to visit the people who were given houses and then thrown out of those houses? They lost them because they couldn’t afford to live in a house because they had no jobs? [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Well, I don’t know of any cases where people were thrown out of houses. I think there is an issue here and I want to explain that issue. The issue is that there are houses that are given to people for free. There is a category of those houses, if you are not aware; those are called “RDP houses”. So, you cannot throw out a person who has been given a free house to live in. Then municipalities have what we call indigence programmes so that those people who are unemployed at that particular moment can go and apply for indigence and a consideration would be given. [Interjections.]

Government has been discouraging those people who after getting a house and then selling it to somebody else, to stop that. That is where we have to ensure that those things do not happen because we give those houses on the basis that people need them and therefore they will be able to grow and develop themselves. [Applause.]

Mr M J BHENGU: Chairperson, hon members, the well-known definition of a developmental state as developed by Chalmers Johnson, which is premised on his seminal analysis of Japan’s very rapid and highly successful post-war reconstruction and reindustrialisation has to be juxtaposed with our own uniquely South African home-made definition that will bear characteristics of who we are, where we come from and where were are going to.

According to Johnson, a developmental state is the one that determines and influences the direction and pace of economic development by directly intervening in the development process rather than relying on the unco- ordinated influence of free markets or market forces. Even if we agree with Johnson’s definition, ours will have to be expanded to include an element of what one may call African humanism.

Indeed, I agree with hon Njikelana that South Africa is actually a developmental state in the making, but any development ideology that we seek to follow will have to be in touch with the African reality. Basil Davidson teaches us very clearly regarding this, that instead of building new states from the foundation culture of Africa’s pre-colonial states, Africa tried to build new states from the foundation culture of colonial states. So, African independence had not been able to join in its own history and tradition.

The whole of the African continent is in the third phase of the struggle for economic liberation and development. No African country right now has won its economic struggle against poverty; and economic emancipation and development is the most important phase in our liberation struggle. Africa can never be free unless it has achieved economic freedom, and that is a given fact.

Political freedom cannot be sustained on an empty stomach whilst holding out the desperate and humiliating hands of begging. We can never be free unless we have overcome our personal poverty and achieved financial success. But, let us get this very straight: The Asian Tigers and China followed development pathways that did not conform to the Washington Consensus doctrine of free markets. It can be argued here that perhaps that is why they are what they are today.

The destruction of our African values as a result of colonialism accounts for many of Africa’s ongoing economic problems. Africa borrowed wrong things from the West. Africa borrowed even the wrong components of capitalism. It also borrowed the profit motive, not actually the entrepreneurial spirit. We borrowed even the acquisitive appetites of capitalism, not its creative risk-taking.

Our kind of capitalism right now assumes that human beings are primarily economic beings. It assumes that human beings will always act so as to pursue their own rational self-interest. In business terms, these principles are mirrored by the pursuit of profits for its own sake and by the assumption that every business exists to maximise its own self- interest. At least, George Soros agrees with me, regarding this.

Poverty as we know it has many faces; one of them is intellectual poverty which has allowed for inappropriate development strategies that are inconsistent with our African culture. We need to ensure that there is an integration of our African belief systems, thought and culture. History shows that significant societal transformation has to be strictly and correctly accompanied by our guided and developed African Renaissance.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): Order! Hon member, your time has expired.

Mr M J BHENGU: Chairperson, we hope that the ruling party will actually take the debate on the developmental state forward, because it seems to be a very interesting debate. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The House adjourned at 16:36. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Translations of Bills submitted

   1) The Minister of Education

   a) Wysigingswetsontwerp op Onderwyswette [W 33 – 2007] (National
      Assembly – sec 76).
   

   This is the official translation into Afrikaans of the Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 33 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 76).

   2) The Minister of Transport

   a) Wysigingswetsontwerp of Algemene Wette op Vervoeragentskappe
      [W 27 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 75).
   

   This is the official translation into Afrikaans of the Transport Agencies General Laws Amendment Bill [B 27 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 75).

2. Introduction of Bills

   1) The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development

   (a) Jurisdiction of Regional Court Amendment Bill [B 48 – 2007] (National Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 3039 of 22 October 2007.]

   Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of Joint Rule 160.

   In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification of Bills may be submitted to the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) within three parliamentary working days. TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister of Transport

   a) 1991 Amendments to the Convention on the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), 1948, tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.

   b) Explanatory Memorandum to the 1991 Amendments to the Convention on the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), 1948.

   c) International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships, 2001, tabled in terms of section 231(2) of the Constitution, 1996.

   d) Explanatory Memorandum to the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-Fouling Systems on Ships.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly

1 Report of the Portfolio Committee on Housing on the Annual Report and Financial Statements for 2006/2007 of the Department Housing, dated 06 November 2007:

    The Portfolio Committee on Housing, having been briefed by the
    Department of Housing on its Annual Report and Financial Statements
    of Vote 28 for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-
    General on the Financial Statements of Vote 28 for 2006-2007,
    referred to it, reports that it has concluded its deliberations
    thereon.