THURSDAY, 29 MARCH 2007 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:01.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

                          NOTICES OF MOTION

Mnr C J VAN ROOYEN: Voorsitter, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting van die Huis gaan voorstel:

Dat die Raad –

(1) kennis neem dat-

     (a)     die ampstermyn van die huidige Rektor van die Universiteit
          van die Vrystaat gedurende hierdie jaar verstryk.


     (b)     in die belang van versnelde transformasie by hierdie
          Universiteit, daaraan oorweging geskenk sal moet word vir die
          studente aan die Universiteit teenwoordig;


     (c)     die Universiteit in dié verband die voorbeeld van die
          Universiteit van Stellenbosch sal navolg wat vir die tweede
          keer ’n persoon aangestel het wat transformasie verstaan en
          ernstig is daaroor om dit te bevorder; en


     (d)     die Universiteit van die Vrystaat daaraan herinner dat dit
          ‘n nasionale bate is wat nie as ‘n ongetransformeerde eiland
          sy voortbestaan verder kan regverdig nie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Chairperson, I give notice that at the next sitting of the House I shall move:

That the Council –

(1) notes that —

    (a)      the term of office of the current Rector of the University
          of the Free State expires during this year;


    (b)      in the interests of accelerated transformation at this
          university, consideration in this regard will have to be
          given to the students enrolled at the university;


       c) in this regard the university will follow the example of the
          University of Stellenbosch, which has for the second time
          appointed a person who understands the process of
          transformation and is serious about promoting it; and


       d) reminds the University of the Free State that it is a
          national asset which can no longer justify its continued
          existence as an untransformed island.]

Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Voorsitter, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag sal voorstel:

Dat die Raad–

(1) kennis neem dat die Demokratiese Alliansie met skok en afgryse verneem het van die insident op Saterdag, 17 Maart 2007, waartydens ’n weerlose 86-jarige bejaarde inwoner van Potchefstroom in haar slaapkamer deur vier inbrekers op so ’n geweldadige wyse verkrag is dat sy inwendige beserings opgedoen het;

(2) die polisie loof vir hul vinnige optrede wat gelei het tot die inhegtenisname van die vermeende verkragters; en

(3) verder daarop let dat die Regering sterker behoort op te tree teen oortreders wat weerlose bejaardes, vroue, kinders en selfs babas verkrag en die slagoffers se regte swaarder behoort te laat weeg as dié van die oortreders. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)

[Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Chairperson, I give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day:

That the Council –

(1) notes that the Democratic Alliance has taken cognisance with shock and horror of the incident on Saturday, 17 March 2007, during which a defenceless 86-year-old elderly resident of Potchefstroom was raped in such a violent way in her bedroom by four burglars that she sustained internal injuries;

(2) praises the police for their swift action which led to the arrest of the alleged rapists; and

(3) further notes that the government should take stronger action against perpetrators who rape defenceless elderly people, women, children and babies and should let the rights of the victims weigh heavier than those of the perpetrators.]

Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the NCOP I shall move on behalf of the IFP:

That the Council–

(1) applauds the bravery of a seven-year-old girl who, while still in hospital with stab wounds, helped police arrest the alleged perpetrator of this terrible crime;

(2) notes that it is alleged that the man arrested for the attack on the little girl also brutally murdered her 80-year-old grandmother;

(3) hopes that the criminal who committed those horrific crimes will be dealt with accordingly and will feel the full force of the law; and

(4) wishes the brave young girl a full and speedy recovery.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you, hon Mzizi.

                    PRESENCE OF FILM CREW IN NCOP The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Before we proceed, I just want to make an announcement. The following communication has been received by the presiding officers: The film crew developing the documentary for the 10th anniversary of the NCOP has requested permission to shoot the ushering- in of the Black Rod and the first part of the NOCP plenary this afternoon. They will be stationed in the gallery and they have been informed of the rules governing that.

                   PRECEDENCE OF ORDERS OF THE DAY

                         (Draft Resolution)

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Deputy Chairperson, I want to move without notice:

That the House-


(1)     notes that the Minister of Finance, who is scheduled to deal
    with the First Order, namely the ‘‘Consideration of Division of
    Revenue Bill [B3— 2007] (National Assembly—sec 76) and of Report of
    Select Committee on Finance thereon (Announcements, Tablings and
    Committee Reports , 27 March 2007, p 515)’’, has been delayed; and


(2)     therefore gives precedence to subsequent Orders of the Day until
    such time as the Minister is present in the Council. Thank you.

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

                        KILLING OF EDUCATORS

                         (Draft Resolution)

Ms A N T MCHUNU: Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the Council-

(1) notes–

    (a)      with great sadness that the world read about the atrocious
          killing of Ms Philile Mthenjana and Ms Phindile Ntuli, who
          were educators at Hlokohloko Primary School in Jozini in
          KwaZulu-Natal who went missing on 14 March 2007 and were
          later found dead in KwaMduku; and


    (b)      that it is a shame that people in the profession can be
          killed in this fashion, particularly when males kill helpless
          females;

(2) hopes that the killers will get appropriate sentences fit for the crime they did; (3) agrees with all who state that the level of crime is terrible and appears to be out of control; and

(4) conveys its condolences to the families of the deceased and also to the National Teachers Union (Natu) of which they were members.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Is there any objection to the motion?

Mr E M SOGONI: Deputy Chair, we would just propose a rewording of this motion. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Thank you. Order, please! In light of the objection the motion may not be proceeded with. The motion without notice will now become a notice of motion.

                            FINANCE BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mr M O ROBERTSON: Chairperson and hon members, the Bill currently before this House gives effect to a Standing Committee on Public Accounts recommendation that the following unauthorised expenditure be withdrawn as a direct disbursement from the National Revenue Fund: Firstly, R313,6 million unauthorised as a consequence of deviations from tender procedures in terms of the Exchequer Act, and, secondly, R159,5 million as a consequence of overspending in terms of the Public Finance Management Act.

Strict criteria exist for the approval of unauthorised expenditure. Some of the criteria are the following: Effective and appropriate steps against officials who made or make or permitted unauthorised expenditure, were taken, funds in excess of appropriation were spent in accordance with the programme descriptions of the department on essential services which could not be avoided, and remedial steps are taken by the accounting officer to prevent further occurrence of unauthorised expenditure.

In addition, strict criteria exist for the non-approval of unauthorised expenditure. Some of the criteria are the following: No disciplinary steps were taken against the officials responsible for permitting unauthorised expenditure; funds not spent in accordance with the purpose of a main division or a Vote, and which are unrelated to the objects of the department, and, unauthorised expenditure occurred as a result of corrupt activities.

The Select Committee on Finance appeals to the NCOP to support this money Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I shall now put the question. The question before the House is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. Those in favour will say Aye’’, and those against,No’’.

HON MEMBERS: Aye!

The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I think the ``ayes’’ have it.

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

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

     SECOND QUARTER NATIONAL EXPENDITURE 2006-07 FINANCIAL YEAR


         (Consideration of Report of Joint Budget Committee)

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson and hon members, one of the main purposes for the establishment of the Joint Budget Committee is to monitor the monthly expenditure of national departments, and report to Parliament on a quarterly basis. Our report as the JBC, published in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports of 19 February 2007, was a fulfilment of this requirement.

We highlight in that report some of the issues in respect of the second quarter of the 2006-07 financial year. Departments spent a total of R120,2 billion against the projected R127,4 billion during that quarter. They were R7,2 billion below target. Percentage-wise, this amounts to 24,8%.

Although expenditure of all national departments is monitored, the JBC focuses on the highest and the lowest spenders, and also on those departments mentioned for specific government programmes in the state of the nation address by the President. We seek out and scrutinise the expenditure of departments which are tied to timeframes by our government and the timeframes of the Millennium Development Goals.

We would therefore keep a very keen eye on the budget implementation of, for example, the Department of Land Affairs, and how it implements its budget with regard to the Land Restitution and Reform programmes, and how their programmes dovetail with the Comprehensive Agricultural Assistance Programme, Casp.

We would also be focusing on the Department of Transport, and how it implements its budget with regard to taxi recapitalisation.

We would also be focusing keenly on the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry to see how it implements its budget with regard to water schemes to municipalities, but especially with regard to the bucket eradication system in our townships.

We hope that the information that we publish will be of assistance to all our committees in their oversight work, especially to ourselves as we deal with Budget Votes in the near future. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their province’s votes. Are all delegation heads present? [Interjections.] Yes.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declaration of vote, if they so wish. Is there any province that wishes to do so? There is none.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do so in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain.

Eastern Cape?

Ms B N DLULANE: Siyaxhasa. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Gauteng?

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: KwaZulu-Natal?

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports. The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Northern Cape?

Mr M C GOEIEMAN: Kapabokone re a dumela. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: North West?

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Western Cape?

Mr N J MACK: Western Cape supports.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

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

      CONVENTION ON THE PHYSICAL PROTECTION OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL


                      (Consideration of Report)

Ms N D NTWANAMBI: Chairperson, comrades, hon members and Comrade Minister who has just entered the House, the convention that is before us entered into force in 1987. It obliges states to implement specific protection measures for nuclear material. We are told that it is regarded as the major nuclear security convention, and the only internationally legally binding undertaking in the area of security of nuclear material.

Parties to the convention are obliged to ensure protection at all levels of the convention used for peaceful purposes in their territories. I know that, in South Africa, waste from Koeberg is stored in heavy, strong cement drums, and is buried somewhere in the Northern Cape. Let me just say that that is why the Northern Cape is demanding its own nuclear power station.

The objectives of the convention are to avert potential dangers of unlawful taking and use of nuclear material and to establish measures related to the prevention, detection and punishment of offences relating to nuclear material.

Legislation has been amended, namely, the Nuclear Energy Act, to cater for the requirements of the convention. These will be found in section 56(1)(h), section 34A and section 56(2)(d) of the Act. I don’t want to bore the House, as I understand that the hon members can get the Act and read all that is entailed therein.

South Africa signed in 1988, and Cabinet approved the accession of the convention. In terms of section 231 of the Constitution of the Republic, Parliament is required to approve the convention.

The Department of Minerals and Energy will be responsible for the implementation of the convention requirements. This convention is considered to be one of 13 counterterrorism conventions. State parties are obliged to ratify all 13 conventions in terms of the United Nations Security Council’s Resolution 1327. The other 12 have been approved by Parliament and this is the last one.

Already South Africa is implementing most of the obligations in the convention, and is also party to the original convention. The Select Committee on Economic and Foreign Affairs requests that the convention be agreed to by the House. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their province’s votes. Are all delegation heads present? [Interjections.] Yes.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declaration of vote, if they so wish. Is there any province that wishes to do so? There is none.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do so in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain.

Eastern Cape?

Ms B N DLULANE: Siyaxhasa. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Supports.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Gauteng?

Mr E M SOGONI: Siyavuma. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: KwaZulu-Natal?

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo steun. [Limpopo supports.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Mpumalanga? Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Northern Cape?

Mr M C GOEIEMAN: Noord-Kaap steun. [Northern Cape supports.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: North West?

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Western Cape?

Mr N J MACK: Western Cape steun. [We support.]

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

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

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: We will now go back to our First Order. Before we do that, I just want to make a brief statement, and then we will go back to our First Order.

                      MISUSE OF TRAVEL VOUCHERS


               (Statement by Chairperson of the NCOP)

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order! Hon members, before we go back to our First Order of the day, I just want to make a brief statement in regard to the matter relating to the abuse of travel vouchers.

However, before I proceed, I would like to request the hon B N Dlulane to stand up.

During December 2006, I received reports that the court proceedings against the hon Dlulane were finalised and that the hon member has pleaded guilty to the charges that were brought before her, that is, fraudulent use of travel vouchers.

I established a disciplinary committee in terms of Rule 256 of the Rules of the National Council of Provinces to look into the matter and make the necessary recommendations. The members of the committee consisted of the hon P M Hollander, who was the chairperson of the committee, hon Kgoshi M L Mokoena, hon N Ntwanambi, who could not attend the meeting, hon A Watson and hon F van Heerden.

The committee met on 12 March 2007 at Saul Tsotetsi Recreation and Sports Centre and resolved that the hon member should be granted an opportunity to explain herself either verbally or in writing.

On 15 March 2007, the committee met again to deliberate on the matter and to consider the hon member’s explanation. After its deliberation, the committee agreed that the hon member by pleading guilty to fraud, theft and abuse of travel vouchers has brought Parliament, and the National Council of Provinces in particular, into disrepute. The Disciplinary Committee recommended that the hon Dlulane be reprimanded for bringing Parliament, and in particular the National Council of Provinces, into disrepute. Further, that the province that appointed the member and her party be informed of the outcome of the matter.

I therefore concur with the decision of the Disciplinary Committee and caution the hon member that the National Council of Provinces will not tolerate such acts from members. Also, that this matter will be communicated to the province that appointed the member and her party. Thank you, hon member. You can sit down.

                      DIVISION OF REVENUE BILL


            (Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Thank you very much. Chairperson, Deputy Chairperson, hon members, firstly, I want to express my very sincere appreciation for the co-operation we received especially from the Select Committee led by the hon Ralane.

The hearings on the Division of Revenue Bill have clearly been exceedingly thorough and I want to express our sincerest appreciation for the manner in which the process was run and the advice that we received from it. We had indicated over the period that as we are able to generate high levels of income, we will use it in a way that responds more to the policy direction that government has and that important amongst the choices that we exercise are those which advance economic growth and job creation in particular. So, in general terms, there is support for spending like infrastructure on the one hand but also very evident in the Budget this year and over the medium term is increased spending on education, school education, further education and training, but also the way in which we are asking the education system to be able to attract new people and regenerate the skills base through bursary programmes etc.

The Division of Revenue Bill is, of course, that very vital link between the ideals we set for ourselves in the country, the various organs of state and their translation into very tangible goods and services that impact very directly on the quality of life of all of our people.

It is exceedingly important that in dealing with this Bill in the discussion today, the House recognises its responsibility beyond today. And the responsibility of the House beyond today clearly involves the oversight function in respect of the utilisation of these resources split into a provincial level, certainly the equitable and conditional grant shares. I know that constitutionally sometimes we stick our feet into boiling water and so on, but I think that it is very important that in the oversight function the House recognises that its responsibility did not end when this Bill was debated on a day like today.

The other part of this - and I want to express appreciation to you, Chair, for the way in which the NCOP is taking up this matter - is to remain seized of the outcomes of what the money bought. The attention to detail of the Intergovernmental Fiscal Review is a very important part of the oversight function. We‘ve said that the shift in medium term expenditure budgets is not to focus on how much the department gets. You can take it further and look at what it will spend on and how it contracts with the people but then you’ve got to be able to measure the change that the money bought.

I know that the House has done this and we will continue to do this. The former government put me away and the only reason they said that I couldn’t be in society was that I was an agitator. The news to those who took those decisions is that I am still an agitator and I am agitating this House to be more vigorous in the exercise of its responsibilities. [Laughter.]

We have published the Budget for this year and so the appropriations are for this year. But very importantly, the allocations for the two outer years are as important. We haven’t really been able to get into the minds of officials that they must treat that money as on budget. We do not want to see spending rise in February and March because they did not spend throughout the year. There’s certainty about the budgets to 31 March 2010. So, in our communication - certainly as members we turn to provinces and deal with their constituencies - it is very important that we are able to communicate that as a single message out of the Division of Revenue Bill.

The publication of the information is exceedingly important for forward planning and to ensure certainty and predictability in funding flows. The question I think we have to ask in the oversight function is whether people understand this and whether they are ready to receive this kind of money.

I have spent some time visiting three of the provinces in the last few weeks - Northern Cape earlier this week, Mpumalanga just a few weeks ago and the Eastern Cape before that. I want to draw courage from the kinds of interactions I had both with provincial executive committees and also with young learners in each province. Very exciting stuff!

We have responsibility to provide certainty so that people can plan and know that the changes will come. If you look at some of the details in the Budget - I will touch on this matter in a moment. If somebody has been waiting for a house, they become desperate. If they see that houses are coming to the neighbourhood they feel better they know that their chance will come tomorrow. The MTEF allows communicating like that and we must ensure that every sphere of government responds in this way to the challenge.

Let me turn to some of the deliberations that arose in the course of the interactions of the select committee and I want to state the obvious, namely that whilst I wasn’t present at the briefings, I believe that what I received from our various officials who were there has been quite thorough in the process.

First and foremost, I want to emphasise the full agreement about the oversight function of the NCOP. We must recognise it was raised repeatedly in the course of the hearings. Secondly, the deliberations focused on the concept of value for money, or the quality of spending, and here too we need to reinforce that kind of interrogation of the presentations. Clearly, we had very interesting discussions about health infrastructure, where things haven’t always gone according to plan.

There was a report carried on the BBC not so long ago about the fact that money for the De Aar Hospital was taken away to build stadiums for 2010. Nothing could be further from the truth! But, these kinds of rumours arise in circumstances where people are not thorough in examining the detail, examining the sources of money, the allocations, or examining the interconnection between one year and the next of the resource availability. So, part of what we must ensure out of the discussion in the select committee is that understanding, certainly by MECs and senior officials in health departments, that there is not going to be some national department that parachutes in money from time to time. I think that the issue of infrastructure in health also challenges us in a very direct way. We have this conditional grant called the Hospital Revitalisation Grant. The Hospital Revitalisation Grant was designed to upgrade hospitals that were found in a very poor state of repair. But it was never designed to relieve provinces of their responsibility for provision of health care. The provision of health care is always impossible without the physical infrastructure.

One gets the sense that provinces now believe that it is not their responsibility to provide health care, especially the secondary or district hospitals. These must wait for revitalisation. We are going to have to have detailed interactions on this.

The third issue which I am told the select committee gave a lot of attention to was the composition of municipal budgets, especially the growing personnel component. Now, I want to express appreciation for the manner in which this matter was debated because we are indeed very seriously challenged because municipalities are responsible and have been given a mandate by the Constitution to provide good quality services and to provide a developmental role.

If they consume too large a share of the budget with regard to personnel, they fail fundamentally in the most elementary constitutional mandate. For us raising it is one thing, but when the select committee raises this in their oversight, I think it raises the tempo of the debate quite a few notches and I want to express appreciation for that.

The Division of Revenue Bill would clearly find resonance completely in the state of the nation address on 9 February and the same things were taken up subsequently by the nine Premiers in what they call – I am not sure why – the state of the province address.

In line with the President’s vision, the 2007 Division of Revenue allocates a further R89,5 billion over baseline on the key priority programmes, and again I want to emphasise that the baseline was in last year’s Division of Revenue Bill. We have added R89,5 billion to that. Of this R32,3 billion is allocated to national departments, R39,2 billion to provinces and R18,1 billion to municipalities.

Schedule 1 of the Bill provides a summary of the allocation of funds across the three spheres of government and national government’s share includes debt service cost of R52,2 billion, a contingency reserve of R3 billion and conditional grants to provinces of R31,5 billion and, to local government, R13,6 billion. The provincial equitable share is allocated R171,3 billion while the local government is allocated R20,7 billion.

The increased allocations provide for the strengthening of a series of pro- poor services, especially at provincial level. A substantial share of the additional resources is expected to go to education to train and hire additional teachers, teaching assistants and support staff in schools and districts and to improve the remuneration levels of teachers.

Together with the resources set aside in the provincial equitable share for the implementation of no-fee schools, and a substantial increase in resources for classroom building and providing water, electricity and sanitation in schools, the investments announced in this year’s Budget constitute a concerted effort towards improving the quality of the public schooling system.

I want to emphasise – as I have done before – that the money is only part of the issue. Without good quality management we will fail the learners, the education system and democracy. I visited some of the poorest places in the last few weeks and in one of the provinces I drilled some of the underspending in the current fiscal year. When you look at underspending in education you pause and take out a very sharp drill like a dentist would have and you drill down as deeply as you can go.

When I strike a point where the province says the underspending is on learner support materials, I pause, because it cannot be that in an environment where parents are incapable of affording elementary things, in an environment where many of the schools affected are in fact no-fee schools, and not schools in leafy suburbs, you sit with money unspent on learner support material. It means somebody is not doing their job. [Applause.]

I use this to emphasise the point I raised because I think that when this Bill is passed by the House we can have a measure of comfort about the quantum of resources allocated for the task. But that is all we can have comfort about. The money won’t walk to where it needs to be. It needs to be managed and change needs to be driven, and that is why the oversight function needs to be enhanced to ensure that we focus on the quality of the outcomes.

In respect of health there are also significant increases, with a very special focus on increases in the number of health workers, and the debate on the Intergovernmental Fiscal Review would have dealt with that issue already. But over the next five years we must train and employ a further 30 000 people in the public health system.

Last year’s Budget framework made provision for the treatment and care of about 250 000 people who are ill with Aids. We are likely to reach that figure quite soon and the HIV and Aids programme, presently developed through 272 sites, is stepped up to double the uptake over the next three years. Money is there and we have to ensure that it is properly allocated.

One of the big changes in this year’s Budget is, of course, the community library services grant. I know the hon Robinson says it was all her work. [Laughter.] We can all claim responsibility in that way, but there is R1 billion, and my observation from interactions is in fact that we must speed up the process. [Applause.]

I am not sure that it is just an issue of a physical space to store the books and that there are many unemployed librarians at the moment. I think we have to look at all issues together and also look at other services like Internet facilities and so on in the libraries to advance this struggle.

In respect of local government, over the next three years municipalities will receive R129,2 billion including in-kind donations of R7,4 billion. This includes R27,2 billion to compensate municipalities for the ongoing loss of RSC levies. As a result, the local government share of nationally raised revenue increases from 6,5% in the current financial year to 7,2% in 2007–08 and 7,8% in the year that ends 31 March 2010.

Regional bulk water and sanitation infrastructure is prioritised to sustain the delivery of free basic services and to deliver water and electricity to schools and clinics. Total infrastructure transfers to municipalities now total R52 billion over the next three years. That is real money in any currency.

These allocations aim to support local programmes that would provide for sustainable neighbourhoods while at the same time attracting private sector investments in underserviced communities. Together with increases in housing allocations, this should provide a major boost to local development.

In conclusion, provinces and municipalities have a key role to play in government’s programme of action which, amongst other things, seeks to deliver more and better services to our people.

They also have a major role to play in facilitating the attainment of our growth targets. The public resources allocated in the Division of Revenue Bill will certainly help us to achieve our targets – but it would only help, it can’t do everything. As elected representatives we have a collective responsibility in ensuring that we spend resources effectively and efficiently and that we can measure the improvements in the quality of life of the poorest of our people and of all South Africans as a result of wise decisions taken in this House. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

Mr T RALANE: Chairperson, the Minister of Finance, special delegates and colleagues, this year marks the 52nd anniversary of the adoption of the Freedom Charter at the historic Congress of the People at Kliptown. The elected delegates who had come from every corner of the country pledged to strive, sparing neither strength nor courage, to win the democratic changes set out in the Freedom Charter. After that they went home, probably scarcely realising the full significance of what they had done. They had held congresses before and many of them adopted declarations, issued appeals, voiced their grievances, and made demands for an end to the oppressive apartheid system.

In 1952 thousands of them had gone to jail in the great defiance campaign, enduring every form of punishment and humiliation in their determination to be free - some had to even sacrifice their lives. Could the speaking and writing of a few words achieve more than that and raise the struggle to a higher level? Perhaps, only when we commemorate the adoption of the Freedom Charter, can the full significance of it and the congress that gave birth to it, be evaluated.

Overcoming all the attempts of the apartheid regime to destroy it, as well as a mass of pettifogging objections from the ultra-left and the ultra- right within the ranks of the movement itself, the Freedom Charter is now clearly seen by friend and foe alike as the only blueprint for transforming South Africa. It is an institution that can never be destroyed or erased from South African minds.

The Freedom Charter is a distillation of the day-to-day experience and demands of the masses of the people of South Africa. It is simple and comprehensive. It pinpointed with accuracy what was wrong with apartheid and outlined what changes were needed to put things right; yet, precisely because of its simplicity and truthfulness to reality, it is profoundly revolutionary. It is timeless and cannot be dated. It is as meaningful as the day on which it was first adopted.

We South Africans have little chance for illusions about the enormity of the task we are engaged in. In this 52nd year of the Freedom Charter we must rejoice in the inexhaustible resolve of our people to be free, which has guaranteed that our vanguard organisation has overcome all efforts to destroy it and has gone from strength to strength, so that its prestige at home and abroad has never been higher. That the ideas of the Freedom Charter have gained ground rapidly in South Africa is clear from even a superficial glance at the policies and programmes of our government.

The January 8th Statement of the ANC instructs us to intensify the fight against poverty. The division of revenue debated today is the allocation of resources to attack poverty. It is for this reason that the eradication of poverty has been at the centre of our policies and programmes since the first democratic elections. Drawing on the experience of the past ten years of freedom, and building on the firm foundation laid by our people in 2004, we identified the goal of halving poverty in South Africa by 2014.

In 2007, we must do everything possible to make certain that we achieve further advances towards the achievement of that goal. We will be able to do this thanks to the progress already made in undoing the devastating legacy of the colonial and apartheid oppressions, dispossession and deliberate underdevelopment.

We will also be able to do this because of the steps we have taken to redirect state expenditure towards meeting the needs of the poor and to free resources previously used to service our inherited public debt for spending on service provision and infrastructure.

The Division of Revenue Bill before us today is the implementing agent of the many provisions of the Freedom Charter. The Bill is noted for its redistributive character. It channels, as never before, resources to the poor by means of increased social grants, higher spending on transport infrastructure, 2010 World Cup stadiums, municipal and social services and community infrastructure, such as water and sanitation, schools, clinics, and roads.

Government, it must be remembered, remains committed to the following: The eradication of social separation, increasing employment opportunities, and reducing crime, addressing hiv and Aids, developing an efficient Public Service and nation-building.

Each of these is a key to a better life for all South Africans. Although programmes to meet these goals cut across all three spheres of government, and often also cut across departments, they are appropriately guided by policies set by the democratic government which, in turn, is guided by objectives of the Freedom Charter.

The challenge, however, is for all select committees in the NCOP to be vigilant in conducting robust and constructive oversight. If a discrepancy exists in provincial financial reporting, it is likely that that discrepancy will also be revealed on delivery.

The Select Committee on Finance declares support for the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill without amendments. I thank you. [Applause.]

Ms D ROBINSON: Chairperson, hon members, let me start by congratulating the Minister of Finance for the fine sense of balance displayed in the Budget that underlies this Act, especially with respect to the social needs of our country. However, as regards the growth and employment needs in our country, we believe that there is ample room for improvement.

In this regard, the DA has been quite vocal for the need to use our fiscal system more proactively, especially with respect to stimulating the production side of our economy.

The fact that this is not currently done, means that national government needs to share in the blame for the amount of upwards pressure that our domestic debt levels succeed in exerting on our inflation rate.

The escalating cost of services and goods, particularly food, is something that severely affects the already insufficient capacity of our provincial and local governments to deliver.

If something is not done at the top by Minister Manuel, then the old German adage – the fish rots from the head down – will become a literal truth. One respect in which we can look forward to seeing some level of recovery is the state of our public libraries.

Constant pressure by the DA in and outside of Parliament’s Select Committee on Finance has, at long last, been rewarded by a R1 billion conditional grant for the improvement of library services. I thank you, Minister, for heeding my call on behalf of all the citizens of South Africa … [Applause.] … as we know that literacy and education are vital to the growth of skills and competence needed to take our country forward.

Although this allocation is significant, since the allocation was made to what was formerly an unfunded mandate, the need is much greater and future discussions around this issue will be focused on getting more money for this cause – both out of the provincial equitable share and out of the conditional grant.

The indications are that more funds will be allocated after a study into the state and functioning of our country’s public libraries has been completed. This needs to be done with some urgency as it has been dragging on for some time.

Chairperson, one needs to know that money allocated will be money well spent.

Continuing on a positive note, and with particular reference to the Western Cape, I found it heartening to learn from committee discussions that responsible government in the City of Cape Town has seen good progress made with transport tendering processes during the past financial year.

This was a matter of particular concern, for under the previous city government, transport infrastructure projects seemed to focus on the inner city alone.

It was also good to hear that the Department of Transport had a comprehensive programme in place for the upgrade of national roads as well as a ten-year programme for managing congestion on our national roads.

We now await information on how this will benefit the Western Cape, particularly as far as rural road safety and the easing of congestion in and around the city of Cape Town on the N1 and N2 is concerned.

Unfortunately, not all concerns over the performance of national government with respect to the province from which we speak today have been suitably and comprehensively addressed.

We need greater accountability, particularly for the slow provision of new electricity connection points to the poor, ensuring that electricity supplies are accessed lawfully and safely, and keeping up the maintenance of electricity cables and other infrastructure.

This has a very real impact on the lives of our citizens and the Department of Minerals and Energy would do well to ease our concerns in this regard ahead of the next round of fiscal reviews.

Then, there is the worrying matter of our state hospitals. I accept that finding the right balance is difficult, but we cannot allow the deterioration of our top public medical facilities to be justified by redistributive activity.

South Africa’s public health service needs to be comprehensively developed, not dismantled in places and haphazardly reassembled to inferior standards in the name of so-called provision for the poor.

While primary health care is important, we cannot allow tertiary health care to deteriorate. Groote Schuur and Tygerberg, the facilities where the poor can access such specialised medical care, have lost R19 million and R11 million out of their respective allocations. It will not be the well- insured and the rich who will be suffering as a result.

While service delivery in the Western Cape is not where the DA would like to see it yet, it has a recognised advantage over its poorer neighbours, the Northern Cape and the Eastern Cape. The citizens of our neighbouring provinces know this and have started to vote with their feet.

Since the past census, people originating from these provinces have come to live and work here, sending their children to school here and sending their sick here for health care.

Better mechanisms need to be built into the Division of Revenue Bill to ensure that fund allocations take these population dynamics into account.

Houses need to be built, education and health care need to be improved, in our neighbouring provinces as well as in the Western Cape, and this is where proper management comes in because often the money is allocated but it is not properly spent – and I know we agree on this. It is vital that not only the Western Cape but the whole of South Africa becomes truly a home for all.

The DA supports the Bill. Enkosi. [Thank you.]

Mr E M SOGONI: Chairperson, hon Minister of Finance and colleagues, in the 2004 election manifesto we were proud to proclaim that government had registered the lowest debt levels and that, as a consequence, it was able to introduce real increases in spending on health – Mrs Robinson – education, housing and social grants in order to ensure that a better life for all was truly realised.

Though the democratic government inherited high debt, a stagnant economy and a local government designed to serve a few, today’s local government strategy is to provide services to all communities in a sustainable manner, irrespective of the colour or creed of a person.

The division of revenue is an attempt by the ANC and the government of the people to legislatively take measures in order to progressively realise the social and economic goals of this democratic dispensation, but, obviously, within the limits of available resources.

It is in this light that a new conditional grant for municipalities called “Backlogs in the Electrification of Clinics and Schools Grant” was created, as a measure of pushing further back the frontiers of poverty.

The grant provides capital subsidies in order to address electrification backlogs in schools and clinics. The concept of a human association asserts that human life has equal worth and that human beings are equally entitled to political, economic and social rights, which allow them to choose a life they wish to live.

The Freedom Charter provides the ideological framework for our transformation agenda, whilst the division of revenue is the operating agent of this transformation, which gives practical meaning to the words of Will Houghton, given prominence by our Minister of Finance, that: “Life has equal worth.”

Although the Division of Revenue Bill is tabled annually on Budget Day, it cannot be regarded as just an ordinary piece of legislation. It epitomises the maturing of our intergovernmental fiscal relations.

My brief is to make special reference to municipalities in relation to the Division of Revenue Bill, currently under review before the National Council of Provinces. The budget is expanding every year. It poses a challenge for municipalities.

Public representatives, nationally, provincially and locally, must bear in mind that transforming local government has been a greater challenge than transforming other spheres of government. This is, however, not an experience restricted to South Africa, but is an international phenomenon.

With reference to conditional grants to local government and the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill, I must emphasise that the performance of the national electrification programme grant, the local government restructuring grant, the Municipal Infrastructure Grant and the Municipal Systems Improvement Grant has improved in the current financial year.

However, there are municipalities that continue to face challenges in relation to expenditure on these conditional grants. In our recent visit to the Eastern Cape we found that in some municipalities, councillors were busy fighting among themselves instead of delivering services to the poor.

We also found that regarding the recent allowance increases, they pushed themselves to the highest limits, to the detriment of service delivery. The current Bill and the 2006 Division of Revenue Bill make provision that funds allocated to municipalities could be withheld on grounds of persistent and material noncompliance.

My appeal to defaulting municipalities is for them to take note of the following, that national and provincial departments have a legal obligation to account to the NCOP on the performance of these grants.

We, as members of the Select Committee on Finance and of the NCOP, would like to witness the implementation of the withholding provisions as a last resort and in very extreme circumstances. The withholding of funds invariably affects the ability to deliver on the ground.

The committee is of the view that provincial governments responsible for municipalities must take measures to ensure that the municipalities have built capacity to deliver on the ground and ensure that they can fulfil their own constitutional obligations and change the lives of the people. Gauteng supports the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill. [Applause.]

Ms A N T MCHUNU: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister of integrity and honesty, because he speaks the truth about monies, which is something very rare.

Hon members, the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, lays down a framework for the equitable division of national revenue between the three spheres of government, taking into account their respective functions. The 2007 Division of Revenue Bill, like most of the previous revenue Bills that have been debated in this Council, contains good intentions, which the IFP supports.

The Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement commits to increasing spending by reaching R80 billion, and luckily our hon Minister has stated that this is actually R89,5 billion over the next three years. About 58% of this money will be allocated to the Department of Provincial and Local Government.

In the last few years, the levels of economic growth and better tax collection have left the government with larger revenue to divide amongst the three spheres of government. The National Treasury will be in a good position to promote economic development, good governance, social progress and a better life through accountable, efficient, equitable, and sustainable public finances.

However, the IFP, whilst in support of the Division of Revenue Bill will urge the government to pay particular attention to the issues of capacity and corruption. Even in his own Budget Speech, our hon Minister Mr Manuel acknowledged that while public spending has accelerated in the past five years, in many cases, increased resources have not translated into increased delivery. Last year, the government failed to spend about R6,3 billion or at least 1,5% of the total Budget.

In KwaZulu-Natal, 17,3% of the social development budget went unspent. Several departments have attributed significant underspending to their inability to fill vacancies. In the light of this, the IFP also welcomes the actions of the Department of Provincial and Local Government to delay payments to municipalities that are unable to spend their allocations. Even more so, we applaud the fact that such allocations may in fact be cancelled and diverted to local governments that have the ability to spend.

The IFP therefore supports the Division of Revenue Bill, but we stress that government administration needs to be jacked up from a financial point of view. Furthermore, the National Treasury should play a much more active role by helping the departments to improve their accounting systems. We need closer monitoring to ensure that allocations are in fact translated into a lifeline of basic services for the benefit of the impoverished majority and to jack up development in the second economy. I thank you. [Applause.]

Cllr C JOHNSON (Salga): Hon Chairperson, hon Minister of Finance, Trevor Manuel, hon members and special delegates, the hon Minister Manuel in his Budget Speech asked the question:

Have we acted in a manner that shows that human life has equal worth or do we still live in a society where the shadow of history dominates over the opportunities of an open society?

We believe that this noon sun of opportunities is fast approaching to remove the shadows that the dawn of our democracy has successfully weakened. This is indeed achievable by the three spheres of government acting in unison, supporting each other in a manner that ensures that our joint actions are greater than the sum total of our individual efforts.

We applaud the President’s initiative to align the plans of the three spheres through the national spatial development perspective. The Division of Revenue Act must seek to strengthen this alignment, and optimise the joint capacity of our three spheres of government to eliminate poverty and to strive for long-term global excellence.

The Division of Revenue Act should, in terms of the South African Constitution, seek to strengthen the ability of provinces and municipalities to provide constitutionally mandated basic services.

The slices we receive are as healthy as the size of the cake. In this regard, the emphasis on local economic development, provision of economic infrastructure and services, and enhancing the potential of localities and people is a core objective of the SA Local Government Association. In this context, the slices have an impact on the growth of the cake.

The Minister of Finance reported robust economic growth of 4,9% in 2006, generating new jobs and rapid growth in investment. Salga has embraced the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa and the Joint Initiative for Priority Skills Acquisition, and is hard at work to contribute towards the presidential growth targets, and we have also met during the past month with the Deputy President regarding Jipsa. Growth and development summits, as I have indicated, have been held in most of our districts to develop joint strategies and catalytic projects that will underpin Asgisa.

Local government share has increased by 19% to fund basic services for the poor. Salga welcomes the fact that a further R5 billion is earmarked for the delivery of free basic services and subsidies to address the challenges in water, sanitation, electricity and municipal roads.

The local government equitable share increased from R18 billion in the 2006- 07 financial year to R20,7 billion in 2007-08, and grows to R29,4 billion in 2009-10. I would be lying if I said that this was enough. The cost of providing basic services has escalated significantly, and increased costs for municipalities to maintain existing infrastructure. We urge our national partners in Treasury and the Department of Provincial and Local Government to work with us to determine actual backlogs, costs of providing basic services, the capacity of the local fiscus and other capacity requirements.

Local government has an important developmental role - that of building physical, social, human and environmental capital. We are concerned that the developmental component of the formula is set at zero. Again, we propose that the developmental aspects of local government be identified and costed to release additional resources for such functions.

Salga therefore proposes that we jointly review estimated costs for basic services, estimating the cost disabilities, quantifying the development component, and revising data in line with the results of Statistics SA’s recent survey. We also support establishing stronger working relationships amongst the three spheres of government to address the capacity challenges and to maximise efficiency.

Salga supports the additional R400 million for the eradication of the bucket system. The eradication of the bucket system is a key milestone in the presidential targets. This will afford many people the dignity that they have been denied for a long time. The municipal infrastructure grant allocations have increased to support the provision of infrastructure to the poor as well as the R600 million for electrification, R1,4 billion for bulk water and sanitation and the schools water and electricity programme.

To address the constraints and institutional hurdles in the implementation of the municipal infrastructure grant, Salga proposes that, firstly, the transferring departments, DPLG and the appropriate state-owned enterprises work together to address these implementation challenges. Secondly, MIG project registration should be facilitated prior to the start of the financial year to avoid delays experienced by municipalities in implementing projects.

Bulk infrastructure backlogs are a serious concern for numerous municipalities. Salga welcomes the bulk infrastructure grant to develop regional bulk infrastructure for water supply to supplement water treatment works and, in the case of sanitation, to supplement bulk collection as well as regional waste water treatment works. We further recommend that the Department of Water Affairs and municipalities work together to establish the actual backlogs, and develop an implementation plan to address these backlogs.

Salga welcomes and supports the allocation of R8,4 billion for stadia and R9 billion for municipal transport, roads and precinct upgrading relating to the 2010 FIFA World Cup. Forward and long-term planning is needed to diminish the hazards in terms of operation and maintenance.

In conclusion, Salga supports the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill. Let me indicate that the basis from which these inputs are made is to indicate that there is significant progress with regard to achieving the mandate of local government. To maximise the impact of our investments, the need to deepen consolidation, co-ordination, and integration between the government spheres is critical. Salga believes that this approach will provide greater insight about the challenges faced in service delivery and economic development, and the resource requirements to address these challenges. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, hon Minister, friends, special delegates and esteemed partner in Salga, Councillor Johnson, my brief here today is to make reference to the new conditional grant awarded to municipalities.

The new conditional grant, known as the 2010 FIFA World Cup Stadium Development Grant, is one of the highlights of the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill. The purpose of the grant is to fund the designing and construction of new designated stadiums or the design and upgrading of designated existing stadiums and supporting bulk services infrastructure in the World Cup host cities.

The 2010 FIFA World Cup Stadium Development Grant provides R8,4 billion for the design and construction of new stadiums and the upgrading of existing ones for the 2010 host cities.

Municipalities are therefore required to plan and budget for construction and rehabilitation of soccer stadiums, taking into account their own revenue potential along with allocations from the national department. This would ensure that affordable stadiums are constructed to suit FIFA standards, using available resources.

To date, R600 million has been transferred for the construction and renovation of stadiums – Ellis Park, Prince Alfred Park, Vodacom Park, Royal Bafokeng and Loftus Versfeld stadiums are expected to be completed for the Confederation Cup in September 2009. And hon members, please do not ask me whether you’ll be here by then. [Laughter.]

Clause 12 of the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill is explicit with regard to the accountability requirement of this grant. It is clearly stated that the relevant receiving officer must, in respect of an allocation transfer to that municipality, adhere to the provisions of section 71 of the Municipal Finance Management Act.

In hindsight, hon members, we can confidently confirm that since these are larger municipalities, there is no doubt about the ability to account and to conform to that prescript of the Municipal Finance Management Act.

With reference to the 2010 FIFA World Cup Stadium Development Grant, clause 12, subclause 5 of the Bill however requires additional information from the receiving officer in the municipality. This officer must submit the following information: Firstly, the cash flow projection for that stadium construction or upgrading in a format determined by the transferring national officer.

Secondly, attached copies of payment certificates issued in terms of the construction contract entered into by the municipality in accordance with the regulations issued under the Municipal Finance Management Act.

The Select Committee on Finance, in collaboration with other affected select committees, would vigorously monitor the spending and outcomes of this grant in the new financial year commencing on 1 April this year.

In addition, we’ve learned that the Whippery of the ruling party in this Parliament has taken a view that all briefings by the local organising committee and other affected bodies hosting this prestigious event would appear before Parliament once only to conduct the same briefing. In other words, briefing on the 2010 World Cup would be properly co-ordinated in order to prevent unnecessary duplications of presentations to the same institution. Parliament would receive regular briefings on the status of this country’s preparation for this distinguished event.

I then submit that the committee, and indeed the ANC complement of the committee, support this Bill without any amendments. Thank you, Madam Chair. [Applause.]

Mr D J BOTHA (Limpopo): Madam Chair, hon Minister, the Limpopo Province will receive R24,8 billion for the 2007-08 financial year. Limpopo will receive 12,3% of the total transfer to provinces. The province will also receive R2,5 billion of this total conditional grant - that is actually 7,96% of the total provincial grants.

In the 2005-06 financial year, almost R319 million meant for the provincial infrastructure grant was suspended from the province due to underspending. Only two-thirds of that amount was released in the current financial year. So, we effectively lost R100 million for a province as poor as ours. A poor province like Limpopo cannot wait for delivery while we sit on financial resources like a hen on eggs.

Our provincial Treasury will play a leading role in ensuring that the departments are geared to deliver on the infrastructure delivery mandate. Clause 14 of the 2007 Division of Revenue Bill requires that by 31 July 2007 the provincial departments must submit infrastructure plans to the Provincial Treasury in the required formats and that departments must budget for newly created and upgraded infrastructure.

With reference to the social sector, namely Education, Health and Social Development, Limpopo accounts for almost 76% of the equitable division of provincial share. The Department of Education’s allocation is almost 2% higher than last year and it has actually grown to 50% of the provincial equitable share.

The Department of Health gets an allocation of almost 24% of the provincial equitable share in the 2007-08 financial year. The budget for Health is mainly to provide for the review of health professionals’ remuneration.

The Department of Social Development receives 1,9% of the provincial equitable share in the 2007-08 financial year. The budget provides for recruitment of social workers and social auxiliary workers.

With these allocations we have to bring about tangible changes to the lives of our people. We have to focus our attention on planning better and pursuing our plans vigorously.

Madam Chair, it is important that Limpopo Province is committed to reducing the unacceptably high incidences of financial irregularities and negligence. The high number of qualified financial reports and the increasing number of suspended officials for misusing public funds must be reduced. We must take effective and appropriate steps against officials who may permit unauthorised expenditure to make sure that capital business plans will be in place.

We have to ask ourselves about the financial input versus output. For example one school in a rural area produces a 80-90% pass rate and 10 km from it with the same conditions another school produces only a 20% pass rate. What is the money you are putting in, and what are you getting out?

We must also monitor the departments through Treasury and Finance committees’ monthly and quarterly reports; monitor expenditure according to business plans of departments by standing committees in the province; monitor oversight visits by finance standing committees to the projects; monitor capacity of the departments to spend; monitor skills in the departments to spend, commitment by department officials to spend; also the political commitment in departments to spend.

There should be co-ordination between different departments’ business plans. You will find that they will build a school or a hospital or a clinic and then find out later that there are no roads or water. So, this is a waste of money. We must also monitor the credibility of these business plans, as well as the implementation and management of service delivery agreements between the national and provincial departments and agents. Action should be taken if there is a lack of spending. What action would we as politicians actually take when there is underspending, and what are the duties of Provincial Treasuries according to section 31 of Division of Revenue Act?

Madam Chair, Limpopo supports this Bill without amendments. Thank you, Madam Chair. [Applause.] Mr Z S KOLWENI: Deputy Chairperson, hon Minister, colleagues, allow me to make reference to provinces on their allocations and on their expenditure trends in relation to the Division of Revenue Bill.

The total revenue anticipated nationally is R544,6 billion for the financial year commencing on 1 April 2007. Provinces’ share of revenue is R202,7 billion, which is R24,9 billion more than the revised estimate for the last financial year.

KwaZulu-Natal receives the largest allocation, which is R42 billion, and Gauteng is the next highest.

Unconditional equitable shares make up 85% of national transfers to provinces.

The amount of R2 billion, which is North West’s share, constitutes conditional grants and the balance is attributable to equitable share.

In aggregate, provinces have been unable to spend R4,4 billion in the financial year ending March 2006.

During the current financial year, at least three provincial departments announced in mid-year that they would not spend their full allocations whilst the actual figures for the financial year ending March 2007 will be released soon. It is true to say that as a consequence of the intervention of the NCOP, as well as the public hearings of the Select Committee on Finance, there has been a substantial improvement in the volume of spending of provinces and the quality of that spending.

The Division of Revenue Bill goes further and supplements the funding of programmes of functions funded from provincial budgets in such a way that some conditional allocations have been tailored to provinces and municipalities for this budget 2007-08 and the three outer years 2007-08, 2009-10. It gives expression to this funding in the form of Votes.

This allocation is named CASP - Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme Grant – and its purpose is to expand the provision of agricultural support services, doing so in a way of promoting and facilitating agricultural development.

Chairperson and hon members, I don’t want to bother hon members again with figures, except to say that all nine provinces have received reasonable allocations under this funding.

Following the Agricultural Vote is a Health Vote and an allocation called a health profession training and development grant, whose purpose is to support training and development of health professionals.

There has been an average spending on this conditional grant to agriculture by most provinces.

Again, all these allocations supplement the funding of programmes funding from the provincial budgets.

There is also an allocation, which concentrates on construction, maintenance, upgrading and rehabilitation of new and existing infrastructure in education, roads, health and agriculture.

In conclusion, I want to make a statement that there is a lot to be done because the NCOP is on course in its implementation of the 2009 vision whereby provinces will be embarking on a provincial week on 14 and 18 May. I hope our counterparts will make use of the provincial Treasury reports whereby we need to check whether business plans, submissions and some service agreements are in line with IDPs.

The ANC supports this Vote. Thank you, Comrade Chairperson. [Applause.]

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, I express my appreciation to the various parties. I see that the FF Plus is silent on the matter. I thank the various parties who supported the Division of Revenue Bill and also, in anticipation, the provinces and the SA Local Government Association for their support of the Bill. Let me just touch on a few issues that were raised. Obviously, those raised by the hon Robinson are worth mentioning. I wish the DA would make up its mind. It is a party style, as part of the Liberal International, that she calls for intervention in the employment side of the economy. Is it just a convenient call or is there some substance to it? If so, where would such interventions happen? On the issue of libraries, I advise that the hon Robinson claim sole responsibility. What else?

I think that we must get into the issues of health. Clearly, tertiary institutions are a very important part of what we do, but it is also important to recognise that the health system is designed to attract people into the primary and secondary health system. Now, in the nature of the beast, doctors don’t like giving up much of their facilities.

I have spoken to Premiers in various provinces, including in this province. I have spoken to MECs. I think that part of what we have to do is to improve on the quality of management. One of the things that we will see when we go to public health facilities is that, given the fact that people are ill, the quality of food provided to ill people is actually quite poor. I don’t believe that the provinces are really cutting back and saying that sick people shouldn’t eat this or that.

I am of the view that the catering companies - and catering largely tends to be outsourced in hospitals - are skimping, but you don’t have the quality of management that actually oversees to ensure that we can improve on the services provided. So, many of these services are outsourced and it is a very important point that we must make.

Again, it is not just looking at the headline numbers. It is trying to deal with a series of other issues, including the equipment. Within the tertiary services grant, there is a special allocation for the acquisition of new medical equipment in the tertiary hospitals. So, it is not as though we are skimping.

Both hon Mchunu and Kolweni raised the issue of delaying payment to municipalities that aren’t spending. It is something that we are doing. In fact, I have just written to all of the MECs in relation to this matter. The problem is always that it is not something that we can do very lightly.

The reason that we can’t do it lightly is that the impact of a withdrawal of funds is frequently a consequence of bad management, but it impacts on the poorest. So, regarding the way in which we deal with it, I think the members of the select committee would be aware of the fact that, two years ago, we held back on some of the infrastructure grants to provinces. The net outcome of that has been exceedingly positive because, in the present fiscal year, provinces are spending a lot more. They don’t want to be caught like that again.

I hope that all of the infrastructure is well designed and so on, so that we don’t just look at the numbers. It is not something that one should do lightly because we shouldn’t impact on the poorest because, frequently, it is the poorest that live in those areas where the management is poor as well. So, we have got to strike a balance and try to ensure that we exert as much pressure as possible to improve on the quality of spending so that we don’t face difficulties.

In respect of one of the points raised by the hon Johnson, what we have done in respect of the formula for allocating to local governments is that we have added an additional component. So, we know that, in the future, the formula is amended to include an aspect of the development component.

Because we don’t have reliable data - outputs from the community survey would be very important for this - we have to populate that. Across the board, it is there, but it has equal value of zero. So, it needs to be populated. It is not as though suddenly there has been a skimping or taking away.

The remainder of the elements of the formula are still there, but we have given an indication that, in the period ahead, there will be a distribution that will be premised on the basis of need, and hence we have had to take the current position. It is a kind of a two-stagism that we have had to undertake.

I would again like to express appreciation for the support. I say again that this is a very important piece of legislation. I express the hope that the interactions between this House, the provinces and local government in the oversight of the transfers received will even be better than they have been in previous years. I thank you very much. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present? Yes, they are.

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

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

Ms B N DLULANE: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Gauteng?

Mr E M SOGONI: Elethu. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.] The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Re a e thekga. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga in favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Noord-Kaap steun. [Northern Cape supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): North West?

Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West abstains.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Western Cape?

Mr N J MACK: Wes-Kaap steun. [Western Cape supports.] [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Order, Please! Order, hon members!

Hon Tolo, I asked for order!

Eight provinces voted in favour and one province abstained. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

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

JOINT STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP WITH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM, PUBLIC ENTITIES AND PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM

                      (Consideration of Report)

Order disposed of without debate.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): As there is no speaker’s list, I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted.

As a decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present? Hon Sogoni, can you please listen? In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.

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

Ms B N DLULANE: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Gauteng?

Mr SOGONI: Siyavuma. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: In favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports. The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): North West?

Mr Z S KOLWENI: Supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Western Cape?

Mr N J MACK: Ondersteun. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): All provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Report adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.

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

CONSIDERATION OF FIRST REPORT OF JOINT RULES COMMITTEE - GOVERNANCE MODEL FOR PARLIAMENT

Order disposed of without debate.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): As there is no speakers’ list, I shall now put the question, and the question is that the report be adopted.

As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution - Hon members Tau and Goeieman, I’m not going to call members’ names again - I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber to cast their provinces’ votes. Are all delegation heads present?

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

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Eastern Cape?

Ms B N DLULANE: Siyayixhasa. [Support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Free State?

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Gauteng?

Mr E M SOGONI: Siyavuma. [Support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): KwaZulu-Natal?

Mr Z C NTULI: Siyavuma. [Support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Limpopo?

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Mpumalanga?

Ms F NYANDA: Elethu. [We support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M OLIPHANT): Northern Cape?

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Ke a rona. [Support.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): North West?

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): Western Cape? Mr N J MACK: In favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms N M Oliphant): All provinces have voted in favour of the report. I therefore declare the report agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

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

The Council adjourned at 15:47. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                      WEDNESDAY, 28 MARCH 2007

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

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

(1)     Bill passed by National Council of Provinces on 27 March 2007:


    (a)      South African Airways Bill [B 35B – 2006] (National
    Assembly sec - 75).

    (b)      Immigration Amendment Bill [B 28 – 2006] (National
         Assembly
         – sec 75).


    (c)      South African Red Cross Society and Legal Protection
         of Certain Emblems Bill [B 25 – 2006] (National Assembly – sec
         75).


    (d)      Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Amendment
         Bill [B 35F – 2005] (National Assembly – sec 76).

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister in The Presidency

(a)     Memorandum by the Minister of Public Works setting out
    particulars of the Building Programme for 2007-2008 [RP 25-2007].

1. The Minister of Safety and Security

(a)     Report of the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) for
    January 2006 to June 2006, in terms of section 18(5)(c) of the
    Domestic Violence Act, 1998 (Act No 116 of 1998).

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women on Budget Vote 1: The Presidency, dated 28 March 2007:

The number of programmes under Vote 1 for the Presidency has decreased from six for 2006/07 to three for 2007/08. This reorganisation may reflect efforts towards greater efficiency. It has, however, also resulted in less information than previously being made available to parliament and the public. The length of the vote has decreased from 16 to 13 pages.

The Office on the Status of Women was previously a separate sub-programme under Programme 5: Policy Coordination. It had an allocation of R3,77 million for 2006/07 and R3,96m projected for 2007/08. The 2006 Vote stated that the role of the sub-programme was to facilitate the development of a national gender policy framework and coordinate activities in the areas of gender equity and equality. The Vote included one three-line sentence on recent outputs of the Office. It also included some definite outputs and measures/indicators relating to development of a manual on mainstreaming gender, a critical review of gender structures and focal points, and an agreed set of implementation indicators.

For 2007/08, the Office on the Status of Women falls under Programme 3: Executive Coordination. The Office does not have a separate budget line and is thus not seen as a distinct sub-programme. Instead it is included in the sub-programme Gender, Disability and Children (GDC). The Vote states that the role of this sub-programme is to work with focal points in the offices of premiers, mayors and departments ‘to bring certain issues into the mainstream, including bringing the rights of women, children and people with disabilities into governance processes, coordinating GDC activities, and overseeing GDC work in Government.’

There is a lengthier paragraph than before in respect of recent service delivery outputs. This paragraph does not, however, distinguish between activities in the three areas, apart from listing the different days and campaigns (such as Women’s Day and 16 days of Activism for No Violence Against Women and Children) which were celebrated. There is no mention of the gender manual, the review of gender structures and focal points, and the implementation indicators. The Committee is concerned about this as these are the outputs that were committed to in last year’s budget.

Under medium-term output targets for the coming period, there is only one measure/indicator for gender, disability and children, namely GDC- sensitive integrated development plans for district municipalities in selected nodes. This begs the question as to what this unit will be doing at the non-municipal level, and in districts which are not selected.

An over-riding concern in respect of this vote is the ‘lumping’ together of women with children and people with disabilities. We are obviously in agreement that all three of these groups need attention. We feel, however, that their needs differ in important respects, and it is thus not helpful to plan for them as a single grouping of ‘vulnerable’ sub-groups. In addition, the problem in respect of women is not only, or even primarily, an issue of ‘vulnerability’.

In addition, we are concerned about the types of activities listed under outputs. While days and campaigns can help in raising awareness, these offices could and should be achieving more in respect of systemic change in processes and government operations.

Report to be considered.

1. Joint Monitoring Committee on Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women on Appropriation Bill [B 2-2007], dated 28 March 2007:

Introduction

The Joint Monitoring Committee on the Improvement of the Quality of Life and Status of Women, having considered the Appropriation Bill and the associated budget votes, reports that it has concluded its deliberations thereon.

This year, as in previous years, the Joint Monitoring Committee has focused its attention on the three issues of poverty, gender-based violence, and HIV/AIDS. The Committee has done so because these are all issues that affect large numbers of South African women, and – in particular – tend to affect those who are most disadvantaged. We focus this year, in particular, on the role of Government’s Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) in addressing poverty and HIV/AIDS-related care, and the role of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development in dealing with gender-based violence. We touch, in addition, on some other Government activities and allocations.

This year the Committee’s ongoing focus mirrors some of the main themes of the President’s recent State of the Nation Address. In particular, the President emphasised the need to overcome poverty and all its ‘ugly and repulsive’ manifestations and consequences. Similarly, he emphasised the importance of addressing crime, within which the Committee focuses on gender-based violence.

Some indicators of the ongoing nature of poverty and crime

The most recently released official statistics on crime highlight why the emphasis on gender-based violence is necessary. The website of the South African Police Service provides the figures for reported rape over the period April 2001 to March 2006. For the most recent year, 2005/06, a total of 54 926 rapes were reported. This gives an average of more than 150 reported rapes per day, with many more unreported.

The website states that this figure yields a crime rate of 117,1 rapes per 100 000 members of the population. Rape is, however, currently defined to apply only to women and girls, and only about half of the population is female. The crime rate for rape is thus, in fact, almost twice as high as this if we consider only those who can be victims. The number of reported rapes decreased very slightly between 2004/05 and 2005/06, but the number in 2005/06 was higher than in any other year. The number of rapes in Eastern Cape increased by 32,6% between 2001/2 and 2005/6.

In terms of poverty, Minister Manuel’s budget speech this year notes that the economy continued to grow at a ‘robust pace’ of 4,9% in 2006. Further, non-agricultural (formal) employment grew by over 3% in the first nine months of 2006. The Minister notes, however, that ‘more work needs to be done’ in a number of areas if we are to improve the health and growth rate of the economy. The Committee suggests to the Minister that at least one important item – HIV and AIDS – is missing from his list. When significant numbers of the economically active population are ill, this affects productivity of those who are ill, as well as those (mostly women) who must care for them. The epidemic also requires additional spending by Government, families and individuals on health care, resulting in ‘wastage’ of part of the benefits of economic growth.

Further, despite the growth rate achieved to date, Statistics South Africa’s labour force survey of September 2006 found that the female unemployment rate was 31,7%, compared to 22,6% for men. The unemployment rate for African women was 37,1%.

The Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) is Government’s flagship programme for South Africa in terms of directly addressing poverty. This programme was introduced in the knowledge that economic growth will not alone or immediately solve the problems of the large numbers of poor people in the country. From the Committee’s perspective, we are particularly interested in the innovative social sector EPWP activity, in the areas of home and community based care (HCBC) and early childhood development (ECD).

Organisation of report

To facilitate engagement with the different departments, we have organised this year’s report according to the different votes. We have looked, in particular, at the votes for Public Works, Health, Social Development, and Justice and Constitutional Development. We comment in a separate report on Vote 1: Presidency, which includes provision for the Office on the Status of Women.

We recognise that in many of the areas we are interested in, national Government’s role is mainly policy, coordination and oversight. We are collaborating with our sister committees in the provincial legislatures to ensure that the questions we are asking are repeated at the provincial, ‘delivery’ level.

Adequacy of information provided

Last year we commended the Treasury and individual departments on the amount of information provided in the budget books. We noted, however, that the potential of South Africa’s budget formats was not being fully utilised. In particular, departments were not using targets and indicators as well as they could.

This year we must repeat this comment. We must also note that in respect of our particular topics of interest, we were often disappointed in the paucity of information provided. Our task was made more difficult by the fact that some of the key departments had reorganised the programmes that make up their budget. In some cases, items that were previously separately specified are now ‘lumped’ together with other items, so that we no longer can see what is happening in respect of our particular items of interest.

In order to find more information, we have sometimes turned to the annual reports of departments. These often provide more detail than the budget documents, especially on delivery. We are concerned, however, that these annual reports are not always as readily available as they should be. We also think that there could be a closer link between what is reported in the annual reports and budgets. We give some examples of these weaknesses below.

The Budget Votes

Budget Vote 6: Public Works

The Department of Public Works has overall responsibility for the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP). In addition, it bears specific responsibility for implementation of the EPWP in construction and related areas.

The budget vote is disappointingly reticent about this area of the Department’s work. The strategic overview acknowledges that the EPWP is meant to become the ‘government leader in the creation of job opportunities’, but states only that the department has established partnerships with state-owned enterprises and other spheres of government to scale up Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) interventions. It does not mention partnerships within its own sphere of government e.g. with the Departments of Social Development, Education and Health which bear responsibility for the social sector EPWPs.

Programme 3 is the National Public Works Programme. This includes a sub- programme for the Expanded Public Works Programme as well as a programme for Community-based Public Works. The latter was, however, given its last allocation in 2003/04, while the first allocation for the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) was in 2004/05. In effect, then, it seems that the EPWP replaced the Community-based Public Works programme in the Public Works budget.

The narrative under service delivery is again disappointingly short. It states that the overall objective of the EPWP is to create additional work opportunities together with training for at least one million people over the five year period ending in 2009. It states that at least 40% of the beneficiaries must be women, 30% youth, and 2% disabled. It says that by the end of the second year, more than 435 300 ‘gross’ work opportunities had been created, with an overall cost of R5,7 billion, of which R1,5 billion constituted wages.

There are several elements that worry the Committee here.

Firstly, we are concerned about the percentage targets quoted. These percentages differ from those in the Code of Good Practice for Special Public Works which was formally agreed to by the three social partners (Government, business and labour) in the National Economic, Development and Labour Council and published in January 2002. This code sets targets of 60% for women, 20% for youth (aged 18-24 years) and 2% for people with disabilities. The Department’s view also seems to be at odds with that of Minister Manuel, who states in this year’s budget speech that the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) has created about 300 000 work opportunities since it began, ‘mainly in rural areas and mainly for women’. The ‘mainly for women’ contradicts a 40% target.

Secondly, we need clarity as to what is meant by ‘gross’ work opportunities? And how do we marry the 300 000 work opportunities reported by the Minister of Finance with the significantly higher 435 300 reported by the Department? What is the average length of these opportunities? Do these opportunities include or exclude the ‘learnerships’ which are being counted as EPWP delivery in areas such as HCBC and ECD?

Thirdly, why is only R1,5 billion of the R5,7 billion (i.e. only just over a quarter) reaching beneficiaries in the form of wages? What is the rest of the money being used for? And how much of the R5,7 billion is ‘new’ money that would not have been spent on these investments if there had not been an Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP)?

Fourth, how can we term this programme ‘expanded’ when the total amount allocated over the three year period 2007/08-2009/10 (R251,64m) is less than the amount allocated to the Community-based Public Works Programe for a single year, 2003/04? The Committee understands that much of the EPWP is being achieved through existing areas of government activity. There are thus not necessarily new and separate budget allocations for most of the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP). For monitoring and reporting purposes, however, we feel that it is important that Government details what is included when it reports 300 000 or 435 300 (new?) work opportunities, whether this is funded through existing or new special allocations, and who (women or men, young or old, disabled or not) are benefiting.

The annual report for 2005/06 of the Department of Public Works provides useful additional information. But it also raises some further questions. In particular, on page 16, the report notes Cabinet’s intention to increase the ‘scale and impact’ of Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP). It is evidence of this intention that we hoped to find in the 2007/08 budget.

The annual report records a total of 208 898 ‘net’ jobs created over the twelve-month period. Only 18 308 of these jobs are recorded in the social sector, which is the Committee’s area of special interest. The report states that 500 community ECD sites have been subsidised, allowing an additional 150 000 children aged 0-4 years to benefit from subsidies. It is not clear if the money for these subsidies is counted as part of Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) or separately, as the Department of Social Development was subsidising some early childhood development (ECD) provision before the EPWP was established.

In the area of home and community based care (HCBC), the report states that 62 445 caregivers were providing HCBC services nationally, and more than 15 000 received stipends and related training. These numbers are again confusing given that the same report records only 18 308 ‘jobs’ in the social sector as a whole. It seems that the Department of Public Works may also here be reporting on some activities that are beyond the EPWP, and/or would have happened even had this programme not been in place.

The report states that an ‘additional’ amount of R4,2bn was allocated to province as part of their equitable share to expand early childhood development (ECD) and home and community based care (HCBC) programmes. It notes, however, that some provinces have not used the additional funding for this purpose. This is something we would have liked to see discussed in the budget review of performance, including a strategy to avoid recurrence of the problem in future.

Budget Vote 14: Education

This vote is of potential interest to the Committee because Education is responsible for the ‘reception’ year of ECD. There is, however, very little mention of early childhood development (ECD) in the Education vote. The strategic overview states that the Department, together with Social Development, finalised an integrated plan on ECD at the end of 2005 and implemented this plan in 2006. No further detail is provided on actual delivery. Programme 2: System Planning and Monitoring has, as a target, that a funding policy for Grade R should be established by March 2008. We could find no further mention of ECD, let alone Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP).

Budget Vote 15: Health

The Department of Health’s vote reports a pleasing expansion in respect of public health facilities offering voluntary counselling and testing and prevention of mother to child transmission. We have also seen progress in provision of anti-retroviral therapy through the public health system. There is, however, very little written in the vote about home and community based care (HCBC). Programme 2: Strategic Health Programmes contains the HIV and Aids sub- programmes of the Department of Health. The allocation to this sub- programme is significant, at R2,4bn in 2007/08, and is expected to increase at a rate far higher than inflation to R3,2bn in 2009/10.

The discussion of recent outputs for this programme has no mention of HCBC. Similarly, there are no measures/indicators in respect of HCBC. The economic classification of the budget allocations shows an amount of R55,37m going to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in respect of HIV and Aids in 2007/08. This amount increases by only 5% in each of the following two years. The amount is presumably intended to provide funding to NGOs providing home and community based care (HCBC) as well as other HIV/AIDS-related services. Yet the total amount is only slightly above the R53,0m allocated to a single NGO, loveLife, for 2007/08, while Soul City gets R12,0m. In 2009/10, LoveLife is expected to get R73,0m, which is more than the R61,44m for all the HIV and AIDS service organisations combined.

HCBC is mentioned under Programme 4: Human Resources. Firstly, the Department reports that it has collaborated with the Department of Social Development in developing a new policy on community caregivers. The policy focuses on standardisation of training programmes, accreditation systems and career paths. The section on recent outputs also states that by September 2006, 60% of all health sub-districts had home and community based care (HCBC) programmes and that in 2005/06, 7 795 caregivers had been trained in HCBC. It does not state whether this was done as part of the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP). It also does not say if Government is assisting through provision of stipends for the caregivers. And it does not say when these services will be extended to the 40% of sub- districts that do not as yet have them. The latter question is of particular importance as HIV and AIDS has not spared any part of our country.

Budget Vote 17: Social Development

Within this vote, Programme 3: Policy Development, Review and Implementation Support for Welfare Services is the most important programme for the Committee’s purposes. HIV and Aids is one of the twelve sub-programmes, and receives the second largest allocation, at R58,22m in R2007/08. This increases to R65,47m in 2009/10. The vote states that this sub-programme monitors and facilitates social welfare services for those affected by HIV and Aids.

Under recent outputs, the vote states that a draft community-based care and support services model has been developed and that consultations are taking place with provinces and other stakeholders. The document also reports research into costs and process indicators for home and community based care (HCBC), finalisation of a draft report on norms and standards, an audit of caregivers, and a situational analysis and needs assessment of HCBC programmes. Finally, the document reports that the Department has embarked on a capacity building programme in four provinces (Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, Eastern and Northern Cape) in partnership with donors.

In terms of planned outputs, the Department seems to have very conservative targets. It hopes in the next year/s that: • (only) 25% of funded home and community based care (HCBC) projects will comply with norms and standards and be monitored • (only) 40% of caregivers will be trained • (only) 25% of institutions will be trained on residential care management of HIV

No statistics are provided as to the actual number of caregivers trained or provided with subsidies over the last year. We understand that the national Department is primarily responsible for policy and systems. This may partly explain the focus on these elements rather than delivery. We will work with our sister committees in the provincial legislatures to find out more about actual delivery. We would, however, also hope that in future years the national Department sees its coordination role as involving responsibility for reporting on overall delivery and not just systems.

Under Programme 5: Strategy and Governance the budget document reports the establishment of the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) social sector cluster task team. We could, however, find no mention of early childhood development (ECD) in the Department’s vote. Our search was complicated by the fact that the Department has reorganised its budget structure several times over recent years.

As for other Departments, the Social Development annual report provides some further information. Under the Children, Families and Youth Development programme (which no longer exists in the current structure), the report notes the development, together with other departments, of an integrated plan for ECD. It suggests that this will necessitate an increase in subsidy for needy young children in registered ECD sites together with an expansion of the number of young children in these sites. Both of these would require additional funds, which we would have liked to see recorded in the budget for 2007/08. From the report, it seems that only a small proportion of sites were receiving subsidies during 2005/06.

In respect of home and community based care (HCBC), the report notes that 1 058 caregivers were trained on various aspects relating to care and support for people with HIV and Aids and 2 988 caregivers received stipends. This is a drop in the ocean when the number of infected people who have progressed to the stage of being AIDS sick, and thus require intensive care, is estimated at around 70 000 in 2007. The annual report also notes that the strategic framework for implementation of national development programmes, including Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP), would only be finalised in March 2007 because of delay with appointment of service provider to conduct the socio- economic study. As in last year’s report, we are concerned that with the 2009 five-year mark of the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) fast approaching, the social sector EPWP is still busy developing frameworks and guidelines.

Budget Vote 22: Justice and Constitutional Development

This vote has five programmes, and the Committee has a particular interest in three of them, namely Court Services, National Prosecuting Authority, and Auxiliary and Associated Services. These three programmes are by far the largest in monetary terms in the Department’s budget.

Court Services consists of 11 sub-programmes. The Committee is pleased to see ongoing significant increases in the amounts allocated to the Family Advocate, which ensures that children are provided for adequately in divorce and other related matters. The Family Advocate is of special interest to the Committee because it is usually women who bear the main responsibility for children’s care and welfare after divorce, and – in the absence of adequate provision by former husbands – it is also women who bear the financial burden. The Family Advocate is thus also of interest from a poverty perspective.

This year’s allocation for the Family Advocate, at R72,31m, constitutes a 27% increase on last year’s. Further increases of 8% and 6% respectively are expected in the next two years. The narrative explains that the extra money will be used for appointing additional family advocates and family counsellors. During the apartheid years, family advocates were only used for divorces which related to civil marriages and which took place in the divorce courts, and excluded most black divorces. Today, with changes in the law, the family advocate deals with a much broader range and larger number of divorces.

Both past and planned delivery statistics of the Family Advocate are impressive. In 2005/06, the Family Advocate scrutinised 38 422 documents compared to the target of 36 000, and finalised 6 842 enquiries compared to a target of 6 000. For 2007/08 the Family Advocate has set itself a much higher target of 76 000 documents and 12 000 enquiries.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) programme is of interest to the Committee because it contains the Public Prosecutions sub-programme. The latter is responsible for the specialised courts, including the sexual offences courts. These are, however, hardly mentioned beyond noting that they met the target of a conviction rate of 70%, with a similar target set for 2007/08.

There is more detail on the Sexual Offences & Community Affairs Unit (SOCA) of the NPA in the Authority’s annual report. This report explains that SOCA was established through presidential proclamation in 1999 with the specific purpose of dealing with victimisation of women and children. Its role includes coordinating the establishment of special courts for sexual offences. Its brief is also to focus on domestic violence, maintenance, and child offenders.

The annual report records the establishment of 14 sexual offences courts in 2005/06, bringing the total to 67. The service delivery performance table notes, however, that about 25 more such courts are required. Elsewhere the report suggests that there will be a total of 100 such courts in 2006.

Five Thutuzela Care Centres were established in 2005/06, bringing the total to ten. These Centres allow services of different departments to be brought together in one place, and so contribute to increased conviction rates as well as better service for victims/survivors. The report records that ‘blueprint’ courts have an average conviction rate of 72% for sexual offences, compared to 68% for other courts. The annual report suggests that a further eight sexual offences courts will be established in 2006.

Given this past progress, together with the open acknowledgement of the need for further action, the Committee is concerned at the silence of the budget document.

Programme 5: Auxiliary and Associated Services of Vote 22 includes provision for the Commission on Gender Equality as well as for the Legal Aid Board. The vote notes the establishment by the Commission of provincial resource centres in Durban and Cape Town during 2005/06, records the number of people participating in workshops and campaigns, and notes the completion of two reports (a gender opinion survey and a report on women’s political participation). It also records the Commission as having dealt with 19 complaints from the Advertising Standards Authority and made 21 submissions to Parliament. For 2007/08 it has set itself targets of dealing with 60% of complaints received, and completing 15 sectoral monitoring and research projects. No such sectoral projects are reported for 2005/06.

The section on the Legal Aid Board, as in previous years, lists ‘women’… ‘particularly in divorce, maintenance and domestic violence cases’ in a list of various priority groups. It does not state what assistance it has provided for each of these priority groups and issues. Its targets do not specify priority groups. The Committee places high importance on the work of the Board. It is therefore pleased that its budget is increasing at a rate well beyond inflation. The Committee would, however, be more comfortable if it knew to what extent these funds are being directed at those most in need and, in particular, at gender-relevant civil cases.

The Department’s vote seems to say nothing about another area of particular interest to the Committee which we have highlighted in previous years, namely maintenance. The annual report, in contrast, elaborates on activities in this area at some length. It records the launch of Operation Isondlo in December 2005 and its ‘substantial successes’ in awareness raising, tracing of maintenance defaulters, and payment of money in arrears. It records the establishment of positions for, and appointment of, 427 maintenance clerks, 86 qualified maintenance officers, 145 maintenance investigators, and 100 legal interns. It states that this new person power has contributed to decreasing the delay in finalising maintenance matters from up to a year to about three months. This should have been of enormous benefit to the many women and children who depend on this system. The report also notes the establishment of a task team within Court Services to examine the systemic problems surrounding maintenance and to come up with solutions. It notes that the Chief Directorate: Vulnerable Groups was finalising guidelines for the development of user- friendly forms for maintenance. The Committee is obviously very pleased with these developments. Our concern is why they get no mention in this year’s budget, which will determine whether the improved situation continues.

The Department’s vote is also silent on the issue of domestic violence. Here, again, the annual report provides more information. The information on domestic violence is, however, not as concrete as that provided in respect of maintenance. Instead, it lists in general terms the allocation of funds for training, information dissemination, and so on. It states that uniform national guidelines for courts in addressing domestic violence have not yet been established. The Committee is concerned that this task has taken so long. It is also concerned that there is no mention of this in the 2007/08 budget documents.

During 2006, the Committee received a memorandum undersigned by a large number of organisations concerned about violence against women. The memorandum was directed at the Committee as well as the Departments of Justice & Constitutional Development and Safety and Security. The memorandum called on the two departments to make the Age of Hope mentioned in the President’s 2006 State of the Nation Address a reality by taking a number of specified steps.

The list below reflects the required steps listed in the memorandum. The Committee was unable to see any real evidence of these steps having been undertaken in the budget document. Nor was it able to see clear plans for them to be done during 2007/08. The Committee will be monitoring the annual reports to be produced by Departments in September 2007 for evidence that these steps have been addressed. Members of the Committee will also ask about these steps in all meetings with the relevant departments.

• Releasing the draft Sexual Offences Bill to the public for discussion
  and consultation
• Finalising the contents of the Bill in accordance with the outcomes of
  the public consultation
• Maintaining and strengthening the specialist sexual offences courts
• Allocating resources to the Departments of Health and Social
  Development and to the many non-governmental organisations that
  provide for the care and management of rape survivors
• Costing the effective implementation of the Sexual Offences Bill and
  ensuring that adequate budget is allocated towards its implementation
• Translating the application forms for the protection order in terms of
  the Domestic Violence Act into at least three other official languages
  in addition to English and Afrikaans
• Employing more maintenance investigators
• Employing more clerks of the court to deal with applications for
  protection orders
• Training all relevant Government employees on the Domestic Violence
  Act
• Training all relevant Government employees on the Maintenance Act
• Ensuring that the Independent Complaints Directorate and South African
  Police Service fulfill their statutory obligations in terms of the
  Domestic Violence Act (DVA) to submit reports every six months to
  parliament around police (non) compliance with their obligations.

In respect of the last action, we note that there is no special mention of responsibilities in respect of the DVA under Programme 2: Investigation of Complaints in Vote 21: Independent Claims Directorate.

Report to be considered.

                       THURSDAY, 29 MARCH 2007

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Draft Bill submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

 (a)    Astronomy Geographic Advantage  Bill,  2007,  submitted  by  the
    Minister of Science  and  Technology.  Referred  to  the  Portfolio
    Committee on Science and Technology and  the  Select  Committee  on
    Education and Recreation.


 (b)    Co-operative Banks Bill, 2007,  submitted  by  the  Minister  of
    Finance. Referred to the Portfolio Committee  on  Finance  and  the
    Select Committee on Finance.


 (c)    Municipal Fiscal Powers and Functions Bill, 2007,  submitted  by
    the Minister of Finance. Referred to  the  Portfolio  Committee  on
    Finance and the Select Committee on Finance

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

 (1)    Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 29 March 2007:


    (a)      Division of Revenue Bill [B 3 – 2007] (National Assembly -
    sec76).

    (b)      Finance Bill [B 5 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 77).

National Council of Provinces

The Chairperson

1. Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces in respect of Bills passed and transmitted

(1)      Bill  passed  by  National  Assembly  on  29  March  2007  and
     transmitted for concurrence:


     (a)     Government Immovable Asset Management Bill [B  1B  –  2006]
          (National Assembly – sec 75)


     The Bill has been  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Public
     Services of the National Council of Provinces.


(2)      Bill  passed  by  National  Assembly  on  29  March  2007  and
     transmitted for concurrence:


     (a)     Tobacco Products Control Amendment  Bill  [B  24B  –  2006]
          (National Assembly – sec 75)


     The Bill has been  referred  to  the  Select  Committee  on  Social
     Services of the National Council of Provinces.

1. Referral to Committees of papers tabled

1.      The following papers are referred to the  Select  Committee  on
    Security and Constitutional Affairs for consideration:

    (a)      Report on withholding  of  remuneration  of  Magistrate  K
         Suliman in terms of section 13(4A) (b) of the Magistrates  Act,
         1993 (Act No. 90 of 1993).


    (b)      Report on the confirmation of the  provisional  suspension
         of Magistrate K  Suliman  from  Durban,  in  terms  of  section
         13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act No. 90 of 1993).

    (c)      Report on the provisional suspension of Mr I  X  Masimini,
         an additional magistrate at  Queenstown  in  terms  of  section
         13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act, 1993 (Act No. 90 of 1993).

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister of Safety and Security

   (a) Proclamation No R.24 published in Government Gazette No 28885 dated 29 May 2006: Notification by President in respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security Council in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, 2004 (Act No 33 of 2004).

   (b) Proclamation No R.38 published in Government Gazette No 29222 dated 19 September 2006: Notification by President in respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security Council in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, 2004 (Act No 33 of 2004).

   (c) Proclamation No R.44 published in Government Gazette No 29284 dated 11 October 2006: Notification by President in respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security Council in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, 2004 (Act No 33 of 2004).

   (d) Proclamation No R.51 published in Government Gazette No 29500 dated 22 December 2006: Notification by President in respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security Council in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, 2004 (Act No 33 of 2004).

   (e) Proclamation No R.2 published in Government Gazette No 29598 dated 7 February 2007: Notification by President in respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security Council in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, 2004 (Act No 33 of 2004).

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

CREDA PLEASE INSERT REPORT - Insert T070329A – insert 1 – PAGES 561-580

National Council of Provinces

CREDA PLEASE INSERT REPORT - Insert T070329A – insert 1 – PAGES 581-601