National Council of Provinces - 20 September 2007
THURSDAY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2007 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
____
The Council met at 14:02.
The Deputy Chairperson took the Chair and requested hon members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr M A MZIZI: Deputy Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting of the NCOP I shall move on behalf of the IFP:
That the Council –
1) notes with shock that the badly decomposed body of a baby was found
floating in a river in Thembisa, Ekurhuleni, by young boys who were
playing near the river bank;
2) further notes that the body of the baby was missing a hand;
3) calls upon the relevant authorities, with the help of the
community, to thoroughly investigate this incident and to locate
the mother of this innocent child; and
(4) realises that we must do our utmost to protect all children, as
they are amongst the most vulnerable members of our society.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Thank you, hon member. Does any member wish to give a notice of motion? Hon member.
Mnr C J VAN ROOYEN: Voorsitter, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek by die volgende sitting van die Raad gaan voorstel:
Dat die Raad -
1) kennis neem van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat se besluit om
studentekoshuise volgens ras te integreer;
2) die raad van die universiteit gelukwens met hierdie besluit, wat in
belang van die breër transformasie geneem is;
3) verder kennis neem van die Universiteit van die Vrystaat se
konvokasie en die VF Plus se teenstand teen hierdie besluit, tot so
’n mate dat hulle ’n hofaansoek wil bring om hierdie besluit te
herroep;
4) die besluit van die VF Plus ten sterkste veroordeel en sien as ’n
teken van die daardie party en sy leiers se onvermoë om hulself in
’n nie-rassige Suid-Afrika aan te pas; en
(5) glo dat die Universiteit van die Vrystaat nie ’n eiland in die groter Suid-Afrika is nie en as ’n nasionale bate en instelling vir verdere onderrig ’n leidende rol in die integrasie van alle Suid-Afrikaners moet speel. Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I will move on the next sitting day of the House:
That the Council –
(1) notes the decision of the University of the Free State to integrate student hostels according to race;
(2) congratulates the University on this decision, which was taken in the interest of broader transformation;
(3) further notes the opposition of the Convocation of the University of the Free State and of the Freedom Front Plus to this decision, to such an extent that they want to bring a court order to reverse the decision;
(4) denounces the decision by the FF Plus in the strongest terms and regards it as a sign of the inability of that party’s leadership to adapt in a nonracist South Africa; and
5) holds that the University of the Free State is not an island in the
larger South Africa and that, as a national asset and an
institution for further education, it must play a leading role in
the integration of all South Africans.]
Mnr J W LE ROUX: Voorsitter, ek gee hiermee kennis dat ek op die volgende sittingsdag sal voorstel:
Dat die Huis kennis neem dat:
1) dit kommerwekkend is dat die onlustepolisie-eenhede gaan ontbind;
2) die huidige onluste-eenhede spesiale opleiding ontvang het en dat
hierdie eenhede effektief funksioneer;
3) waar alle spesialis eenhede onbind het, dit tot agteruitgang van
die diens gelei het; en
4) daar ’n duidelike toename in die voorkoms van openbare protes is en
dat die Raad dit verstommend vind dat die eenhede juis nou gaan
ontbind. (Translation of Afrikaans notice of motion follows.)
[Mr J W LE ROUX: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that I will move on the next sitting day of the House:
That the Council notes that –
1) it is alarming that the riot police units are going to disband;
(2) the current riot units have received specialised training and that these units are functioning effectively;
3) where other specialist units have disbanded, it has led to a
deterioration in service; and
(4) there has been a marked increase in the prevalence of public protest and that the Council finds it amazing that these units are going to disband right now.
Ms J M MASILO: Ke a leboga Mme Motlatsa Modulasetulo, kwa Ga-Rankuwa Ward 32, … [Thank you, Chairperson, in Ward 32 in Ga-Rankuwa …]
Madam Deputy Chairperson, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of the Council I shall move:
That the Council –
(1) notes that Arbor Day was celebrated on 1 September 2007 at Ga- Rankuwa, Ward 32, which is my home and my constituency;
(2) also notes that our President, Thabo Mbeki, together with the hon Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry, the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, Comrade Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, and Her Worship, the Executive Mayor of the City of Tshwane, Dr Gwen Ramokgopa, graced the occasion;
(3) further notes that the Mayor informed us during that occasion that in Ga-Rankuwa township there was not a single mkhukhu [shack] or informal settlement, because when they erect a house they also shut down a mkhukhu; and
(4) acknowledges that we are proud to have a township without an informal settlement in the City of Tshwane.
I thank you.
OPERATION VULINDLELA IN LIMPOPO
(Draft Resolution)
Mr D J BOTHA: Deputy Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council-
1) notes that the Limpopo community expresses its appreciation to the
Provincial Police Commissioner, station commanders and all police
officers for the crime prevention event over the weekend,
Operation Vulindlela, during which -
a) more than 800 illegal immigrants were arrested;
b) illegal cigarettes from Zimbabwe with a value of more than
R200 000 were confiscated; and
c) 1 212 suspects wanted for murder, rape, drugs and theft
were arrested;
2) further notes that –
a) the purpose of the operation was to prevent crime, to find
old suspects and also to find places where they sell
alcohol illegally;
b) the operation was carried out at all police stations and
led by the station commanders themselves;
c) Operation Vulindlela will go on in the province; and
d) this was made possible because of the dedication and
commitment of all the police officers in the province; and
3) wishes them well in their future engagement with the Limpopo
community.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
INTERRUPTION OF WORK AT GREEN POINT STADIUM
(Draft Resolution)
Mr J B TOLO: Deputy Chairperson, I want to move without notice:
That the Council-
1) notes –
a) with grave concern the continuing interruption of work by
striking workers at the Green Point Stadium; and
b) that yesterday the workers, brandishing wooden poles, rocks
and hammers, went on the rampage, which resulted in suspension
of work in the stadium until Tuesday next week; and
2) takes this opportunity to call on all the parties involved to put
the interests of the people of South Africa and the broader African
continent first by ensuring that this issue is resolved and that
construction of the stadium resumes immediately, so as to be ready
by 2009.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
OVERSIGHT VISITS AND PUBLIC HEARINGS IN WESTERN CAPE
(Draft Resolution)
SOSISWEBHU WEMKHANDLU WAVELONKHE WETIFUNDZA: Ngibonge Mhlonishwa neLisekela Lasihlalo wemkhandlu wetifundza. Ngitawutsandza kuphakamisa lombiko egameni laSihlalo wemkhandlu wetifudza Mhlonishwa M J Mahlangu kwekutsi leNdlu yetifundza incume kuhambisana nekufaka ekhatsi umsebenti waleNdlu njengobe kubekiwe kusigaba 72(1)(a) na (b). (Translation of Siswati draft resolution follows.)
[The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL: Deputy Chairperson, I want to move a motion without notice in the name of the hon M J Mahlangu, the Chairperson of the NCOP:
That the Council –
1) in terms of Rule 21(2), resolves that -
a) in the interest of enhancing public participation, as provided
for in section 72(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution of the
Republic of South Africa, 1996, the Council will conduct
oversight visits and hold public hearings and meetings at
Stellenbosch in the Western Cape from 29 October to 2 November
2007; and
b) on 2 November 2007, the Council will sit in plenary at 09:30
until the conclusion of business on that day; and
2) notes that the estimated cost of effecting the change in venue and
maintaining it for the specified period will be approximately R2
million.]
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CHOICE ON TERMINATION OF PREGNANCY AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Ms N F MAZIBUKO: Chairperson, the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill was introduced as a section 76 Bill for consideration to the Select Committee on Social Services, and hon members will recall that both Houses deliberated and passed this amending Bill in 2004. As usual, there are the so-called “Doctors for Life” and their friends, who wanted to test our democracy, and thus delayed this legislation and further deprived women of access to health care, due to what they claimed was no public participation.
The purpose of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill is to amend the definition and insert others in order to empower a member of the executive council to approve facilities where a termination of pregnancy may take place; to exempt a facility offering a 24-hour maternity service from having to obtain approval for termination of pregnancy services under certain circumstances; to provide for the recording of information and submission of statistics and to enable a member of the executive council to make regulations, and lastly, to provide for matters connected therewith.
Sizokhumbula ukuthi izifundazwe ziye zawuthobela umyalelo weNkantolo yoMthethosisekelo, lapho inkantolo ithole ukuthi, ngempela, ezinye izifundazwe azizange ziyenze imihlangano yokulalela imibono yemiphakathi, ngaphandle kwaseGauteng ngoba thina sayenza leyo mihlangano. Mangiphawule- ke ukuthi izifundazwe manje seziyenzile imihlangano yokulalela imibono yemiphakathi, ngoba iMpumalanga Kapa iyenzile, iFreyistata iyenzile, eGauteng baye baphinda futhi; neKwaZulu-Natali, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Nyakatho Kapa, Nyakatho Ntshonalanga naseNtshonalanga Kapa nabo sebeyenzile.
Mangiphawule-ke, Sihlalo, ukuthi kukhona ukudideka okuningi mayelana nalo Mthetho esiwuchibiyelayo. IsiZulu lesi engisikhulumayo, futhi ngiyethemba ukuthi utolika ungizwa kahle. Uma ulalela noma ulandela izizathu ezibekwa ngabo-Doctors for Life nabanye, bathi, ngiyabacaphuna:
This Bill does not contain a clause that recognises a doctor or a nurse’s right to refuse abortion. Many healthcare workers face intimidation and unfair discrimination because they believe that abortion is wrong, even though many other countries have specific clauses protecting health professions in this regard. Also, the Bill does not recognise a scientific fact that human life starts at fertilisation.
Bayaqhubeka-ke futhi bakhulume nangokunye. Engithanda ukukuphawula ukuthi lo Mthetho ebesiwuchibiyela awuhlangene nhlobo noMthetho okuyiwona okhuluma kabanzi ngalolu daba, i-principal Act. Kukhona uMthetho esawemukela ngonyaka we-1996, obekuyiwona obuveza izizathu zokuthi umuntu angasikhipha ngaziphi izizathu isisu nokuthi kusuke kungamasonto amangaki noma izinyanga ezingaki. Kepha esikuthole kuvela ezifundazweni manje njengoba simatasatasa sichibiyela lo Mthetho, ngukuthi kugcwele ukudideka okuningi. Abaningi abadidekile yilaba abalandela amaphepha noma izindaba. Ngiyabona ukuthi kade belele, kodwa bavele bavuka nje nkathi thile. Kuthe uma sebephaphama bathola ukuthi sekuthiwa izingane ezineminyaka eyi-12 nazo sezivunyelwe ukuthi nazo zingakhipha izisu. [Ubuwelewele.] Yebo.
Manje into ebesizama ukuyichaza ukuthi lo Mthetho owemukelwa ngonyaka we- 1996 yiwona obukade ufaka abantwana abaneminyaka eyi-12. Sizokhumbula ukuthi kwenzekani kweminye imindeni. Kukhona le nto ebizwa ngeSingisi kuthiwe i-incest, ngamanye amazwi kusho ukuthi ilungu lomndeni lisuke lilale nomntwana omncane aze akwazi ukukhulelwa. Kwezinye izindawo kuba khona ukudlwengulwa kanti kwezinye kuba ngukuthi umuntu ubengazi ukuthi ukhulelwe. Kwi-principal Act besizama ukuthi sibhekele lezo zimo lapho kusuke kube khona i-incest emndenini, ngoba abaningi bavamise ukuthi uma zenzeka lezi zinto bazishanelele ngaphansi komata bese bethula bethi du; bahambe baye ezindaweni ezingekho emthethweni ezikhipha izisu zabantwana bababulale khona lapho. Ngalo mthetho senza ukuthi umuntu ahambe aye endaweni ebhalise ngokugcwele ukuze lowo muntu akwazi ukuthi kukhishwe kahle isisu sakhe.
Phezu kwalokho, asikhulumi nge-arbotion lapha – ngithemba ukuthi izilwane ezenza uku-abort. Abantu baye baya-terminate ukuze umuntu athathe ilungelo lakhe njengomuntu wesifazane, futhi athathe isinqumo sokuthi yini afisa ukuyenza ngomzimba wakhe. Phezu kwalokho, umuntu akavuki ekuseni kube sengathi uya kothenga uma ecabanga ukuya kokhipha isisu; umuntu uyacabanga, acabangisise uma ezogcina esesithathile isinqumo sokuthi uyafuna ukukhipha isisu noma cha. Ngakho-ke abantu mabangahambi bekhuluma izinto abangaziqondisisi kahle. Kufuneka bawufunde kahle umthetho, kuthi-ke noma uma amalungu echazela abantu ababavotela bazi ukuthi umthetho uthini.
Phezu kwalokho, abanye bayaphaphama manje ngemuva kokuba sewuvunyiwe uMthetho Wezingane, njengoba sekuthiwa izingane ezineminyaka eyi-12 nazo sezingazisebenzisa izindlela zokuhlela imindeni. Ngizama ukucacisa kule Ndlu ukuthi siyazi sonke ukuthi izingane zethu azikhuli njengathi. Thina sakhula kuthiwa asiwadli amaqanda noma izinso zesilwane esihlatshwe ekhaya. Kepha izingane zethu namhlanje zikhula ngokushesha okukhulu ngaphezu kwethu sonke. Yingakho-ke sesibeka izinsiza ukuze sikwazi ukuvikela ukuthi izingane zingamithi. Kepha mangichaze ukuthi ingane ayizihambeli yodwa. Ingane iyakwazi ukuhamba nomzali noma nalowo oyibhekayo. Ngisho noma uma ingane iphelezelwa ukuze iyohlolisiswa umzimba wayo, ayihambi yodwa kepha ihamba nomuntu omdala ekhaya. Lowo muntu nguye onikeza imvume yokuthi ingane ikwazi ukunakekelwa izidingo zayo ngokomzimba.
Ngiyethemba ukuthi uma amalungu efuna ukucaciselwa, angabonana nosihlalo wekomidi, uMama uJoyce Masilo ngoba ukhona. Uzoyichaza kabanzi yonke leyo nto.
Njengekomidi, sithanda ukuphakamisa ukuthi umbiko wethu wamukelwe lapha eNdlini ukuze oNgqongqoshe bezifundazwe kanye noNgqongqoshe Wezempilo bakwazi ukubhalisa izindawo eziyizinsiza; nokuthi izindawo lapho kukhishwa khona izisu kube yizindawo ezivumelekile, hhayi lezi ezingekho emthethweni ezivuka namhlanje. Namhlanje sekubiza ngisho namarandi ayi-1 000 ukuthi umuntu ahambe aye kokhipha isisu. Kepha uma umuntu engahamba aye endaweni leyo ebhaliswe uhulumeni, lowo muntu uzokwazi ukunakekelwa ngezempilo kangconywana futhi ngendlela eshibhile. Ngiyabonga, Sihlalo. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[We will remember that provinces have complied with the Constitutional Court order where the court found that, in fact, some provinces did not conduct public hearings, except for Gauteng because we, as the Gauteng province, conducted those public hearings. Let me bring to your attention the fact that now nearly all the provinces have conducted such public hearings, namely, the Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng which has conducted them again, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West and the Western Cape.
Let me say, Chairperson, that there is a lot of confusion with regard to this Act that we are amending. I am speaking Zulu here and I hope an interpreter understands me correctly. If you listen to the reasons put forward by Doctors for Life and others, they say, and I quote: This Bill does not contain a clause that recognises a doctor or a nurse’s right to refuse abortion. Many health care workers face intimidation and unfair discrimination because they believe that abortion is wrong, even though many other countries have specific clauses protecting health professions in this regard. Also, the Bill does not recognise a scientific fact that human life starts at fertilisation.
They go on and talk about other issues. What I would like to comment on is that the Act that we were amending has nothing to do with the Act that explains this issue in detail, which is the principal Act. There is an Act that we passed in 1996, which put forward reasons for pregnancy termination and it also specified weeks or months on which pregnancy can be terminated. But what we have heard from the provinces, as we are amending this Act, is that there is a lot of confusion. The people who are confused are the ones who are following what is said in the media. I think they have been asleep. They just woke up. When they woke up, they found out that even the 12-year- old children are allowed to terminate a pregnancy. [Interjections.] Yes.
What we have been trying to explain is that when this Act was passed in 1996, it included 12-year-old children. We will remember what happens with other families. There is what we call “incest”. In other words, a male member of the family has a sexual relationship with a girl in the family and then she falls pregnant. In the principal Act, we were trying to address those unpleasant circumstances where incest takes place within families because most people do not report these things. They just sweep them under the carpet and they do not say anything about them. Instead, they go to illegal places to terminate pregnancy. With this Act, we create a situation where a person would go to a legal facility to have her pregnancy terminated.
We are not talking about abortion here. I believe that animals are doing abortions; people are terminating pregnancy so that a person uses her right as a woman and decides what she wants to do with her body. Furthermore, it is not like a person wakes up in the morning to go shopping when she is thinking of going to terminate her pregnancy. A person thinks hard before she takes a decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy; therefore people should not go around and talk about things they do not understand.
Some people are waking up now after the Children’s Act has been accepted, as 12-year-old children are now allowed to use contraceptives. I am trying to explain in this House that we all know that our children do not grow up like we did. When we grew up, we were told not to eat eggs or the beast’s kidneys that had been slaughtered in the household. Our children today grow up faster than we did. That is why we have established facilities that will enable us to prevent early pregnancy - but let me make it clear: The child does not go there by herself. She can go with her parent or a legal guardian. Even if the child is going for a physical examination, she must not go alone. There must be an adult who gives consent so that the child’s physical needs are cared for.
If members want clarity, they could contact the chairperson of the committee, hon Joyce Masilo, because she is here. She will explain everything. As a committee, we would like to propose that our report be adopted in this House to enable the MECs and the Minister of Health to register the facilities so that they become legal, not the fly-by-night facilities. Today, it costs R1 000,00 to terminate pregnancy but if a person could go to a registered facility, she could get better medical care at a low cost. Thank you, Chairperson.]
Debate concluded.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): 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 house. 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.
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, or against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?
Mr M O ROBERTSON: Eastern Cape supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: In favour.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Elethu. [Supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: KwaZulu-Natal siyavuma. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Ondersteun. [Supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Mpumalanga.
Ms F NYANDA: Mpumalanga supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Northern Cape?
Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Ondersteun. [Supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West in favour.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Western Cape?
Mr N J MACK: Ondersteun. [Supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
TRADITIONAL HEALTH PRACTITIONERS BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon) Ms N F MAZIBUKO: Sihlalo, umthethosivivinywa esixoxa ngawo, i-Traditional Health Practitioners Bill, ngumthethosivivinywa ohlose ukubeka okwesikhashana umkhandlu ozobizwa nge-Traditional Health Practitioners Council. [Chairperson, the Bill we are discussing, ie the Traditional Health Practitioners Bill, is intended to set up a temporary council that will be named the Traditional Health Practitioners Council.]
This Bill will provide a regulatory framework to ensure the efficacy, safety and quality of traditional health care services. It will also provide for management and control of the registration, training and conduct of practitioners, students and specified categories within the traditional health practitioners profession.
Lo Mthethosivivinywa uzophinda uhlelele nezinye izinto ezihambisana nalo mkhakha. Nakuwo lo mthethosivivinywa, ngokunjalo baye bahamba baya kohlola ukusebenza kwenqubo yeningi. Abantu bathe abazange bathintwe mayelana nalo mthethosivivinywa. Kepha mangichaze ukuthi, maqondana nalo mthethosivivinywa futhi ngemuva kwesinqumo esithathiwe, iFreyisitata yenze eyayo imihlangano yokulalela imibono yabantu. IGauteng nayo iye yaphinda yabiza eyayo imihlangano yokulalela imibono yemiphakathi. IKwaZulu-Natali nayo ibize eyayo futhi neLimpopo, iMpumalanga, iNyakatho Kapa, iNyakatho Ntshonalanga, iMpumalanga Kapa kanye neNtshonalanga Kapa.
Mangichaze futhi ukuthi ngenkathi bezikhulumela odokotela bezempilo, laba okuyibona abakade befuna ukuzwa ukuthi amandla oMthethosisekelo ayezwakala yini, bathe bona banexhala ngenxa yalokhu okulandeyo: (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[This Bill will also sort out other issues that are related to this category. Even with this Bill, Members of Parliament acted democratically by going to the people. People said that they were not consulted about the Bill. However, let me explain that with regard to this Bill and after the decision was taken, the Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Eastern Cape and Western Cape held their public hearings.
Medical doctors, who wanted to test the strength of the Constitution, raised their concern with regard to the establishment of the council. They said that they have a problem because of the fact that …]
… traditional healers will have similar status to that of doctors, even though they haven’t had any training.
Niyazizwela nani ukuthi badelela izinyanga zethu. [You can hear for yourself that they are insulting our traditional healers.]
Secondly, they have stated that there is no measurable standard for the qualification or training of a traditional healer.
Sizokhumbula ukuthi ukuze umuntu abe yinyanga noma aqale ukubhula, lokho kuyizinto asuke eziphiwe amadlozi noma abaphansi. Uma odokotela laba abangondlebezikhany’ilanga bekhuluma, njengoba kwasho iNkosi yethu yamaZulu, uShaka, bathi, ngamanye amazwi, izinyanga zethu ngeke zikwazi ukuthola iziqu ezingama-qualifications uma sezelapha. Phezu kwalokho, bathi lo mthetho … (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[We will remember that for a person to become a traditional healer, he/she must have been approved by the ancestors to do that. When the doctors who are using the Western medicine talk, they say that our traditional healers will not get medical qualifications, which will allow them to practise medicine. Furthermore, they say that this Bill …]
… precludes accountability on the part of traditional healers by providing for communication with ancestral spirits in traditional health practice.
Ngithemba nokuthi lokhu kungokunye kwezindlela lapho sizibona khona sidelelwa, njengabantu. Nizokhumbula ukuthi iningi laba abelapha ngokwendabuko yizangoma, yizinyanga futhi abanye baphiwe ngokomoya. Uma sibeka imikhandlu efana nale kufana nokuthi sihlehlisela inqubo yethu yentando yeningi emuva. Kuyacaca ukuthi odokotela laba abawahloniphi amasiko abanye abantu. Abanye abelungu nabo bayaya kubelaphi bendabuko. Odokotela-ke laba abakwamukeli ukuthi umuntu kuyenzeka athande ukuya kokwelashwa ngenye indlela, ngaphandle kokuya kokwelashwa ngudokotela.
Ngakho-ke ngithemba ukuthi, njengoba siwuvuma lo mthetho namhlanje, kuzoba lula ukuthi uMnyango Wezempilo ukwazi ukubeka kahle uMkhandlu Wezabelaphi Bendabuko ukuze uqale-ke manje ukuthi uhambe isifunda ngesifunda uye kobona bonke odokotela abelaphayo okungaba yizingcibi, izangoma noma-ke kube yilabo ababhulayo, ukuze nabo babe nendawo lapho bengasebenzela khona noma bakwazi ukwamukelwa ngokomthetho nguhulumeni. Lokho kuzosiza ngokuthi uma nami kade ngiye enyangeni yami ngikwazi ukuthola isitifiketi. Angazi ukuthi sizozibiza sithini lezo zitifiketi, MaNyanda, kodwa kuzobe kungama-medical certificates ngoba kuze kube yimanje yilaba abamhlophe kuphela abasabhala lezo zitifiketi.
Nathi-ke sesizokwazi manje ukuthi uma kade uye kobona inyanga, yafike yakupha amakhathakhathana akho okuthi ufike ekhaya uphalaze noma uchathe, kuthi uma usubuyela emsebenzini nawe ufike uveze-ke incwadi yakho eshoyo ukuthi, “Cha bengiyile nami kudokotela. Udokotela uye wathi ngibofika ekhaya ngenze ukuthi nokuthi. Bengihluleka ukuma ngezinyawo, ngakho-ke angikwazanga ukuza emsebenzini.”
Sihlalo, ngalokho-ke bengithanda ukuthi umbiko wekomidi wamukelwe. Siyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[I hope this is just another way of looking down upon us, as people. You will remember that most of the people who use traditional medicine are traditional healers and those who are guided by the spirits. They say that if we were to establish such councils now, it would be like we are reversing our democracy. It is clear that these Western medical doctors do not obey other people’s traditions. Even other whites do go to these traditional healers. These doctors do not accept the fact that a person could get alternative treatment without actually having to go to them.
I therefore hope that if we agree to adopt this Bill today, it would be easy for the Department of Health to establish this Traditional Health Practitioners Council to enable the department to go from province to province to see all the doctors who may be foretellers, traditional healers, etc, so that they also have a place where they can work or get approval from government. I do not know what those certificates would be called though, but they will be medical certificates because even now those certificates are issued to the doctors who practise Western medicine.
We would also be able to produce a medical certificate at work if we have been to the traditional healer to get some traditional medication. You would be able to tell your supervisor that you have been to the doctor, so you could not come to work because you were sick.
Chairperson, I propose that we adopt this committee report. Thank you.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Thank you, hon member. That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces an opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration?
We shall now proceed to the voting in alphabetical order. Eastern Cape?
Mr M O ROBERTSON (Eastern Cape): Siyaxhasa. [We support.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN (Free State): Supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Gauteng? Mr E M SOGONI (Gauteng): Supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI (KwaZulu-Natal): KwaZulu-Natal elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE (Limpopo): Limpopo ondersteun. [Limpopo supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA (Mpumalanga): iMpumalanga iyasekela. [Mpumalanga supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Northern Cape?
Mr C M GOEIEMAN (Northern Cape): Northern Cape supports.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI (North West): North West ke ya rona. [North West supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Western Cape? Mr N J MACK (Western Cape): Wes-Kaap ondersteun. [Western Cape supports.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (P M Hollander): All nine provinces have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
BANKS AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Mr M O ROBERTSON: Chairperson, I’ll ask the House to accept the Banks Amendment Bill, B12B – 2007. Thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): That was a very short debate!
Debate concluded.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Order! The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. Those in favour say ``Aye’’.
HON MEMBERS: Aye.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): Those against
No’’. I think theAyes’’ have it.
The majority of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 75 of the Constitution.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
Hon members, I am informed that there is one speakers’ list for the fourth and fifth Orders of the day.
DIAMOND EXPORT LEVY BILL
DIAMOND EXPORT LEVY (ADMINISTRATION) BILL
(Consideration of Bills and of Reports thereon)
Mr E M SOGONI: Deputy Chairperson, colleagues, comrades and friends, South Africa rates amongst the top diamond-producing countries in the world. Those diamonds are immediately exported only to return as expensive jewellery and watches that our ordinary people cannot afford. This scenario ensures that the rich become richer and the poor poorer, including the mineworkers who work for poor wages on these dangerous diamond mines.
These two Bills before the House today, the Diamond Export Levy Bill [B22 of 2007] and the Diamond Export Levy (Administration) Bill [B23 of 2007] will bring sanity by ensuring that producers sell at least 40% to the State Diamond Trader so that the diamond polishers and cutters can buy from this agency. The diamond producers do not support local cutters and polishers. However, the State Diamond Trader will also buy their diamonds at market value, so that they will not be in any way disadvantaged by selling to the State Diamond Trader, but will contribute to job creation for other South Africans. Currently there are approximately 2 100 cutters involved in this industry in the country.
So, this industry has a potential for growth that’s fulfilling the ideals of the Freedom Charter of ensuring that people share in the wealth of this country. I’m sure all patriots support the transformation of the economy.
In submissions received from business it is clear that the Bill does enjoy sufficient consensus. Of course, they will have reservations on details. Government has no intention of killing the goose that lays the golden egg but someone must ensure that there is transformation in the mining sector for the benefit of all citizens of the country. It’s not going to happen automatically. Our regulatory framework must create a climate that will create opportunities for small business as well to engage in this lucrative diamond industry. That is the reason for the introduction of these two Bills.
The role of the State Diamond Trader is therefore to ensure that all players play by the rules by monitoring and evaluating the requirements of the law. It will ensure that macro, medium and small producers are treated fairly, but also ensure that there’s enough capacity on the ground to absorb those diamonds.
Our manifesto states that the government will have to accelerate job creation and the creation of small and medium businesses, thus leading to those commitments. Deputy Chairperson, this is an assault on the continued economic exclusion and deprivation of the poor. The Select Committee on Finance proposes to this House the adoption of these two Bills. Thank you.
Debate concluded.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms P M Hollander): I shall now put the question in respect of the Fourth Order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. Those in favour say
Aye’’. Those against,No’’. I think the ``Ayes’’ have it. The majority
of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in
terms of section 75 of the Constitution.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
I shall now put the question in respect of the Fifth Order. The question is that the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule 63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declarations of vote if they so wish.
We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. Those in favour say
Aye’’. Those against,No’’. I think the ``Ayes’’ have it. The majority
of members have voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in
terms of section 75 of the Constitution.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
SPECIAL ADJUSTMENTS APPROPRIATION BILL (2007-08 FINANCIAL YEAR)
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Mr D J BOTHA: Madam Chair, the purpose of the Special Adjustments Appropriation Bill [B37 of 2007] is to provide for both additional and interim funding for the Departments of Sport and Recreation, Agriculture, Communications, and Public Enterprises. Chair, the Bill appeared on 18 September.
The select committee, which discussed this Bill, was brief and no one voted against the Bill, so the Select Committee on Finance appeals to the NCOP to support the section 77 Special Adjustments Appropriation Bill. I thank you.
Debate concluded.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT PF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE SWISS CONFEDERATION FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT PF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT PF SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - CONVENTION BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA FOR THE AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION WITH RESPECT TO TAXES ON INCOME
Mr C M GOEIEMAN: There is no trap that has been set. The government of the Republic of South Africa recently concluded three agreements that relate to the avoidance of double taxation and the prevention of fiscal evasion. The tax treaty between South Africa and the Portuguese Republic and the tax treaty between South Africa and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are new treaties.
The tax treaty between South Africa and Switzerland is the renegotiation of an existing tax treaty. The first treaty between these two countries commenced in July 1968. The revised treaty, signed in May 2007, addressed issues not covered in the existing treaty. These agreements eliminate double taxation. This implies that where a resident from Saudi Arabia, the Swiss Confederation or the Portuguese Republic derives income which, in accordance with the provisions of these agreements, may be taxed in South Africa, their respective countries shall exempt such income from tax.
These agreements ensure that taxes are allocated more efficiently and that tax disputes are resolved more promptly. President Mbeki visited Saudi Arabia in March 2007. His visit yielded a new tax treaty between these countries. Saudi Arabia is a major supplier of crude oil to South Africa and it is also the third largest market for South African goods in the Middle East.
It does not levy income tax on its nationals. These exemptions are the religious tax, the personal income tax and business income tax imposed on non-Saudi nationals only. The aims of the treaty are to impose economic benefits and strengthen relations with Gulf region countries. With reference to the treaty with Switzerland, that is one that has given us an opportunity to go into your account; that is now an agreement with South Africa.
So you won’t be able to take money from here and deposit it into the Swiss Bank and then think that we won’t be able to access your account. With regard to this treaty between Switzerland and South Africa, two very significant changes have been included in the new treaty. Article 25 on the exchange of information and the item on protocol require elaboration. The article on exchange of information and protocol is introduced for the first time between South Africa and Switzerland.
It is an internationally known fact that Swiss financial institutions do not release data on their clients. Their domestic law on bank secrecy prevents the release of documentary evidence on their clients but, with the emergence of global consensus on money laundering - which is close to the heart of the hon Tau - doesn’t have to support this money-laundering. Owing to illegal trade and corporate governance, the Swiss have in essence retreated on their bank secrecy provisions. This treaty allows for the release of information by Swiss authorities if it can be proved that there is a direct link between tax fraud and the requested information. These changes are infrequent and mark a turning point in the crusade against money-laundering and similar practices.
Participating countries have rectified all agreements and the parliaments of these countries are expected to endorse them. South Africa’s tax treaties with Portugal, Saudi Arabia and Switzerland are the outcomes that emerged from the negotiated settlements. Parliament is required to ratify these outcomes for which consensus has been achieved. The Select Committee on Finance is also aware that some treaties concluded previously by government officials have not been ratified by the parliaments of the countries which are signatories.
Current defaulters are in the main from the African continent. Clarity on the outstanding ratification should be an NCOP priority. The NCOP is seriously advised to endorse these agreements. I thank you.
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Reports be adopted. The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber.
In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces an opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration?
We shall now proceed to the voting in alphabetical order. Eastern Cape?
Mr M O ROBERTSON: Siyaxhasa. [We support.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Supports.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Gauteng?
Ms N M MADLALA-MAGUBANE: Supports.
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: Limpopo supports.
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: Northern Cape supports.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): North West?
Mr Z C KOLWENI: North West ke ya rona. [North West supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Western Cape?
Mr N J MACK: Wes-Kaap ondersteun. [Western Cape supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): All nine provinces have voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution. Business suspended at 14:55 and resumed at 15:37.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Order! Hon members, we now resume our business. I would also like to further apologise for suspending the House for longer than I said. Hon Minister, we welcome you. We received the apology that you were on the way. Hon members, the secretary will read the Tenth Order of the Day.
TOBACCO PRODUCTS CONTROL AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson and hon members, thank you very much for your consideration. I apologise for being late. It indeed gives me great honour to be here today to participate in the Second Reading debate on the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill.
The Bill proposes amendments to improve the implementation of the Act and also takes into account new and emerging tobacco industry practices designed to circumvent the objects of the Act.
The Act is also amended to bring it into compliance with the World Health Organisation’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which South Africa has ratified.
The Bill further proposes a number of related and consequential amendments to the Act, which are designed to promote health and prevent disease.
The main provisions of the Bill are to amend the current Act so as to strengthen the sections which prohibit advertising, promotion and sponsorship; remove misleading package descriptions like light and mild; control the ingredients in, and the emissions from tobacco products; and increase penalties for breaking the law.
After approval by Cabinet, the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill was gazetted in October 2003 for public comment. Over 2 000 submissions on the Bill were received from individual members of the public, the tobacco industry, its associate and health organisations. The majority supported the proposed amendments to the Bill.
However, some submissions, mainly from the tobacco and associated industries, made alternate proposals that were not necessarily in line with the objectives of the Bill. The Bill has therefore been amended, taking into consideration the comments that were received.
One of the challenges in the implementation of the current Act has been related to limitations in the definition of some of the provisions of the Act. The Bill before this House therefore seeks to amend those definitions that were posing a challenge in the present tobacco legislation, as well as to insert some new definitions to extend the application of the Tobacco Products Control Act and to close loopholes that exist in the present tobacco legislation.
Building from the success we have had in restricting smoking in public places like restaurants and workplaces, the Bill seeks to further protect the rights of employees and to protect them from intimidation.
The protection of children has been our main focus of tobacco control interventions. This strategic focus is based on the understanding that young people are the main area of focus for the marketing of tobacco products. The assumption is that once young people are hooked onto this addictive habit, they will provide a sustainable market for tobacco products, probably for the rest of their lives.
This Bill therefore seeks to protect children by prohibiting the entry of anyone less than 18 years old into a designated smoking area. It also empowers the Minister to prohibit or restrict smoking in schools and in sports stadiums, which are the places where we want our young people to spend much of their time.
We are strengthening our enforcement of tobacco control measures by clarifying the mandate of municipalities and health officers to enforce the Tobacco Products Control Act and the regulations issued in terms thereof.
The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control also provides us with a mandate to collaborate with other countries in our tobacco control interventions. In line with the mandate, the Bill seeks to prescribe standards for the manufacturing and export of tobacco products, with special consideration given to those countries of destination where products and testing standards do not exist.
More importantly, the Bill increases the penalties so that they become a real deterrent against contravention of the Act. We want to send a clear message to all those who are bent on finding ways to undermine our tobacco control efforts that we will act decisively in the face of contravention.
Hon members, it is important to emphasise that tobacco is deadly in any form or disguise. Therefore, as policy-makers, we have an obligation to prohibit the misleading terms relating to labelling on tobacco packaging such as … [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Order! Hon members, could you please listen to what the Minister is saying. You may continue, hon Minister.
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Deputy Chairperson I will deal with them decisively. [Laughter.] Therefore, as policy-makers, we have an obligation to prohibit the misleading terms related to labelling on tobacco packaging such as low tar, chocolate or fruity flavour and any other tobacco attraction that entices our communities to start smoking or dissuades them from quitting this deadly habit.
Now is the time to strengthen our ratification of the Framework Tobacco Convention on Control and implement it fully. If we can manage to do this, I am convinced that we will reduce tobacco-related diseases, disabilities and deaths in our country. As we all know, tobacco addiction is a serious global health challenge that is increasingly ravaging countries and causing unnecessary diseases, disabilities and death.
Research indicates that the impact of tobacco consumption and production goes as far as impacting on the health care system itself. According to the MRC, the cost of maintaining tobacco survivors in terms of health care costs and disability grants is about R2 billion per year. It is distressing to report that worldwide studies reveal that there are an estimated 1,3 billion smokers in the world.
However, South Africa has been successful in passing stringent tobacco control product legislation that has contributed immensely to the reduction of smoking prevalence amongst youth and adults. The 2002 Global Youth Tobacco Survey showed that the smoking prevalence among the youth decreased from 23% in 1999 to 18,3% in 2002.
While we continue to make progress in reducing the use of tobacco, the tobacco industry has also sought ways to undermine our efforts, particularly using loopholes in the Act. It is for this reason that we are tabling the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill, which seeks to amend and strengthen the existing law.
Hon members, tobacco consumption is a preventable cause of death. It is very important for us to strengthen our health promotion interventions to support the implementation of the Tobacco Control Programme. As government we have a mandate to empower communities with knowledge that will enable them to make informed decisions about these deadly products and to raise awareness about these deadly tobacco products, such as pipes, snuff, cigars, clove-flavoured cigarettes and bidis.
We should remember that those who consume tobacco are not the only ones exposed to its negative effects. Millions of people, including half of the world’s children, are exposed to second-hand tobacco smoke, known also as passive smoking. There is conclusive evidence linking passive smoking to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, lung cancer and other respiratory diseases in adults.
It is also known to cause respiratory diseases, ear infections, intestinal diseases and sudden infant death syndrome in children. Passive smoking is a health problem that requires society’s active involvement.
In addition to the diseases caused by tobacco consumption and those caused by exposure to secondary tobacco smoke, tobacco dependency itself is a disease described in the International Classification of Diseases as a “chronic disease often involving relapses, nicotine addiction and requiring proper treatment”. To date the Department of Health has broadened its scope of work to combat this problem. Its main focus is on implementing a comprehensive, continuous, sustainable and adequate tobacco control strategy based on the following: Preventing people from engaging in tobacco consumption, promoting smoking cessation, protecting nonsmokers from exposure to tobacco smoke and regulating tobacco programmes. We are confident that these amendments to the current tobacco legislation will go a long way in protecting our communities from the harm caused by tobacco use.
In conclusion, I say that this Bill will enforce tobacco product control in our country, and promote the health and wellbeing of our citizens. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Ms J M MASILO: House Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members and invited guests, it gives me great pleasure to speak on the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill.
The aim of the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill, Bill 24 of 2006, is to amend the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Act of 1999, hereafter referred to as the principal Act. The Bill seeks to bring the principal Act in line with the World Health Organisation’s Framework Conventions on Tobacco Control. South Africa is one of 147 countries that have ratified the WHO Framework, and therefore has to adhere to its legal obligations in terms of the framework. The Bill also seeks to address shortcomings in the current legislation, which is exploited by the tobacco industry, making prosecutions for contravening of the Act very difficult.
The following situations with regard to tobacco use necessitate the promulgation of legislation that can effectively address some of the shortcomings of the current legislation. Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of death globally.
Tobacco results in the death of 4,9 million people annually, and this figure is expected to increase to 10 million by the year 2030. Projections indicate that about 70% of future tobacco-related deaths will occur in developing countries, including South Africa.
Evidence suggests that tobacco companies are targeting developing countries as new and emerging markets. Tobacco slows economic development because it places a huge strain on the economy and reduces productivity. Millions of days are lost to industry because workers are ill owing to tobacco use. In South Africa, about 60% of all admissions to Groote Schuur Hospital are from tobacco-related illnesses. In South Africa, on average, a person dies of tobacco-related illnesses every 20 minutes.
The Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill is a section 75 Bill that seeks to further regulate smoking in public places through restricting or prohibiting smoking in certain outdoor places or public places, establishes manufacturing and export standards for tobacco products, and increases fines for contravening the Act. The Bill contains the transitional arrangements necessary for its application. It also proposes amendments to the preamble, including inserting the words “World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control”.
Clause 2 of the Bill provides for control over the use of tobacco products, which includes prohibiting smoking near air inlets, windows – hon Sulliman – doorways and entrances to public places … [Laughter.] … protecting children through not allowing minors into public areas set aside for smoking; prohibiting smoking in private homes used commercially for childcare or educational purposes, and not allowing any children under the age of 12 to be passengers in a motor vehicle where smoking takes place.
It seeks to protect employees through the provisions in subclause 5 that they may object to being exposed to smoking in the workplace, without fear of retaliation of any kind; that they are not exposed to tobacco smoke in the workplace should they so wish; prohibiting the use of a condition of employment for employees to work in areas of the workplace where smoking is permitted, and granting employees the right not to sign any indemnity for working in areas of the workplace where smoking is permitted.
It empowers the Minister of Health with the right to prohibit smoking in certain outdoor areas or a portion thereof, where people may be in close proximity to each other or where it may pose a fire hazard or any other risk.
The Bill has been criticised for not specifically addressing the situation with regard to domestic workers who work in a private dwelling, and their right to a clean and safe environment. However, it can be argued that the provision in clause 5 gives adequate protection to domestic workers, as with any other types of worker.
Clause 3 of the Bill seeks to provide standards for the manufacturing and export of tobacco products. It seeks to prohibit the export of tobacco to countries outside South Africa unless it complies with the product and testing standards of the destination country. Furthermore, it provides that if no such standards exist in the destination country, the provisions of clause 3 will apply.
Clause 4 of the Bill was drafted in recognition of the fact that over 4 000 chemicals are found in tobacco smoke. Manufacturers add up to 600 chemicals to tobacco. These chemicals are added for a number of reasons, including the need to increase nicotine delivery to smokers, and reduce the harsh taste of tobacco, therefore making cigarettes more appealing to the youth.
Clause 4 of the Bill therefore seeks to reduce the harmful chemicals used in tobacco products and requires that manufacturers produce the least harmful product possible. The Bill requires the disclosure of additives and ingredients used in making tobacco products. It also makes provision for setting standards to reduce the fire risk from discarded cigarettes through the use of self-extinguishing or lower ignition propensity cigarettes.
The Bill seeks to allow the Minister of Health to issue regulations regarding composition – what is inside the tobacco product, emission – what is produced when the product is used, and methods to test tobacco products. In this way, the Bill seeks to control the use of chemicals that are harmful, increase the addictive properties in tobacco and increase the appeal of cigarettes.
The Department of Health has health awareness programmes within the Tobacco Control Programme that focus on primary prevention of tobacco use for all age groups, particularly amongst the younger generation, in different environments, as the Minister said, in schools and so on. At school, as a public place, even the educators must smoke outside the school premises.
Persons under the age of 12 years are more vulnerable to the effects of smoking. The age limit for persons permitted to smoke in permissible smoking areas is 18 years, whereas the sale of tobacco products is prohibited to children under the age of 16 years.
Regarding offences and penalties, it has been argued that the penalties contained in the current legislation have not had the desired effect, and the Bill therefore seeks to introduce a more meaningful series of penalties. The Bill seeks to increase the fines for contravening the Act through introducing a maximum penalty of R500 for an individual smoking in a nonsmoking area. It increases the penalty from R200 to a maximum of R50 000 for employers and those in control of public places that do not comply with the legislation. It increases the penalty from R200 000 to a maximum of R1 million for a person who engages in tobacco-related advertising, promotion and sponsorships, provides free or discounted tobacco, and those that do not comply with the standards for manufacturing and exporting in terms of the proposed Act, and increasing the penalty from R10 000 to a maximum of R100 000 for employers who fail to protect workers’ rights not to be exposed to tobacco smoke.
In conclusion, the committee would like to congratulate the Minister of Health and the department for supporting the campaign on no smoking in public places. The United Kingdom, as a developed country, has only banned public smoking from 1 July this year. We congratulate South Africa for leading globally.
After the committee’s study tour on tobacco to Sweden and the UK in July this year, one of our committee members quit smoking. We congratulate the hon member. Keep it up for the sake of your good health’s sake. [Interjections.] However, some members still say that there is no need to take good and healthy lungs to the grave.
Lastly, I would like to thank the Minister of Health and senior management for their ongoing support, and also hon members of the select committee for their dedication and commitment in our committee, even if you lost the opportunity of attending the People’s Assembly in Mbizana so that we could finalise these three pieces of legislation today. Ke a leboga. [Thank you.] [Applause.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you, hon chairperson of the committee. I will now call upon hon Thetjeng. While the hon member is approaching the podium, I just want to recognise the Chairperson of the National House of Traditional Leaders, Khosi Kutama. He is sitting there in the gallery. You are welcome, Chairperson. [Applause.] You may continue, hon member.
Mr O M THETJENG: Chairperson, the Minister, hon members,
… na Muhulisei Khosi Vho-Kutama. Ri khou vha livhuwa vho kona u swika fhano namusi. [… and His Excellency Chief Kutama. We thank you for your presence here today.]
There is an agreement that tobacco products are, by their nature, addictive. These are the sentiments across the board in the industry – the users as well as the nonusers. We also all agree that tobacco is an authorised drug that can be purchased over the counter. Most parents would want their children not be involved in the use of tobacco products, particularly cigarette smoking.
South Africa is one of the several countries in the world to have legislation that bans smoking in public places, but possibly the first on the continent of Africa.
Research also shows that smoking trends have decreased as a result of the banning of smoking in public places in South Africa. We are enjoying riding in buses and taxis that are smoke free. Most of our drivers have now become self-regulators and it is encouraging to realise that with proper sensitisation, regulations and laws can be implemented without employment of law enforcement agencies such as inspectors, if the general public has been properly consulted.
There are some concerns that we raised in the committee that we would also like to raise here so that we can take note of those particular concerns. Subclause 3 (a) says, and I quote: “No person shall export a tobacco product from the Republic unless the tobacco product meets the product and testing standards of the country of final destination”. Well, the DA does not believe in determining standards for another country but our own standards.
If we set our standards that are satisfactory, then the manufacturers will have to comply with them. Any violation will be met with the full might of the law. Why then do we have to grapple with the standards of another country while ours are competitive and acceptable internationally? I believe we have to stick to our own without reference to another country. Arguments have been put forward that this is done to discourage dumping of products of low and poor quality in other countries, particularly in Africa. Well, that should be discouraged, of course. One should not be allowed to do that.
Also, Clause 4(f)(iv) deals with the information a manufacturer must submit to the Minister and to the public in respect of product composition, ingredients, hazardous properties and emissions. A number of role-players and manufacturers have registered their concerns because this clause seems to want to compromise them on trade secrets that they do not want their competitors to know about.
Maybe it would be better if hazardous properties and emissions could be disclosed while allowing manufacturers to withhold information on product composition and ingredients. The other suggestion could be that if such information is disclosed, perhaps it be kept in a safe place where it cannot be compromised.
The provision of exemption in the proposed section 6A is welcomed. One would have thought that more exemptions could have been considered, particularly where the nonsmokers are not directly affected. We all know that smoking is bad. But since there are people who choose to smoke, where they cannot affect the nonsmokers, or in a situation where one does not become a passive smoker, perhaps those exemptions should actually be considered.
The use of snuff affects the users as well, because it is not burnt but put in the mouth around the gums. People can actually use that product in that particular manner without affecting the person next to them. We know that it does not really make it nonaddictive. It still remains addictive but it does not affect the next person who is actually not using it. A request for its exemption does not mean it is less harmful and nonaddictive but it does not affect the nonusers.
The biggest challenge we are facing, as a country, is that more and more schoolchildren are heavy users of cigarettes, particularly boys, and this may vary from province to province in terms of the gender usage. Cigarette smoking becomes their road map to the introduction of their involvement in prohibited hard drugs.
It is perhaps necessary to increase the age limit for its use. In other words, we now increase the age limit up to a certain age. It is 18 at the moment. Can we not lift it further to 20? I know there are arguments about the fact that it is relative, but we need to really take care of the situation where our young children get involved in smoking.
It is reported by the South African National Council on Alcoholism and Drugs that one in three teenagers in South Africa is addicted to drugs or alcohol. This information is gleaned from their 34 clinics countrywide where teenagers present themselves for treatment. Children are getting addicted at a younger age because the age of first experiment has dropped to between 9 and 10 years.
We also welcome the prohibition of the use of cigarettes in any motor vehicle when a child under the age of 12 years is present in that vehicle. These are the paediatric years in which the development of a child is at its peak; particularly the respiratory organs, and they must be protected. The health of our community comes first, and this must be a high consideration by the department in its endeavours to provide a good service to all of us. [Time expired.] Thank you, Chairperson. That was the last sentence of my presentation. Thank you very much, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Nkk J N VILAKAZI: Sihlalo ohloniphekileyo, mhlonishwa uNgqongqoshe noNgqongqoshe abakhona, abahlonishwa bonke abakhona eNdlini noMnyango okhona phakathi kwethu, ugwayi uyinkinga enkulu kakhulu kumuntu obhemayo nongabhemi. Umuntu obhemayo akanandaba nokuthi ubhema kuphi noma isinqamu sikagwayi usitshinga kuphi. Ulahla noma yikuphi nje bese kudaleka umlilo osha ubuhanguhangu kwesinye isikhathi kudaleke omkhulu umonakalo kubantu, ezilwaneni nakwenye impahla ngesinqamu nje sikagwayi. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[Mrs J N VILAKAZI: Hon Chairperson, hon Minister, Ministers present, hon members in the House, tobacco is a big problem whether one smokes or not. People who smoke do not care where they smoke and they do not care where they throw a cigarette stump. They just throw it anywhere and, as a result, they start fires which, sometimes, cause extensive damage to people, animals and other goods just because of a cigarette stump.]
The IFP is especially supportive of the Bill to increase control measures against smoking in public places, and good policing of those measures so that the public does not suffer harm through exploitation, corruption and fraud. Tobacco is a uniquely dangerous consumer product, therefore those who smoke in public places and spaces unequivocally infringe on the right of others to a healthy environment.
Sihlalo ohloniphekileyo, sebekhulumile ozakwethu futhi ngivumelana nakho konke lokhu esebekubekile kodwa ukuvikela abantwana abancane nesizwe kanye nabo bonke abangezwani nokubhema, thina beqembu leNkatha Freedom Party siyawesekela lo Mthethosivivinyo oyisichibiyelo. Ngiyabonga kakhulu. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[Hon Chairperson, my colleagues have spoken and I agree with everything they have just said. To protect our children, the nation and all those who are against smoking, the IFP supports this amending Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Chairperson, thank you very much for the opportunity to participate in this important debate on the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill, which is a section 75 Bill that seeks to amend the Tobacco Control Act of 1993 to bring it in line with the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to which South Africa is a signatory. We want to salute the Minister in particular and government in general for having ensured that South Africa becomes part and parcel of that broad international convention, which is part of our drive to create a health hazard-free society. The Bill also intends to close loopholes that exist in the current legislation by making prosecution for the contraventions of the Act more effective. As we may realise, the current legislative framework has so many loopholes, which makes it very difficult for prosecuting authorities to prosecute, particularly the industry that violates the provisions of the Act.
Hon Chairperson, my colleagues and the hon Minister have dealt extensively with the rationale, context and substance of the amending Bill, and in this regard my contribution will focus on the process by Parliament, the NCOP in particular, particularly as it relates to public participation and also attempts to demystify some misconceptions by some media commentators about the legislative process in our evolving bicameral system of parliament.
I am raising this because I know that there are people here who have an interest in the matter, and they are welcome. Every time we pass a Bill as this House and the Bill does not tally with their interests and their position, then we are not heroes but rubber stamps, either of the executive or of the NA. We do not have roles, and are nothing else but rubber stamps, but when we pass a Bill that addresses their concerns, we are their heroes.
Chairperson, this is not just a simple thing that as elected public representatives we may take for granted, because on the one hand it is ideological in the sense that it begins to foster a spirit that takes away the fundamental basis of all of us of being in this august House.
That fundamental basis is membership of political parties, and from membership of political parties that have brought us here then arises the question of party-political discipline, particularly when we deal with section 75 legislation where we vote as political parties. And I want to demystify a notion that asks about being rubber stamps or not. In saying that, I think it will also be important for all of us both individually and collectively to be cautious of being created heroes by editorial boardrooms.
History has actually revealed how many people were created as heroes by editorial boardrooms, and then they jump high, but that heroism does not last in the minds and hearts of the masses of our people, because that heroism has a short lifespan. If in the view of the editorial boardroom you are no longer newsworthy they then begin to pick up on certain things that are negative and those that are going to destroy you. We have seen it happening with many people.
So I am cautioning members, particularly our colleagues, that we must not be tempted, because this issue basically says to us, “Look NCOP, to be liked and to be reported on positively, especially when we deal with section 75(b) legislation, you must be critical even of your own self so that you are not seen as being a rubber stamp.” You must just oppose, hon member Tau, everything that comes from the NA according to the standards and terms of the big interests that are finding expression within the editorial boardrooms.
We must defy that logic, because we are not here because we were profiled in editorial boardrooms. We are here because our political parties had interest, confidence and trust that we will do what we are expected to do. We are here because the masses of our people have confidence and trust that we will do what we are supposed to do. On that note I think it is also important that we need to highlight certain provisions of the Constitution, particularly when it relates to the NCOP in relation to the legislative process.
If you look into the Constitution, quite clearly it does not speak the same language when it comes to the legislative powers of the NCOP. On section 76 processes, the Constitution consistently and throughout uses the words, “NCOP passes”, and that is why there is mediation. If there is deadlock between the NCOP and the NA on a particular section 76 Bill, then there is mediation. Mediation as a parliamentary conflict resolution mechanism will finally come with an outcome, which will be accepted and the Bill will be handed to the President.
But Chairperson, in respect of the section 75 legislation, I think it is fundamentally important that we need to read what the Constitution intends to instruct us. It says that the NA will pass the laws, etc. It also says that the NCOP will consider and pass legislation from the NA. What is also more important is that it gives us two powers: It says the NCOP can pass any Bill from the NA with amendments or without. It also gives us the power to reject the Bill.
Now let me give you the flip side of this. If that Bill, whether it has been passed with amendments or has been rejected, goes back to the NA, that House is obliged by the Constitution to reconsider its position. Should the NA believe that they are right in their views as per the powers given to them, and are not convinced or persuaded by the views of the NCOP, they can pass that Bill, which will then be sent to the President for assent. I think that is finality on the matter. [Interjections.]
Hon Tolo is saying something. It is not I, Chair. [Laughter.] I am saying that we must be critical, not overcritical about ourselves to a point where we forget how we should be dealing with these issues. So in this context the NCOP Select Committee on Social Services has agreed in broad terms with this Bill before us. But in doing that we have considered submissions that we received from various stakeholders. I must mention that submissions were by and large from the industry.
The industry is raising consistent issues, one of which is that South Africa, as part of its drive to reduce tobacco-related harm, should actually begin to legalise alternative tobacco products, in particular “snooze” - I think the hon Minister has alluded to this - and our view as the committee is that harm is harm, irrespective of its magnitude.
The position of South Africa in relation to this particular aspect is to reduce the harm. We are also convinced that when you look particularly at the statistics from the Western Cape on the expenditure in the public health hospitals in relation to tobacco-related diseases, you will actually become more convinced as to why as a country, as public representatives and as a society we should take the lead in ensuring that over and above the provisions of this legislation, we actually join the campaign to ensure that we raise awareness of our people to reduce smoking. And I will be one of those who should actually be given that particular counselling. [Applause.]
The chairperson has alluded to hon Tolo’s quitting smoking, and I always pray every morning and wish that hon Tolo has quit for life now. Since I met him in Parliament, he did quit, but then it was only for two months and after that he was back again. [Applause.] So I am not sure, but I think it is an important thing that we may want to look at. [Interjections.]
Mr E M SOGONI: Chairperson, I am just asking if the member could make it clear whether he supports what I heard the Chairperson say about the increase of penalties that must be applied to those people who smoke in places that are not designated for smoking.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Chair, I take that as a comment by the hon member. I do not know what the question is. I was going to answer the question. But as a law-abiding citizen I will support and abide by every enforcement in relation to the provisions of this Act, really. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF HEALTH: Chairperson, thank you, once again, for allowing me to close the debate. Let me start off by thanking all the hon members for participating in this debate, but most importantly for supporting the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill. Proudly South African, I think we have done it again. [Applause.]
Of course, I can hear the DA raising concerns. Follow us: We are leading the way, and if we could, we would lead the rest of the world. I think we are destined to do so as South Africans, so follow us. Unfortunately, the date has passed. I would have invited you to do something else, but it has passed now.
Thank you very much for supporting the Bill. I think what we have just done is to endorse the amendment to improve the implementation of the Act and take into account new and emerging tobacco industry practices designed to circumvent the objects of the Act, as was articulated by the House Chair. Thank you very much for that. I think it then brings us in line also with the World Health Organisation Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, and as I have said, we ratified that framework.
What we have just done is to commit ourselves to protect our communities, particularly the children, the poor and the women of this country. I am sure we can also influence other countries to do the same.
May I take this opportunity to please encourage the House Chair to come out very boldly and take a decision today? [Applause.] You can monitor him. He says henceforth he will not smoke. I am very grateful because next week is my birthday and that is my birthday present from you. Thank you very much. [Laughter.]
I think also what we have just done is to contribute towards reducing the health care costs which, as you will hear tomorrow and as those who were in alluded yesterday heard, are escalating at a phenomenal rate, and if we do not do anything about it the health care system might just collapse. Therefore, we have to do everything in our power as individuals and collectively to try and see what we can do to bring down the health care costs in South Africa. Of course, it is to protect ourselves, our communities and those that are targeted the most by the industry - the poor, the young people and the women in our country. Chairperson, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to once again close the debate. But before I take my seat, let me express my deep gratitude to the hon members for having finalised the amending Bill and the Bill itself. The first one is the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill - thank you very much, and also the African Traditional Health Practitioners Bill.
I must say that I am very grateful. We have gone a long way in this regard. What these two Bills do is to ensure access to health care services, be they conventional or traditional. I was in Limpopo and I saw how African traditional medicine is given its own status. I would invite hon members, when they go on their oversight visits, to visit two surgeries in Tafelkop to see how they have elevated African traditional medicine to its correct status. They do training and their infection control is incredible.
If you go into their pharmacy they’ve got Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 medicines. Their records are just something that we can learn from. In fact what they do is to ensure that African traditional medicine is recognised, to ensure that African traditional medicine is institutionalised in its own right and recognised accordingly in that context, but also to ensure that there is quality access to African traditional medicine.
We will be working very closely with the council to ensure that we do things that begin to bring back our dignity as Africans, that define who we are and ensure that we are not deterred along the way, because this is about who we are. I have asked on several occasions why it is that when we talk about Chinese traditional medicine people accept it and when we talk about Indian traditional medicine it is acceptable, but when you talk about African traditional medicine, it is seen as witchcraft and you are regarded on a heathen when you practise it. Those days have passed and I want to thank this House for having passed the Bill to establish the council. You will be working very closely with the council.
Ngiyabonga, Sihlalo, ngokungivumela ukuthi ngijobelele ezinye izinto ezingahlangene ne-Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] [Thank you, Chairperson, for allowing me to add some more things in respect of the Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Debate concluded.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
Housing consumers protection measures amendment bill
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M N Oliphant): Order! Hon members, I want to welcome the hon Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, who will introduce this subject on behalf of the Minister of Housing.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Chairperson, hon members, I suppose Home Affairs and Housing are almost the same with not much difference. I was in China some time ago and was advised by one Chinese gentleman that I met there, when he was told that I was a Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, to keep my affairs as far away from home as possible. [Laughter.]
Chairperson, I am privileged on behalf of the Minister of Housing, the hon Lindiwe Sisulu, to table this amending Bill before this august House. This Bill is important in that it addresses itself to the measures to protect the rights and interests of housing consumers.
The Bill seeks to rectify certain interpretations and implementation problems encountered since the promulgation of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act, 95 of 1988. It addresses the issues of the owner- builders and clarifies the application of the Act with regard to this category of builders.
Owner-builders are persons who build homes for occupation by themselves and as such do not necessarily need protection against shoddy workmanship by the builders. In the amendment, allowance is made for the late enrolment and the non-declared late enrolment of houses. Such being houses enrolled with the National Home Builders Registration Council after construction has already started as against the desired prerequisite that houses must be enrolled with the council prior to the commencement of the construction. In the past these issues were dealt with in regulations and they are not defined in the Act.
The Bill provides for the insertion of a definition of late enrolment and makes specific provision thereafter in section 14A. Definitions for the National Housing Code and the People’s Housing Process projects have also been inserted as they are contained in substantive provisions proposed in the Bill.
Section 7 of the Act dealing with measures that the council and the Minister may prescribe is amended in order to include measures pertaining to late enrolment, nondeclared enrolment and late enrolment fees. A new section 10A is being inserted to enable owner-builders to apply for exemption from section 10 - that is, with regard to registration of home builders, and section 14. A new section 14A is inserted to provide for and to regulate late enrolment and nondeclared late enrolment.
Section 17 of the Act is amended in order to extend the cover provided by the council’s warranty scheme to include roof leaks and to enable the council under certain circumstances to make payment to the housing consumer in final settlement of a claim.
The list of the contraventions in the Act that constitute offences, as set out in section 21 of the Act, is amended to include section 18(2) on duty of a conveyancer to ensure that a home builder is registered before attending to the registration of a bond.
Section 22 of the Act is being amended by the insertion of a new subsection that enables persons who are aggrieved by a decision of the council in terms of section 29 to lodge an appeal with the Minister. This is necessitated by the amendment of section 29. Section 29 is also being amended to allow the council to grant or refuse applications for exemption currently in the power of the Minister.
This is necessitated by the amendment of section 29. A safeguard in the form of an appeal process is, however, built into section 22 of the Act in order to ensure that exemptions are not refused unreasonably.
The Bill was published for public comment on 25 August 2006.
Invitations were also extended to various institutions, including the National Home Builder’s Registration Council, the Banking Association of South Africa, all the major banks, the national Department of Justice and Constitutional Development, the nine provincial housing departments, the SA Local Government Association, the Master Builders Association, the Building Industries Federation of South Africa and the SA Property Owners’ Association. Thank you. [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): I will now call upon the hon B J … I mean, R J Tau, the chairperson of the select committee. [Interjections.]
Mr R J TAU: Chairperson, I’ve observed that I’ve been given the name of B J, but nevertheless, it’s OK. [Interjections.] No, the smoking debate is over now. [Laughter.]
Chairperson, hon members and comrades, as we present this piece of legislation before this House for adoption, perhaps it would also be important for us to remind ourselves of the fact that it is this very same House that adopted the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act, Act 95 of 1998, hereafter known as the principal Act.
It was as a result of that Act that the Minister of Housing was able to establish an institution referred to as the National Home Builder’s Registration Council, with the sole mandate of protecting housing consumers and in this instance the poor. In terms of section 14 of the Act, all houses of which construction commenced after 1 December 1999 should have been enrolled in or registered with the NHBRC in a manner prescribed in the Act.
It is worth noting that this Act was not passed in this House first by mistake. It was as a result of a commitment that our government had made to our people in 1994. It was a further reminder of and also consistent with the Freedom Charter’s clause that states that “There shall be houses, security and comfort.” At the passing of this Act we knew very well that the Freedom Charter did not say there shall be houses with structural defects and leaking roofs, or unsafe and unfinished houses for all, hence the enactment of the Act.
The Act was also consistent with the Reconstruction and Development Programme and the election manifesto of 1994, which in the main called on government for a commitment to build houses for all our people. Through that commitment it was not just a question of building houses or structures, but building homes for our people, for whom such structures would restore the dignity of our people and reassure them of their humanness and their pride.
However, albeit with good intentions, the bad still surfaced its head, even with the existence of that Act. Like any other piece of legislation, there are those who at times will be left out and there are those people who will at all times seek to find ways of bypassing the law and continue with their ill deeds. It is worth noting that at the national level we’ve seen many unfinished houses, and houses built and finished with major structural defects; we’ve also heard of contractors who just vanished without even having started on a single house, and worst of all, you then find the NHBRC, established for purposes of protecting the poor and the weak, being left extremely powerless, owing to the fact that in most cases these contractors are not even registered with the council, therefore leaving the poor and the vulnerable with these kinds of houses, and as a result a bad image is then created of our government.
As a result of the above observations the Minister has found it necessary to make amendments to the principal Act of 1998. In the main, the amendments seek to protect and further extend the protection that was found in the principal Act in order to protect the poor and vulnerable against unscrupulous home builders in our country and, furthermore, to give some more clarity to some definitions, for instance the inclusion of unregistered home builders such as the unemployed youth and women.
Noting that this is a section 76 Bill, we had to take our people along in the process of these amendments, because they are the major beneficiaries.
The House will note that for this year Parliament adopted a theme that says Masijule Ngengxoxo Mzansi, which in the main reinforces the principle as expressed in the Freedom Charter that says the people shall govern. As a result, as a committee, we held public hearings in most provinces, except for one province, of course. Through this exercise our people were able to make their voices heard on the said amendments. It was during these hearings that it became clear that our people expressed their profound appreciation for what government seeks to do in terms of protecting them against shoddy work during the construction of their houses.
Most provinces endorsed the amendments as proposed by the department, although some raised some concerns with regard to the role of the NHBRC. While they welcomed the fact that all contractors would have to register with the NHBRC and the fact that with this Bill, late enrolments would also be considered, including owner-builders, there was a common concern raised by provinces about the accessibility of the NHBRC.
We note, however, that this was a matter of which the NHBRC took note and further committed itself to ensure that it would enhance and improve on their work. Our people confirmed the fact that there was no better – over and above these concerns, I must emphasise this – insurance for them than the NHBRC.
It would be unfair of me not to make note of the fact that one of the most interesting and welcome amendments was the inclusion now of “roof leaks” as part of the insured work that would be covered by the NHBRC. We will know that in the principal Act only the top structure, excluding the roof, was recognised as insured by the NHBRC.
To quote, for instance, Mr Kobus in one of the public hearings I attended in the Northern Cape, he had this to say in terms of the roof leaks:
Van nou af sal ek dan nie meer probleme hê met tyd nie, want in die verlede gedurende die somer moes ek onnodig vroeg opstaan, want die son skyn reg op my gesig deur die dak van my huis. [From now on I won’t have problems with time any more, because in the past during summer I had to get up unnecessarily early as the sun used to shine directly onto my face through the roof of my house.]
[Interjections.] The other concern raised by our people during the hearings was the fact that we needed to take note of the rural housing question and to ensure that no one was left out and marginalised. In that context our people believe that provinces should be empowered to deal with the unregistered contractors to prevent them from getting paid for jobs badly done or not done at all.
Therefore, with the late enrolments these are the kinds of problems that will be resolved. With the clause that deals with late enrolments, these are the kinds of problems that will, of course, then receive attention and our people’s problems will be resolved and their dignity will be restored.
It is this kind of people’s forum that assisted us as a committee to arrive at the conclusion that our people are happy with the amendments as proposed by the department.
The other interesting amendment that was introduced was the simplified process of appeal. Because of the complexity of this appeal process it also created a lot of confusion where you would find that our people would not even know what to do and end up giving up, remaining with this structure that you would call a house, but which would not necessarily be one.
In conclusion, as a result of these amendments it is the view of the committee that the department has truly demonstrated its commitment to the developmental goals of government. It is this kind of legislation that protects our people against unscrupulous builders who have no interest in building a better life for our people but who rob them of the last opportunity to be seen as a people capable of living a decent life with their children.
For that, as a committee, we put these amendments before this House for adoption, because we believe that this is the only way to accelerate the creation of a better life for the poor of our people. Lastly, as we further conclude, we have noted that this debate is taking place on a very important day, because of members who will be going back home to interact with the poor and vulnerable, and those who have in the main been affected by these unscrupulous home builders.
Therefore we take this opportunity to ask that members will take note and utilise the following two weeks to also seek to popularise these amendments that have been brought about in the principal Act. I thank you. [Interjections.]
Ms J F TERBLANCHE: Chairperson, hon members, since I am short and sweet, I am going to deliver an equally short and sweet speech. [Applause.] The duty of the House in regard to this Bill being tagged a section 76 Bill is really only to consider and debate the final mandates of provinces, but that task will probably be taken well care of by other speakers representing provincial perspectives.
I am furthermore advised by my colleague, hon Armiston Watson, that the majority of provinces have approved the Bill without further amendments. My input is therefore limited to a party perspective.
The Bill sets out to amend certain definitions in the principal Act and to define certain words or expressions; to make provision for late enrolment and nondeclared late enrolments; to enable owner- builders to apply for exemption; to amend provisions pertaining to the granting of exemptions and the lodging of appeals; to extend claims to include roof leaks and to provide for matters connected therewith.
In essence, the amendments are aimed at tidying up loose ends and tightening control, ultimately to achieve better quality housing for our people.
During the portfolio committee process, the Democratic Alliance spokesperson on housing, hon Butch Steyn, successfully argued for some further amendments to be effected in regard to risk management and the NHBRC’s duty to protect consumers against flawed construction that had been paid for in good faith.
The select committee has since also heard evidence of sufficient public hearings that have been conducted by the majority of provinces. The DA is therefore happy to support this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M A MZIZI: Chairperson and Deputy Minister, the Department of Housing is faced with problems in issuing tenders to contractors because of shoddy workmanship. Other contractors do not finish their work and abscond.
The aim of this Bill is to rectify certain interpretation and implementation problems, which have arisen since the promulgation of the Act. This Bill also assists in addressing remedies in the event of contractors absconding or passing away before completing the building, and this is the guide for the department on measures to be taken when such a thing does occur.
However, the department must ensure the availability of funds in the event of the contractor not being able to complete building a house or a project. Government must ensure that proper consultation with the relevant stakeholders has been done. The failure of contractors to comply with the requirements may lead to the expulsion of those contractors.
The monitoring of builders and paying them in terms of looking at the progress in stages rather than paying upfront, before even the foundation is laid, will help in curbing loss that usually occurs when the builder disappears into thin air.
The role of municipalities should be clearly addressed, especially in building RDP houses. They must play a vital role in the process of the building and distribution of houses for accountability purposes. Also, because they will be working closely with their contractors, they should enhance the quality of housing products so that they can improve. There must be co-operation among the relevant stakeholders and no repetition or duplication of duties.
Iqembu leNkatha liyothokoza uma abahloli bengaqikelela ukuthi izindlu ezakhiwayo ziyizindlu eziseqophelweni eliphezulu futhi kube ngezihlangabezana nezidingo zabantu. Ekugcineni, kufanele uhulumeni ahlolisise ukuthi ngabe abakhi bezindlu ngeke banikeze yini isiqinisekiso sokuthi bayolungisa noma umuphi umonakalo kuze kufike isikhathi esigculisayo, sisho igaranti phela. (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[The IFP would be very happy if inspectors could ensure that the houses that are built are of high quality and are also houses that meet the people’s needs. Eventually, government must check whether builders could give a guarantee to repair any damage until such time as the construction is satisfactory.]
The IFP welcomes the amendment of section 17 of the Act in order to extend the cover provided by the council’s warranty scheme to include roof leaks and to enable the council, under certain circumstances, to make payment. [Interjections.]
Section 17, as I also indicated, includes roof leaks and enables the Council, under certain circumstances, to make payment to the housing consumer in full and final settlement of a claim.
Furthermore, the Bill is clear in its guidelines that any person who is aggrieved by a decision of the council may lodge an appeal with the Minister.
Iqembu leNkatha liyazisekela zonke lezi zichibiyelo esezenziwe. Ngicela ukwehlela ngenzansi; wena wakomkhulu! [Ihlombe.] [The IFP supports all these amendments. Thank you, Chaiperson.]
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Modulasetulo, Motlatšatona ya tša Selegae, maloko ao a hlomphegago, … [Hon Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister of Local Government, hon members, …]
… comrades and compatriots: “There shall be houses, security and comfort.”
Ke seo se bolelwago ke Freedom Charter, e lego tokomane ya batho, go tiiša lentšu la setšhaba gore se nyaka go dula le go phela bjang – ka boiketlo.
Ntlo ke mothopo wa bophelo bjo bokaone. Legae leo le nago le lethabo ke leo motheo wa ntlo ya lona o sa tekatekego, yeo leboto la yona le se nago bosodi, yeo marulelo a yona a dutšego gabotse, a baletšwego ka bothakga le botswerere. Se se tiišetša seo batho ba se nyakago – e lego go ba le legae le borutho. Tše ka moka ke tšeo Molaokakanywa wo wa Housing Consumer Amendment Bill o tlilego go se dira. (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)
[This is what the Freedom Charter states; this is the people’s document, to affirm the voices of the people regarding the way they should live. A house is a basic need. A happy household is one with a decent house. It has a house with a good foundation, without cracked walls and with good roofing. This shows what the needs of the people are, that is to have a decent house. The Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill will be able to help in solving all the challenges pertaining to housing.]
The Bill was introduced to bring about solutions regarding the implementation of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act of 1998. It further provides definitions for late enrolment and nondeclared enrolment to enable construction of quality houses.
The Bill stipulates regulations in tackling measures pertaining to interventions to be made by the Minister or the National Home Builder’s Registration Council. It provides for alterations for utilising owner- builder definitions. In addition, the owner builder provision in this legislative framework enables the building constructors to attain entitlement to an application for exemption from the provisions of the Act.
It also enables the NHBRC to grant or refuse applications for exemption. Presently, the Act empowers the Minister to consider applications for exemption based on the recommendations made by the NHBRC. The new provisions intend to ensure robust construction of quality housing in a manner that will impact intensively in enabling sound infrastructure investment. E sego tšeo re di bonago ge re sepela le lefase. [It is not what we have observed in some places.]
The approval of this Bill will pose no financial implications to the parties concerned. It is crucial to indicate that granting of all powers to the NHBRC in enabling effective inspection in housing construction will not address the existing challenges. Therefore, it becomes imperative for the NHBRC to indicate to Parliament, prior to the approval of this Bill, the methodologies it has in place to ensure effective and efficient inspection of the Breaking New Ground strategy. In its present form, it does not provide measures to maximise inspection for enabling effective construction of housing subsidies by the NHBRC.
The intention of the Bill is to clarify the scope of application; to make provision for late enrolment and nondeclared late enrolment; to enable owner-builders to apply for exemption, and to extend claims to include roof leaks; to make further provision for the use of money in the funds contemplated in the said Act, to extend the offences created under the Act and to amend provisions pertaining to the granting of exemptions and lodging of appeals.
Section 19(2), which is very critical, says an inspector may, for purposes of inspecting a home during construction, enter and inspect the premises constituting the site of the construction at any reasonable time. For investigation purposes, an inspector may require the production of the drawings and specifications of a house or any part thereof, including plans approved by the local authority and plans and specifications prescribed in the rules, or the home-building manual, for inspection from the home builder, and may require information from any person concerning any matter related to a home or any part thereof.
An inspector may also be accompanied by any person employed or appointed by the council who has special or expert knowledge of any matter in relation to a home or part thereof. The council may recover the costs of any examination or test contemplated in subsection (3)(c) from a home builder where he has failed to comply with NHBRC technical requirements.
The construction of poor quality houses emanating from a lack of effective and efficient monitoring and evaluation strategies to ensure NHBRC compliance in housing construction is one of the key critical areas. The second one is that of the methodologies used by the national Department of Housing to co-ordinate between the NHBRC and the provincial and local housing department.
Tšhireletšo ya bahloki ke mošomo wo Ntlo ye e swanetšego go o gatelela. Ka go amogela Molaokakanywa wo, dintlo tša go swana le tša gaMaponto, tša L9 go la Sešhego le Eldorado, ka Limpopo, di iša seriti sa Ntlo ye fase. Go a nyamiša go hwetša motho wa go dula ka gare ga ntlo ya majabajaba, ye kgolo, ya mabato a go phadima boka seiponi, a jabetša bahloki bao ba inyakelago fela ntlonyana ya RDP yeo mmušo o ba neago gomme ba ikgantšha ka yona. Re dira boipiletšo go bao ba ikhwetšago ba jeleditšwe ke batho ba mohuta wo gore letsogo la molao ke le letelele le gore ba o šomiše gobane wona molao o a ba emela.
Molawana wo o tla tsentšha boitshepo le seriti go batho ba gaborena ka ge o tsebiša mmušo ka ga dijagobe tše, tšeo di ratago go ipona e le tšona di le noši go hwetša se sekaone. Diphešamare tše tša go tšhabiša namana tša mmele ke tša ge maboto a gona ka nako ye nngwe le nngwe a ka wela bao ba dulago ka gare ga ntlo ya mohuta woo.
Ka moo, bjaloka lekgotla le legolo la ANC, re re a re šomaneng le batho ba ba go nyatša le go telela batho ba gaborena. Molaokakanywa wo o re fa matla
- ke sebetša sa rena go bona gore re lokiša moo go senyegilego. Ke a leboga. [Legofsi.] (Translation of Sepedi paragraphs follows.)
[It is the responsibility of this council to protect the poor. By accepting this Bill we will be helping people who live in houses such as those in the Maponto, Seshego and Eldorado areas, in Limpopo. It is quite disturbing to realise that rich people, who stay in decent houses, are defrauding poor people who only need an RDP house. We are assuring those who have been defrauded by these unscrupulous people that those defrauders will be brought to book.
This Bill will bring back the trust and the dignity of our people because it exposes these selfish people who only think of themselves. The shocking thing about this kind of housing is the fact that they can collapse at any time, endangering those who live in them.
The ANC, as the majority party, says: Let us deal with these disrespectful people, who undermine our people. This Bill empowers us – it is our tool to correct where things were not done properly. I thank you. [Applause.]]
Ms B L MATLHOAHELA: Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister, hon members, all protocols observed, on Tuesday, 17 September 2007, the Cape Times reported that studies have found that only 10% of the families in the Western Cape live in shacks. The 10% represents 286 000 families. In future these families are going to be accommodated in houses. Hence, these occupants need to be protected. This is not only the Western Cape.
The new Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill is a welcome gesture in relation to the complaints from the disgruntled Hanover Park residents. The complainants point to defective government-built houses. It also seems as if the MEC for Housing in the Western Cape, Mr Dyantyi, already is in line with the amendment. According to the paper, he made available R45 million to fix the defective houses. The amending measures make provision for that. My questions are: What about the defective houses that are built in Victoria West in the Northern Cape Province, where people received only R200 to fix defects? Will these amendments speak to incidents such as those as well? These defects were noticeable even before the occupants could move into the houses. When builders disappear after building defective houses, are the councils going to take financial responsibility? This seems to be the trend now. If the amount of money becomes a disputed factor in an appeal where the defect was reported, is the Minister’s judgment going to be accepted? If not, what can the poor person do who does not have the means to go to court?
The report states that there are 2 400 houses being built over a period of seven years in Hanover Park and that the plans were approved only afterwards, hence the welcoming of the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill. The ID trusts that this Bill will give a better deal to occupants by the home builder in relation to consumer protection measures. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Rev P MOATSHE: Chairperson, hon members and hon Minister, in fact, there shouldn’t be houses with defects. It’s a long story to explain because it means something is seriously wrong with our system. A builder casts the foundation or digs the trenches. Before the builder casts the foundation, the inspector must inspect and say the trenches are in order and the builder can now cast the foundation. After casting the foundation, the inspector must come back and give a letter for payment. That’s how the builder proceeds.
Again, the builder is paid for the work done when he has dug the trenches, and a certificate is issued. One cannot get payment for the trenches one has dug and money for the foundation before one has cast the foundation. So, something is wrong with the system. If things were done accordingly, I don’t think we would have so many defects. But we have defects because inspectors are not doing their work. We will also pose some suspicions that they might be receiving something – why do they allow defects to be paid for? This says much should be done before we pass all legislation. These laws were in place before the attainment of democracy. I don’t know what went wrong. Therefore, we must help our people so that they shouldn’t live in defective houses, with a possibility of them falling upon them.
The Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill reflects the commitment by our ANC-led government to ensure compliance and uniformity in the housing construction sector as a whole. The Bill, in terms of its basic tenets and among other things, seeks to provide an improved protection framework for particularly vulnerable groups in exercising their right to housing and on entering the residential market.
I would therefore today like to emphasise the plight and the needs of particularly vulnerable and marginalised groups – rural women, the youth, the elderly, people affected and infected by HIV/Aids and people with disabilities - and how we as government are promoting and responding to their needs.
As I speak, the national Department of Housing is in the process of ensuring that the historical approach in relation to housing delivery is changed significantly. This shift has been necessitated by the need to deepen the understanding on the potential role of women in the housing process, either as residents, as implementers or as regulators. In this regard, we should ensure that more attention is given to the diversity of needs in the housing process as women may have different needs than men.
Furthermore, as the NCOP, we believe that the housing industry is losing out on potential capacity that might contribute towards improved rates and quality of delivery in the face of the growing housing backlog because we are failing to strengthen the representation of women in the housing delivery industry, either as contractors, developers, building material suppliers, financiers or other service providers.
In this regard, we have taken note of the Minister of Housing, Comrade Lindiwe Sisulu’s endeavours, particularly with the launch of the National Gender Guideline during the opening of the Women’s Build on 14 August 2007 in Orange Farm. These initiatives are indeed laudable and we would like to pledge our support and commitment to other similar initiatives in other provinces. Also, as the ANC we must ensure that it is communicated to our communities in order to generate mass participation.
Let me now return to this Bill before us. Apart from its objects, it further aims to address one of the key objectives of the Comprehensive Plan for the creation of Sustainable Human Settlements, namely enhancing efficiency and capacity for housing delivery as adopted by our government. At the heart of this comprehensive plan is the objective to improve the socioeconomic and environmental quality of South Africans. What is particularly significant to us is the participation of a wide spectrum of stakeholders across the financial, social and government spheres during the writing of this piece of legislation.
We hope that through the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill, a consciousness is developed in relation to social responsibilities and statutory compliance. Furthermore, we trust that it will foster stronger interaction and relations between house builders and house owners, and that it will not, as in the past, unfairly disadvantage the homeowner. The ANC supports the Bill. Amandla! [Applause.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Chairperson, I wish to thank all the hon members who participated in the debate for their comments. I pre- emptively want to thank the House for supporting the Bill. The comments will all be conveyed to the Minister without amendments or spin-doctoring on my part. [Laughter.]
The matters we have addressed here are vital to our people, to protect them and enhance their rights. Indeed we are all aware of the fact that there are many houses that have been built and constructed with defects, where unscrupulous contractors have cheated our people. If, as Parliament and as government, we kept quiet and folded our arms in the light of this, we would be conniving in the act of robbing our people. This Bill is therefore important.
As the hon Tau correctly stated, it is about restoring the humanity and dignity of our people. We must therefore remain consistently committed to these ideals, for which our people were prepared to lay down their lives and which form the bedrock of our people’s democracy. As public representatives, we must continue to serve the interests of our people as loyally as we can so that they are not abused.
We must continue to ensure that Parliament becomes a living and robust tribunal of our people, with bias towards the poor, the underprivileged, the vulnerable as well as those at risk. These amendments indeed, hon Matlhoahela, will address all our people and will not discriminate against the constituencies, which you represent.
It is true that strategic stakeholder partnerships involving our people’s participation will be important to ensure that we are able to fulfil the ideals of the Freedom Charter, upon which this new South Africa is being founded. Therefore, it was important that we should take the steps that we have taken and we are indeed happy that there were no dissenting voices in supporting the Bill that has been presented before the NCOP. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): I shall now put the question. The question is that the Bill be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the House.
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 please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour or against or abstain. Eastern Cape?
Mr M O ROBERTSON: Eastern Cape supports
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Free State?
Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Vrystaat ondersteun. [Free State supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Gauteng?
Mr E M SOGONI: Elethu. [Supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): KwaZulu-Natal?
Mr Z C NTULI: Siyavuma. [Supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Limpopo?
Ms H F MATLANYANE: Ha seketela. [We support.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Mpumalanga?
Ms F NYANDA: Supports.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Northern Cape?
Mr M A SULLIMAN: Ondersteun. [Supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): North West?
Mr Z S KOLWENI: Ke ya rona. [Supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): Western Cape?
Mr N MACK: Wes-Kaap ondersteun. [Western Cape supports.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S Setona): All provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution. [Applause.]
Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
BLACK ADMINISTRATION ACT AND AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Repeal of Bill and of Reports thereon)
Order disposed of without debate.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
The Council adjourned at 17:18. ____ ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
FRIDAY, 14 SEPTEMBER 2007
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
The Speaker and the Chairperson
- Translation of Bill submitted
(1) The Minister of Finance
(a) Spesiale Aansuiweringsbegrotingswetsontwerp (Finansiële
Jaar 2007/08) [W 37 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 77).
This is the official translation into Afrikaans of the Special
Adjustments Appropriation Bill (2007/08 Financial Year) [B 37 –
2007] (National Assembly –sec 77), as introduced in Parliament.
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The President of the Republic
(a) Report and Financial Statements of Vote 1 – The Presidency for
2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements of Vote 1 for 2006-2007 [RP 198-2007].
- The Minister of Labour (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority (SAS-Seta) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 84-2006].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Construction Education
and Training Authority (CETA) for 2006-2007, including the Report
of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
MONDAY, 17 SEPTEMBER 2007
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
-
The Speaker and the Chairperson
The Speaker and the Chairperson called a Joint Sitting of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces, as follows:
CALLING OF JOINT SITTING OF PARLIAMENT
The Speaker of the National Assembly, Ms B Mbete, and the Chairperson
of the National Council of Provinces, Mr M J Mahlangu, in terms of
Joint Rule 7(2), have called a Joint Sitting of the Houses of
Parliament for Thursday, 20 September 2007, at 11:00 in order for the
Houses to commemorate Heritage Day.
-
Membership of Committees
Defence Dr E A Schoeman has been elected as Chairperson of the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, with effect from 14 September 2007.
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The Minister of Trade and Industry
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Bureau of
Standards for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements and Performance Information
for 2006-2007 [RP 105-2007].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Companies and
Intellectual Property Registration Office for 2006-2007, including
the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements and
Performance Information for 2006-2007.
(c) Report and Financial Statements of the Small Enterprise
Development Agency for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements and Performance
Information for 2006-2007.
- The Minister of Housing
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Rural Housing Loan Fund
for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on
the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the National Urban
Reconstruction and Housing Agency for 2006-2007, including the
Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for
2006-2007.
- The Minister of Transport
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Rail
Commuter Corporation Limited (SARRC) for 2006-2007, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007 [RP 188-2007].
-
The Minister for the Public Service and Administration (a) Report and Financial Statements of the State Information Technology Agency (Proprietary) Limited (SITA) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 33-2007].
-
The Minister of Safety and Security
(a) Report and Financial Statements of Vote 24 – Department of
Safety and Security for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote 24 for 2006-
2007 [RP 199-2007].
(b) Report of the Independent Complaints Directorate (ICD) for July
2006 to December 2006, in terms of section 18(5)(c) of the
Domestic Violence Act, 1998 (Act No 116 of 1998).
TUESDAY, 18 SEPTEMBER 2007
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
-
The Minister of Finance
(a) Government Notice No 522 published in Government Gazette No 30013 dated 29 June 2007: Exemption for High Capacity Municipalities in terms of section 122(2) and (3) of the Local Government: Municipal Finance Management Act, 2003 (Act No 56 of 2003).
-
The Minister of Science and Technology
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 131-2007].
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Council of Provinces
-
Report of the Select Committee on Social Services on the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill [B21 – 2007] (National Council of Provinces – sec 76), dated 18 September 2007:
The Select Committee on Social Services, having considered the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill [B21 – 2007] (National Council of Provinces – sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 76 (2) Bill, reports the Bill without amendments.
-
Report of the Select Committee on Social Services on the Traditional Health Practitioners Bill [B20 – 2007] (National Council of Provinces – sec 76), dated 18 September 2007:
The Select Committee on Social Services, having considered the Traditional Health Practitioners Bill [B20 – 2007] (National Council of Provinces – sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 76 (2) Bill, reports the Bill without amendments.
-
Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Special Adjustments Appropriation Bill (2007/2008 Financial Year) [B 37 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 77), dated 18 September 2007:
The Select Committee on Finance, having considered the subject of the Special Adjustments Appropriation Bill (2007/2008 Financial Year) [B 37 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 77) referred to it, reports that it has agreed to the Bill.
WEDNESDAY, 19 SEPTEMBER 2007
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
-
The Minister of Finance
a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Revenue Service (SARS) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 205-2007].
b) Report and Financial Statements of the Reconstruction and Development Programme Fund for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 179-2007].
c) Government Notice No 809 published in Government Gazette No 30247 dated 31 August 2007: Determination of interest rate for purposes of paragraph (a) of the definition of “official rate of interest” in paragraph 1 of the Seventh Schedule, in terms of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 58 of 1962).
d) Government Notice No 1062 published in Government Gazette No 30220 dated 31 August 2007: Rate on the interest on Government loans made in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).
e) Government Notice No R.815 published in Government Gazette No 30254 dated 7 September 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 1 (No. 1/1/1342) in terms of the Customs end Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91 of 1964).
f) Government Notice No R.816 published in Government Gazette No 30254 dated 7 September 2007: Amendment of Schedule No. 3 (No. 3/618) in terms of the Customs end Excise Act, 1964 (Act No 91 of 1964).
-
The Minister of Communications
a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Broadcasting Corporation Limited (SABC) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
-
The Minister of Science and Technology
a) Report and Financial Statements of Vote 31 – Department of Science and Technology for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor- General on the Financial Statements of Vote 31 for 2006-2007 [RP 200- 2007].
-
The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Agricultural Research Council (ARC) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor- General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 168-2006].
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Council of Provinces
-
Report of the Select Committee on Finance on the Co-operative Banks Bill [B13B – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 75), dated 19 September 2007:
The Select Committee on Finance, having considered and examined the Co- operative Banks Bill [B 13B – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 75), referred to it, and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a Section 75 Bill, reports the Bill without amendments.
THURSDAY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2007
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
The Speaker and the Chairperson
- Bills passed by Houses– to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 20 September
2007:
(a) Housing Consumers Protection Measures Amendment Bill [B 6B
– 2007 (Reprint)] (National Assembly – sec 76(1))
(b) Tobacco Products Control Amendment Bill [B 24B – 2006]
(National Assembly – sec 75)
(c) Banks Amendment Bill [B 12B – 2007] (National Assembly –
sec 75)
(d) Diamond Export Levy Bill [B 22 – 2007] (National Assembly –
sec 77)
(e) Diamond Export Levy (Administration) Bill [B 23 – 2007]
(National Assembly – sec 75)
(f) Special Adjustments Appropriation Bill (2007/2008 Financial
Year) [B 37 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec 77)
(g) Repeal of the Black Administration Act and Amendment of
Certain Laws Amendment Bill [B 34 – 2007] (National Assembly –
sec 75)
National Council of Provinces
The Chairperson
- Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces in respect of Bills passed and transmitted
(1) Bills passed by National Assembly on 20 September 2007 and
transmitted for concurrence:
(a) Constitution Thirteenth Amendment Bill [B 24 – 2007]
(National Assembly – sec 74)
The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on
Security and Constitutional Affairs of the National Council of
Provinces.
(b) Cross-Boundary Municipalities Laws Repeal and Related
Matters Amendment Bill [B 25 – 2007] (National Assembly – sec
75)
The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Local
Government and Administration of the National Council of
Provinces.
(c) Education Laws Amendment Bill [B 33B – 2007] (National
Assembly – sec 76(1))
The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on
Education and Recreation of the National Council of Provinces.
(d) Rental Housing Amendment Bill [B 30B – 2007] (National
Assembly – sec 76(1))
The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Public
Services of the National Council of Provinces.
(e) Criminal Law (Sentencing) Amendment Bill [B 15B – 2007]
(National Assembly – sec 75)
The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on
Security and Constitutional Affairs of the National Council of
Provinces.
- Referral to Committees of papers tabled
(1) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
Public Services for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
National Roads Agency Limited (SANRAL) for 2006-2007,
including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 27-2007].
(2) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Labour and Public Enterprises for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of Eskom Holdings Limited
(Eskom) for 2006-2007, including the Reports of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Sentech Limited for
2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors
on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
(c) Report and Financial Statements the National Productivity
Institute (NPI) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(3) The following papers are referred to the Select Committee on
Economic and Foreign Affairs for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the National Lotteries
Board for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 170-
2007].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Competition
Tribunal for 2005-2006, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements for 2005-2006 [RP 125-
2007].
(c) Report and Financial Statements of the National Credit
Regulator (NCR) for the ten months ended 31 March 2007,
including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for the ten months ended 31 March 2007.
(d) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
Quality Institute for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(e) Report and Financial Statements of the Estate Agency
Affairs Board for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(f) Report and Financial Statements of the Estate Agency
Affairs Board for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(g) Report and Financial Statements of the International Trade
Administration Commission of South Africa for 2006-2007,
including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial
Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 91-2007].
(h) Report and Financial Statements of Khula Enterprise
Finance Limited for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-
2007.
(i) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Micro-
finance Apex Fund for 2006-2007, including the Report of the
Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007
(j) Report of the Strategic Industrial Projects (SIP) for
April 2002 to March 2007.
(k) Report and Financial Statements of the National Gambling
Board for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-
General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 142-
2007].
(4) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
Social Services for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African
Medical Research Council (MRC) for 2006-2007, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for
2006-2007 [RP 172-2007].
(5) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
Labour and Public Enterprises and the Select Committee on Local
Government and Administration for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Local Government
Sector Education and Training Authority (LG-Seta) for 2006-
2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the
Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 69-2007].
(6) The following paper is referred to the Select Committee on
Labour and Public Enterprises and the Select Committee on Public
Services for consideration and report:
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Transport Education
and Training Authority (Teta) for 2006-2007, including the
Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for
2006-2007 [RP 76-2007].
TABLINGS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
- The Speaker and the Chairperson
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Auditor-General for 2006-
2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the
Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 134-2007].
-
The Minister of Finance
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Reserve Bank for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Financial Services Board (FSB) 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 91-2007].
(c) Report and Financial Statements of the Office of the Ombud for Financial Services Providers for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
-
The Minister of Communications
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 155-2007].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the South African Post Office Limited for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
-
The Minister of Health (a) Report and Financial Statements of the Council for Medical Schemes for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007 [RP 75-2007].
-
The Minister in The Presidency (a) Report and Financial Statements of Vote 7 – Government Communication and Information System (GCIS) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements of Vote 7 for 2006-2007 [RP 194-2007].
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the Media Development and Diversity Agency (MDDA) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Auditor-General on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
-
The Minister of Housing
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Social Housing Foundation for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
(b) Report and Financial Statements of the National Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (NHFC) for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.
-
The Minister of Education
(a) Government Notice No 496 published in Government Gazette No 29979 dated 8 June 2007: Appointment of ministerial committee on schools that work, in term of the provisions of regulations 20, Part 8, of the Treasury Regulations for Department, Trading Entities, Constitutional Institutions and Public Entities, issued in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).
-
The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs
(a) Report and Financial Statements of the Ncera Farms (Pty) Ltd for 2006-2007, including the Report of the Independent Auditors on the Financial Statements for 2006-2007.