WEDNESDAY, 27 FEBRUARY 2008 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 15:01.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY

DEPUTY PRESIDENT

                Key elements of anti-poverty strategy

1. Mr T M Masutha (ANC) asked the Deputy President:

 What are the key elements of the antipoverty strategy as introduced by
 the President in his state of the nation address of 2008?
                               NO648E

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, hon members, the question is about the antipoverty strategy introduced by the President during the state of the nation address.

In answering, firstly, we welcome the question because it gives us an opportunity to give more information on the antipoverty strategy as introduced by the President. The President spoke of an antipoverty war room which will bring together programmes by departments such as Social Development, Provincial and Local Government, Trade and Industry, Agriculture and Land Affairs, Public Works, the National Treasury and Health as well as provincial and local administrations. They will work with nongovernmental organisations and with business to identify interventions required especially in specific households, and then we will implement it as a matter of urgency. Of course, this is not new because these are ongoing initiatives.

The draft antipoverty strategy emphasises some key elements. These are the prevention of poverty, especially amongst children and youth, which means that our interventions must aim at preventing children and youth from growing up to be poor; alleviating poverty, especially amongst the vulnerable members of our society who are incorporated through some of the programmes we are already implementing through Social Development, and the eradication of poverty, especially amongst the young and old who are able and willing to work. At the core of these elements should be the quality of skills transferred, finding and sustaining work opportunities, and assisting these members of our society to enter the labour market and to become self-employed as well. A total package of our interventions must also be targeted at households, that is, the poor households which would then be a combination of all these interventions including social grants, human capital, social wage and sustainable economic activities.

The approach also recognises that government cannot be alone in this fight. So, in the elaboration of the strategy, we need to say more about the role of the private sector as well as civil society. The approach also recognises the multidimensional nature of poverty and the extent to which different members of our society experience poverty differently.

Hon members, in that regard, therefore, there are seven pillars that the strategy stands on. The first pillar is income security, and this pillar calls for progressive expansion and the strengthening of the social security system in order to provide safety nets for the most vulnerable. The social security programme needs to close gaps so that it becomes inclusive but, at the same time, it should not be abused. The work that we are currently doing on increasing the age of children that are supported by the state as well as bringing in old men – Terror - into the pension net is part of being inclusive, Trevor. [Interjections.] The second pillar calls for the enhancement of rapid expansion of basic services and other nonfinancial transfers primarily through the social wage. The third pillar deals with human capital which is arguably the most important pillar for poverty eradication, especially for the young, and it calls for increased investment in human capital interventions. Statistics show that people with training after matric are less likely to be unemployed or poor. The strategy also aims to prevent young people from exiting school; instead, the aim is to support those who have already exited to go back to school as well as to access quality vocational and tertiary education. The strategy, however, recognises that not all young people can return to school or will be able to succeed in vocational training as some need income. The mathematics literacy campaign that is to be launched by the Minister of Education next month is one of such initiatives that will assist those who are already out of school and who need a second chance. Kha Ri Gude – that is the name of the campaign.

The fourth pillar is improving access to quality health care to ensure that all South Africans, especially children and women, are free from preventable and curable diseases. Curable infections such as tuberculosis should not be allowed to rob us of potential breadwinners in households, and some of the preventable diseases such HIV/Aids need greater attention.

The fifth pillar involves the creation of sustainable economic opportunities and, in particular, job creation. The stakes in the private sector and other social partners will, in this case, need to intensify the measures to support our people to become gainfully employed. Accordingly, we will propose to expand the absorption capacity and impact of the Expanded Public Works Programme, the National Youth Service, and the small enterprise promotion and co-operative programmes.

The sixth pillar relates to building access for the poor and calls for the rapid expansion of the housing, land and public infrastructure programmes. These must be delivered faster and with better quality. We must build the necessary economic infrastructure in townships and rural areas, including access to finance, to help the poor in those communities to start and sustain their own enterprises.

The seventh pillar is the antipoverty strategy and relates to improving social cohesion. In this proposal we look at building added community areas, better social cohesion and linking it to existing government programmes, opportunities and campaigns including the 2010 World Cup, moral regeneration initiatives, the school pledge that has been proposed for learners, Letsema activities and Big Brother-Big Sister support programmes. All of these are efforts to improve social cohesion.

Madam Speaker, we would like to encourage members to interact with the process that will lead to the completion of the strategy and we look forward to a robust debate and practical implementation. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr T M MASUTHA: Thank you, Deputy President, for your comprehensive and detailed response. The comprehensive nature of this antipoverty strategy you have just outlined mirrors the extent and complexity of poverty which manifests itself mainly in the form of income, asset and social poverty, demonstrating that income support alone will not address this challenge and that it is critical for government to accelerate access to basic services to ensure that the poor enjoy an acceptable standard of living.

Given the concerns about effective service delivery, particularly at provincial and local government levels, what role does the Deputy President envisage her office should play to ensure effective implementation of this antipoverty strategy with tangible outcomes?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon member, the Presidency by itself does not operate in a vacuum. It is part of the collective of departments and Ministers and, therefore, the critical role of the Presidency is co-ordination, monitoring and evaluation as well as supporting the different departments who have the capacity to implement these programmes. Increasing also is the role of Picas which is our agency that facilitates our interaction, research and planning. We would have to continue to play that role but in particular focus on the outcomes that our co-ordination, monitoring and evaluation can facilitate. Thank you.

Ms J A SEMPLE: Madam Deputy President, a key element of the antipoverty strategy is the childcare grants. In many communities, it is actually the perception that this childcare grant is encouraging young women to have babies. It is even said that young men have offered to father the children so that they can have a share in the grant.

So, what I’d like to ask the Deputy President is: Has government given any consideration to alternative means of alleviating poverty such as food parcels for babies and young children or even opportunities for school- going children to further their education?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon member, we have. In fact, part of what we are discussing - but we do not have finality yet on the strategy - is sending the young mothers back to school so that you do not create what I call a perverse situation where young mothers are dependants of children because of the grant instead of being breadwinners. Is it better if we rather give incentives to the mother to either further her skills – go back to work – and, through that process, she will be in a better position to look after her children? At the same time, we obviously also need to make sure that the young men also take some responsibility for their children, in which case we are encouraged very much by the proactiveness of the Department of Education in encouraging young people to go back to school. The large number of young people who are out of school and out of work, who swell the number of people who are unemployed, should actually be at school because people who are below the age of 24 who are already classified as unemployed are going to become chronically poor. This will happen unless they go back to school, improve their education and then again attempt to enter the labour market. [Applause.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Deputy President, in view of the government’s antipoverty strategy, how much of a priority is food security? With the seemingly out- of-control prices of food which are subject to inflation and, in particular, the price of bread, how does government intend dealing with this issue in both the short and the long term? For example, calls have been made for exempting white bread from VAT and reducing import duty on wheat. Also, will we be reviewing the agriculture and land policies in terms of the impact that they are having on food production and security? Thank you.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Of course we do have some of the interventions that are addressing food security which includes food parcels. In relation to the issues that you are raising - the uncontrollable escalation of prices - I think that the broader interventions that look at increasing the use of access to employment obviously improve the situation. There should be the punishing of those who are price-fixing in those situations where we can, so that we discourage these habits that escalate the prices. There was a robust debate in the House where, I think, different suggestions were made about how to deal with this issue. I wasn’t part of the debate, hon member, so I don’t know how the matter was actually concluded. We have some challenges that are out of our hands like the price of wheat, for instance, and all of those activities in the value chain.

Ms S RAJBALLY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hon Deputy President, I see you have a very intensive programme for the antipoverty strategy. Can you please tell us whether this antipoverty strategy will reach our deep rural areas?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon member, if it does not reach the deep rural areas, then there’s no point in doing it.

                  WELCOMING OF SUDANESE DELEGATION

The SPEAKER: Hon members, before we get to the next question, I simply wish to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the delegation from the Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly. Hon Deng Arop Kuol and delegation, we welcome you! Welcome! [Applause.]

          Filling of vacant posts in government departments

1. Mr K J Minnie (DA) asked the Deputy President: (1) Whether, with regard to the figures reflected in the annual reports of 2007 on the vacant posts in government departments and her statement in the House on 23 May 2007 (details furnished), the government is preventing skilled black South Africans from employment in its administration; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;

 (2)    whether any programme in the Accelerated and Shared Growth
      Initiative for South Africa, Asgisa, is designed to address this
      problem; if not, why not; if so, (a) what programme and (b) why
      has it failed to produce the requisite skills to date?
                                    NO641E

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. This question is related to vacancies in government departments but it also has a racial sting at the end of it. The reply is: Vacancies in government and elsewhere need to be attended to. That is why the President, in his state of the nation address earlier this month, committed us to acting on this matter since we also have many vacancies in the Public Service. If we are not filling the vacancies in areas where there are South Africans with skills that need these jobs as much as we need these skilled South Africans, we, of course, have to take urgent steps to correct this and that is exactly what we are doing with the Public Service and Administration department.

I’m not, however, about to get into this mudslinging and point- scoring on the racial matter as implied in the question. As far as the Joint Initiative on Priority Skills Acquisition, Jipsa, is concerned, yes, it is designed to respond, to some extent, to the issue of skills shortage in certain categories of jobs in the Public Service. The responses also that we may have, including the training institutions when it comes to training will not give instant results and solutions. So, when it comes to senior positions, investment in quality training still remains one of the most important investments that one needs to make. In the next question on skills, I will say a little bit more about it later. Thank you.

Mr K J MINNIE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Deputy President, it is not me who is playing the race card. It was actually you who told this House that you agreed with Mr Manyi, the Chairperson of the Commission for Employment Equity, that racism was keeping skilled black South Africans out of employment. The civil service is one of the biggest employers in the country and within the national administration, according to your own government’s annual reports, there are 40 000 vacancies. My question is very simple: Why does government not fill the vacancies with the available skilled black South Africans? Is racism one of the reasons? If not, what are the real reasons for the high vacancy rate? Thank you.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Government, actually, goes out of its way to employ people of all races. In your question, you implied that government is discriminating against skilled blacks. We are known for actually going out of our way to look for skilled people of all races. However, I still agree with Mr Manyi that there are incidents where skilled black people – not in the Public Service – are given junior jobs. That is why, in the end, they would leave those jobs because they feel underutilised. So, the issue there is failure to appreciate those people and give them a challenge that is equivalent to the skills that they have. [Applause.]

          Success of Jipsa in alleviating skills shortages

1. Dr U Roopnarain (IFP) asked the Deputy President:

 Whether the Joint Initiative on Priority Skills Acquisition, Jipsa, has
 been successful in alleviating the skills shortages in South Africa; if
 not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?
                         NO644E

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, this is also a question about skills. I would like to indicate upfront that the nature of the skills challenge that we face in South Africa has ensured that we co-ordinate much better and that Jipsa is making a meaningful contribution. However, as I noted in my response in this House on 23 May 2007, there are areas where we have not been successful. Jipsa’s mandate is indeed limited and specific to certain skills categories. A list of these priority skills was published and when they were published, we were also able to even go further in relation to the built environment skills, for instance, and identify the specific trades that we needed to focus on with the assistance of the relevant departments. A review of Jipsa is currently being finalised and a report will be released in this regard.

However, in the first nine months of Jipsa’s operation, we focused on determining the priorities that I set; analysed critically what needed to be done in each skills category, and we quantified the challenge and began to develop concrete proposals for the acquisition of skills, especially in the areas of engineering and artisanship, which is where we have done most of our work. That was followed by quantifying and detailing what needed to be done in the other areas which will be covered in the report that will be released. Hon members will get the report.

I just want to give concrete examples of what happened in the areas of artisanship and engineering which is where we started. One of the achievements in the area of artisanship has been the fact that we have been able to get all the stakeholders to agree on the routes that need to be taken for the training of artisans. The Department Labour and the Department of Education and other departments assisted us significantly in order to achieve this. Of course, the private sector also played a crucial role in this regard.

A draft Skills Development Amendment Bill has been drafted - it’s probably in the House by now or en route - to strengthen the policy for artisan development. A total of 9 000 trainees are now being trained as artisans as a result of the interventions that we have all been making. Of course, there is also a significant contribution by the further education and training institutions which, as you know, were recapitalised to the amount of R48 million in 2006 to improve the pass rates and graduation rates. In addition to that, bursaries are now offered to FET students. So, again, all of that has happened as a result of a co-ordinated approach led by the different departments and by working together with private sector, labour and other concerned groups.

In relation to artisans, Jipsa is targeting 50 000 that must be trained by

1. We feel that we are on course to achieve this target which has been assisted by the fact that many sector education and training authorities reprioritise their budgets so that they are able to support the training of artisans. The private sector and some provinces such as the Western Cape are also investing in the training of these artisans, and through that, we will be able to top up the 50 000 that we have taken responsibility for producing.

In 2007 we committed ourselves in a consultative process in Jipsa to produce an additional 1 000 engineers per annum in our higher education institutions. We all would have loved to do more but we were cognisant of the fact that our institutions have limited capacity. As a result, the Department of Education has provided for R39 million so that they can improve the production of engineers in universities between 2007 and 2009, and this is ongoing.

However, because these numbers will not meet the demand, we are therefore, working with the private sector and other institutions to top up these numbers by undertaking their own initiatives. Again, the details on how they are going to do that will be in the report that will be released.

There is also an ongoing process of recruiting from other countries, and the Department of Home Affairs has gone out of its way to make this process easier and to facilitate easy entry of those people that are being recruited. There is also a process led by the Development Bank of Southern Africa of recruiting retirees. A dedicated programme to improve throughputs through candidacy phase, which is where we tend to lose engineers, is also in place and is led by the professional bodies.

Professional registration has increased since we started intervention and there is also a process that is aimed at retaining engineers within the profession. This also includes recruiting people into the sector for the purpose of mentoring as well as retaining them in training institutions so that we can increase the capacity of training institutions.

Based on just these two examples of artisans and engineers, we can see that the co-ordinated approach has produced results. Of course, we are however very clear that Jipsa is not a panacea and it is unable to solve all our problems. That is why ongoing support of our established institutions remains important. Thank you.

Dr U ROOPNARAIN: Madam Speaker, I thank the Deputy President for that comprehensive response. You also highlighted some of the challenges. Something that we in the IFP are very concerned about is the underperformance of some of the Setas. Some of them are riddled with financial mismanagement. We just want to know how you can come in and intervene to provide leadership because there clearly is a leadership vacuum in some of these Setas so that these Setas can recommit themselves and reprioritise themselves so that Jipsa can deliver on its mandate.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, firstly I think it is important that we don’t discourage the Setas that are getting on with their work because we tend to know about those that are underperforming and not about those that are performing well. As I have said, for instance, in the work that we have done with artisans, it is the Setas that came forward and assisted us in increasing the number of trainees that we were able to absorb. There are some Setas that indeed have problems. We have developed intense interactions with those Setas, especially those that are training in the areas where we need the skills.

Of course, when we do fight with the Setas, we don’t announce it because sometimes that does not actually help us to get the results that we need. The Minister in the Department of Labour also has a sustained initiative which is aimed at addressing some of these shortcomings that we see in the Setas.

We are, however, convinced that the corrections that we seek will not come about as a result of interventions just by government because, as you know, the Setas are tripartite institutions. We need business to send senior people to be on the boards of the Setas in order for governance as well as for high performance. We need labour to send senior people because, together, they then make a collective that can supervise the Setas better.

There is also an ongoing discussion initiated by the Minister of Finance where we look at how we can assist the Setas to spend some of the money in some of the Jipsa activities. Thank you.

Mr T G ANTHONY: Madam Speaker, would the Deputy President be able to identify specific challenges that Jipsa, in particular, and Asgisa, in general, is facing in achieving its stated objectives?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, the fact that there are only 24 hours in a day is one of the challenges and they are quite significant. I think that because we are talking about a co-ordinated approach, the number of stakeholders that we need to co-ordinate outside and inside government is an issue. Also in many of our institutions, there is a challenge of capacity that presents a problem.

In some of the areas, for instance, if one were to take the area of skills, some of the challenges are that we have got programmes and plans and we have to invest in training the trainers. And, for some of those things there is no substitute for time. You have got to give a little bit of time so that you can get quality interventions.

So, I would say that a combination of time and the size of the task, not always the resources, presents us with some of the problems that we face. Thank you.

Ms A M DREYER: Madam Speaker, through you to the Deputy President, the Setas are supposed to alleviate the skills crisis and help achieve the Jipsa targets. However, as it has already been pointed out, they are themselves suffering under the severe skills shortage with vacancies at top management level and a leadership vacuum with a dramatic effect on training. I’ll mention just one example: Jipsa recommends the training of 50 000 artisans until the year 2010, including electricians in this group. However, the Energy Seta target for 2006-07 was to train 200 young persons over a 12-month period. Its achievement was naught. No learners were trained after the completion of this programme. Does the Deputy President agree that under these circumstances Jipsa is doomed to fail?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I don’t know if that is a fact. I don’t know about those statistics that you are giving but I have to say that Jipsa and the Setas are not the only interventions. They are but two of the measures that we have in order to address the issue of skills. So, the doom and the gloom of Jipsa cannot be determined by a specific problem of one Seta. And, of course, as I say, I am not familiar with the statistics that you are giving. I cannot commit to that.

Ms A M DREYER: Madam Speaker, may I have another follow-up question?

The SPEAKER: Yes, you may put a last follow-up question.

Ms A M DREYER: Just for the clarification of the Deputy President, the figures I mentioned come out of the annual report of the Education Seta for 2006-07 and they were discussed and confirmed by the Deputy Director- General of Training yesterday in a portfolio committee meeting. These figures are indeed correct and we are not focusing on just one Seta. I can mention many others with similar results. In fact there was an announcement yesterday that the construction Seta was also going to be placed under administration by the Minister and we urge him to also put the Education Seta under administration.

My understanding was that all the Deputy President was saying was that she was not familiar with them, not that the figures were incorrect.

   Progress and bottlenecks iro implementation of Apex Priorities

1. Ms M J J Matsomela (ANC) asked the Deputy President:

 In light of the President’s state of the nation address of 2008 in
 which he announced the Apex Priorities, (a) how will progress regarding
 the successful implementation of these priorities be monitored and
 communicated and (b)(i) what bottlenecks are
 anticipated in its implementation and (ii) how will they be resolved?
                                                           NO649E

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: In the light of the President’s state of the nation address of 2008 in which he raised the Apex Priorities, I would like to answer the hon members by indicating that the Apex Priorities will assist us to focus on areas of special attention over the next remaining 15 months of our term. In an approach of business unusual, priority areas such as ICT interventions, the war against poverty and improving Public Service performance will all be given special attention.

For each Apex Priority there is a lead department - because all these fall within departments - to take primary responsibility for ensuring the smooth implementation of the new focus areas. The lead department is responsible for reporting progress in this regard. Progress will be monitored through a web-based system that uses a series of project cards and employs a set of performance indicators for this purpose.

In addition, detailed attention is given to strategic policy issues, measures to fast-track implementation, and discussion on further challenges and comments on a bi-monthly basis. The information is in the monitoring system and will be compiled so that we will be able to produce progress reports for Cabinet and other institutions such as Parliament.

Once Cabinet has approved the progress report, there will be briefings during which the detailed progress will be discussed. At the same time, progress information will be made available on the government website as part of the programme of action.

Every Apex Priority is accompanied already by a detailed business plan that outlines implementation modalities, human resource requirements and expenditure requirements, and provides a workplan with detailed due dates and indicates possible risk areas. Special attention is being given to those areas in which co-ordination between government departments is needed.

Cabinet will monitor the implementation of these Apex Priorities closely and if bottlenecks are detected, specific ministerial attention will be given to those issues. Thank you.

Ms M J J MATSOMELA: Madam Speaker, I thank the Deputy President for her answer and I believe that we all agree with the Apex Priorities. The major problem is with the implementation which takes place at provincial and local government.

Therefore, Madam Deputy President, I would like to find out as to what mechanisms the Presidency has put in place to ensure that there is frequent and timeous reporting by provinces and local government on progress made and challenges encountered in order to give this Parliament an opportunity to make meaningful, timeous and effective interventions. Thank you.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, as you know, we have a forum of directors-general which includes provincial directors-general, called the Forum of South African Directors-General, Fosad, where the directors- general also sometimes, with other officials from the provinces, participate in the cluster. That gives us an opportunity through this system. There is an intergovernmental forum which the hon member may be aware of which is convened by the President and it involves premiers as well. As you know, in our makgotla, we have the premiers participating as well as representatives of Salga.

Of course, there is the NCOP which is a whole institution responsible for monitoring and follow-up of the work that is done by the provinces. The NCOP has its own committees and undertakes its own visits to communities and all of that put together also facilitates monitoring and evaluation.

We have also done our own visits, at least up to the end of last year, of all the provinces, in particular, to look at the extent to which provinces were managing to implement their Accelerated and Shared Growth Institution for South Africa targets, their provincial growth strategies, and all of the things that are part of the Apex Priorities are parts of those initiatives: provincial growth targets, the programme of action of the provinces as well as their Asgisa commitments. Thank you.

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Deputy Speaker and Deputy President, the 24 Apex Priorities have been identified by the President. They are projects of enormous scope and demand. I have looked at them but when I look at them it seems to me to be the repackaging of the old promises which have been recycled. If I just look at: “Provide all schools … with basic resources; speed up acquisition of land for redistribution; massively speed up implementation of early childhood development programme; implement intensive campaign to meet targets for water, etc.”

Please, Madam Deputy President, can you explain to us what is new this time and what will the various clusters who are taking responsibility for these 24 Apex Priorities be doing differently so that they influence delivery?

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That is why they are Apex priorities - because they are not new. You simply left out some of the ongoing work that sometimes gets buried in the detail. Because of its importance and potential for high impact, we give it greater priority. There are some areas where progress has been made where some departments have less work. When something has been taken to be an Apex programme and therefore, if you like, a priority of a priority, we are then mobilising those people who may have completed some of the work to consolidate and to support us in fast-tracking those areas which are regarded as Apex Priorities.

We have never said that we were coming up with new programmes. It would be stupid for us, in the last year of our term, to introduce new things. We are trying to complete those things that are possible to complete and therefore we are giving them greater priority. [Applause.]

Dr J T DELPORT: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon Deputy President, I accept and we all accept your good intentions. We accept the good intentions of the hon President but good intentions will not get us through this crisis. The basic problem, which your President admitted, was that he was doing business and that this government was doing business as usual and he said it should now be business unusual. Now, in your response, you have said in so many words now that you were just going to go on and concentrate on the things that must be done. So, what is different and that was the question the hon Botha asked you; What is different from what you have been doing to what you are going to do? Give us at least some hope that you will really cope with all the problems - vexing problems - of South Africa. [Applause.]

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: For instance, just to show that we are not talking about hope alone, you just have to look at the Budget. There is a greater prioritisation of resources in accordance with these priorities that have been given …

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Deputy President, let me try to get you an audience. There are just too many meetings taking place, hon members. Some members are actually leaning against other desks and so on. Please! [Interjections.] We do allow people to have meetings. We have restaurants and lounges; go and take care of that business where you can do it without anybody calling you to order. [Interjections.] We are dealing with questions to and responses from the Deputy President. For goodness sake, please let us try and make it better for all of us. I am very sorry, Madam, to have had to interrupt you.

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I just want to give an example: The Department of Defence has been given a responsibility to participate in Jipsa in fast- tracking the acquisition of tactical skills and it has been allocated a significant amount of money. If they did not have it, we would not be pushing business as usual and prioritising skills.

We should think about legislation. We have actually embarked on a very intensive process with the chairpersons of committees. Of course, maybe you don’t have a chairperson in your party so you may not know. In the elections you’ll know that. We have involved Ministers, DGs and officials, just to tighten up on the pace it takes for us to deliver legislation so that we are able to prioritise some of the legislation that needs to be implemented urgently in order for us to make the example that we have, and I do want to thank hon members for the co-operation in that regard because that process has been completed, even in the NCOP. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr J BICI: Deputy President, in your responses, you mentioned that the Apex Priorities will be monitored by the Cabinet. My question is: Does the Cabinet already have the strategies for monitoring? If those strategies are already available, could we perhaps get them so that the UDM can assist in the implementation? [Laughter.]

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Luckily there is a member of the UDM in the Cabinet, so that, I am sure, would also help. Yes, the monitoring and evaluation system is also on our website. That information is actually available to you, hon member. The Cabinet system by itself is also a monitoring mechanism because individual departments report, monitor, police, engage, make suggestions, make observations and send those departments back to FITs, and so on.

Questions to the Deputy President concluded.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The next item on the Order Paper is questions addressed to Ministers in the Peace and Security Cluster. Question 20 has been asked by the hon S Siboza to the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We have been informed that the Minister is delayed and we will come back to that question at a later stage. Question 5 has been asked by the hon D Kohler- Barnard to the Minister of Safety and Security.

                         PEACE AND SECURITY
                              Cluster 1

MINISTERS: Measures to ensure that possible disbanding of Directorate of Special Operations would not compromise any criminal cases

1. Ms D Kohler-Barnard (DA) asked the Minister of Safety and Security:

 (1)    Whether, in light of the possible disbanding of the Directorate
      of Special Operations (Scorpions), his department has proposed
      any measures to ensure that current and future criminal cases
      currently managed by the Scorpions are not compromised, delayed
      or halted as a result of the possible disbanding deadline of June
      2008; if not, why not; if so, what measures;


 (2)    whether any steps have been taken to ensure that (a) the
      integrity of confidential information such as witness (i) contact
      details and (ii) statements are maintained and (b) all (i)
      computers, (ii) files, (iii) systems and (iv) records currently
      under the control of the Scorpions are not lost, mislaid, stolen
      or copied during its possible disbanding; if not, why not; if so,
      what steps?  NO594E

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The amalgamation of the Directorate of Special Operations with the SA Police Service’s organised crime unit will be effected through legislation providing for the required transitional provisions. This will include a joint meeting of the most senior officials of the SA Police Service, the National Prosecuting Authority and the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. The process would ensure that all interests relating to personnel, equipment and cases under investigation as well as the interests of justice, security of information and witnesses and law enforcement are addressed during the amalgamation in an orderly way so as to ensure that the decision is properly piloted. Thank you.

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Thank you very much. As decisions taken outside of Parliament now seem to take priority in this establishment, kindly explain to the House how the advent of another senior official of the SAPS coming under investigation …and even you have shown total disregard of parliamentary process … and if the only body capable of handling such an investigation is the people currently being charged, who will undertake such an investigation? Who is left to investigate members of SAPS or are you going to suggest to this House that it would be so incredibly gullible as to believe that the SAPS should be in charge of investigation of its crooked members in the House? It is abjectly clear to the entire world that the decision to dissolve the Scorpions has already been taken by nonparliamentarians. But explain to us anyway - humour us and tell us who is going to squeeze the police? [Laughter.]

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: I am not going to deal with matters of politicking - which is what you are asking of me. [Interjections.] What I am going to give to you, in the first instance, is that I never said that Parliament was not going to be involved in this process. [Interjections.] I stood here at this podium during the debate of the President’s state of the nation address and among the things I said was the following: We managed to place on the table, therefore, a proposal for the creation of a better crime-fighting unit to deal with organised crime. I never, said that Parliament was not going to be part and parcel of that process and I clearly said: We were placing on the table a proposal and Parliament will do the necessary work because that is how we do things. It will come to Parliament as part and parcel of the legislation that we are proposing. I am not going to deal with the other matters that relate to politicking. [Applause.]

Ms A VAN WYK: Deputy Speaker, Minister, I think we have worked too hard to create a credible police service to, in the disbanding of the Directorate of Special Operations, allow the impression to be created that SAPS is the enemy and they do not know how to deal with investigations, the handling of witnesses and their arrests. [Interjections.] I think all politicians have a responsibility to make sure that this does not happen. Furthermore, the disbandment of the Directorate of Special Operations in no way reflects negatively on this government’s continuous commitment to fight specifically organised crime. [Interjections.] How will this enhance … [Interjections.] How will this move enhance the SAPS’ capacity and capability to combat organised crime? The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: If we want her to be honest, if you want us to be honest, we will go and enquire how much the police’s organised crime units have done to deal with organised crime ourselves.

The other day, and I am going to bring those facts to Parliament, we did a comparative study. Of course we cannot compare apples with oranges and therefore we had to compare like figures with respect to this work. We therefore took only the Gauteng organised crime unit and compared its work to that of the Scorpions. I don’t want to put before you a situation where I’ll say: These ones had so many investigations that they did and the other ones so many. In the broader scheme of things, you can’t compare work that is done by a grouping of law enforcers that relates to only 100 cases and say that they were, therefore, able investigate 80% of those cases, and compare that to 500 law enforcers and say that they were only able to investigate 20% because ordinary simple arithmetic and maths will tell you that 80% of a 100 is only 80 but 20% of 500 is 100. You can’t compare those things. All that I am appealing about is that we should be honest and investigate this matter. Check how many people were put behind bars by the police’s organised crime unit and those that were put behind bars by the Scorpions. It is as if there was no investigation of organised crime unit before we established the Scorpions in 1999. The fact of the matter is that there are cases like that which were investigated and successfully completed. [Applause.] The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, we may raise our points without screaming and shouting as if people are not allowed time to take points of order. Really, at times I think we need to bring a DVD to the House during a sitting for you to look at yourselves and say: Really, am I really the leader that I am pretending or acting to be? If we can do that, I think it will help. This is what the nation is looking at. People have the right to raise points, they have the right to ask questions and you can get responses without shouting. Thank you.

Mr S N SWART: Hon Speaker, on a point of order: Is this ruling suggesting that we should no longer have interjections in the House?

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, it doesn’t say that. There is business of the House. I have to respond a little bit on that. What we are doing here is an exercise of people speaking and others listening. At the end of it, people raise questions and say that I didn’t hear properly and so on. You are making my work here very difficult. I will allow you all the time you need for as long as it is in an orderly fashion. You can still continue being an hon member who interrogates and does everything that you want to do but do it in an orderly manner, Mr Swart.

Mr M SWART: Madam Deputy Speaker, arising from your response, hon Minister, the Scorpions’ report yesterday to the Justice Committee under the auspices of the NPA’s annual report emphasised that: Early prosecutorial oversight is aimed at ensuring that all evidence and information collected is court directed. This approach, based on the principle of constant prosecutorial oversight in investigations is the cornerstone of the success of the DSO.

Do you not agree, hon Minister, that any attempt to incorporate the unit into the SAPS will result in it losing this essence, the constant prosecutorial oversight which is crucial to its success and which will compromise further very important investigations that the unit is busy with at the moment such as Fidentia, Saambou Bank, Project Cybercrime and the Johannesburg Consolidated Investment, the JCI investigation which has been characterised as our Enron, considering that prosecutors cannot serve within the SAPS; and if so, how will the issue of constant prosecutorial oversight be addressed? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Deputy Speaker, I am sure you do remember the English phrase “empty vessels”? [Laughter.]

Hon Swart, it has always been our view that every investigation must be accompanied by intelligence as well as people who understand the law – prosecutors, etc. – who will guide that investigation. The difference between what we are saying and what has become practice is that we do not want those prosecutors who work to guide that investigation to be the same people who go to court to prosecute the matter. That is all that we are saying in terms of guiding the process legally so that, at the finalisation of the investigation, that docket will stand the scrutiny of the court. You need people who have that legal training who are prosecutors and understand what is going to happen in that court. Those people will continue to be part of this special organised crime unit and therefore we are not going to lose that element. There is no suggestion at all that what we are talking about will be minus that element. You are correct; it is an important element, which we recognised from the beginning. That is why, right at the beginning, before the establishment of the Scorpions, we said that we needed a prosecutorial team that would assist in the finalisation of all investigations.

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Adjunkspeaker, ek het nou mooi gehoor wat die agb Minister gesê het. Hierdieselfde Minister het verskeie kere van hierdie podium juis die Skerpioene geprys en gesê dat georganiseerde misdaad effektief bestry kan word, juis omdat hulle onafhanklik van die polisie kan funksioneer en soos hulle altyd gesê het, “it must be a prosecuting orientated investigation”. Die agb Minister het nou daarna verwys.

Nou wil ek vir die agb Minister vra: Wat het intussen sy mening laat verander om hulle nou wel deel van die polisie te maak? Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Deputy Speaker, I have listened carefully to what the hon Minister has said. The same Minister, on several occasions, indeed praised the Scorpions from this very podium and said that organised crime could be combated effectively precisely because they can function independently of the police and, as they always said, “it must be a prosecuting orientated investigation”. The hon Minister referred to it now.

Now I want to ask the hon Minister: What has changed his view, in the meantime, to want to make them part of the police now? Thank you.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I think we had a problem with the English there. Did you get it, sir?

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: I’m not quite sure, but I …

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The summary is that you have stood at the podium several times in praise of the Scorpions … Will you please complete it in English?

Mr P J GROENEWALD: Deputy Speaker, what I actually, in essence, said was that the same hon Minister stood at the podium several times and emphasised the fact that the Scorpions were successful in their investigations because they are not part of the police. The words were actually, “it is a prosecuting orientated investigation”. Now my question to the hon Minister is: Why now, Minister? What happened to change your mind to say that the Scorpions can be part of the Police Service now?

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Deputy Speaker … [Interjections.] … Oh please, I never said that. [Laughter.] I never did but the way I personally understand these things is that five fingers are strong; these five fingers of my other hand are also strong, but when you put them together, they are even stronger. [Applause.]

           Progress in resolving political crisis in Kenya

1. Mr S Siboza (ANC) asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs:

   Whether any progress has been made to resolve the political crisis in Kenya; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NO611E

The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. I apologise for coming late to the House.

I would just like to say that the negotiation and the mediation process is still in progress between the Party of National Unity and the Orange Democratic Movement over the disputed presidential elections. Of course, after a very intensive discussion, the parties reached agreement on a number of issues. We have the creation of an independent review committee, and this committee is mandated to investigate all aspects of the 2007 presidential elections and to make findings and recommendations to improve the electoral process. The committee will be a nonjudicial body made up of Kenyans and non-Kenyans, recognised electoral experts of the highest professional standing and personal integrity. The committee will submit the report between three and six months from the time it is formed and it will start its work not later than 15 March. The findings of this committee must be factored in into the comprehensive electoral reform that is envisaged.

On the need for a political settlement to resolve the crisis, it was also agreed that it needed to be recognised that, since there is a serious crisis in the country, a political settlement is a necessary and effective way of promoting national unity. So a political settlement is needed to manage and implement a broad reform agenda to address the root causes of the crisis and to deepen and broaden the democratic foundation.

The reforms that have been identified are: Comprehensive constitutional reform; comprehensive electoral reform; a truth, justice and reconciliation commission; identification and prosecution of perpetrators of violence; respect for human rights; parliamentary reforms and commitment to a shared national agenda in parliament and, of course, other legislative structural, political and economic reforms. So there is a whole basket of reforms that has to be undertaken. That is where things are but this is work in progress. I thank you.

Adv Z L MADASA: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Hon Minister, thank you for your answer. The ANC raised the Kenya crisis out of a genuine concern about how the presidential elections were conducted in Kenya which precipitated the loss of lives of fellow Africans which inevitably caused the suffering of the most vulnerable - African women and children - and the negative impact of the crisis on the economy of the region. We are also outraged by the persistent conduct of some of the continent’s leaders who are bent on personal gain in politics at the expense of collective development. The follow-up question is: What is the government doing within the context of the African Union to strengthen democratic institutions on the continent, as we believe that the strengthening of these institutions is the only guarantee for lasting peace and security?

The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Thank you. I think the whole African agenda that the government and the country is pursuing is aimed at, amongst others, strengthening democracy and democratic institutions. Of course this happens at various levels. In countries where there is conflict, you can’t strengthen democracy when people are at war. You have to stop the war and make sure that there can be reconciliation, stability and security, and you then rebuild the democratic institutions where they exist, of course. Even the African Peer Review Mechanism has, as one of its objectives, precisely to review what is happening on the democratic front in all the countries that are being reviewed and to see what needs to be done to strengthen democracy in those countries.

Kenya subjected itself to a review and some of the things that are happening now were pointed out in that peer review. I am sure that if the elections had not happened, the peers would probably have asked Kenya what it has done to address some of the problems that were pointed out in the review.

There is the work that we do in peacekeeping and all of the work including the strengthening of the AU itself. Last year, the AU completed a protocol on democracy, elections and so on, and that protocol will be coming to Parliament for ratification which is a protocol that will guide all the countries on the continent. So there is a lot of work that is being done. I can go on and on, on this matter. Thank you.

Mr W J SEREMANE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Madam Minister, given all the useful facts you have just presented, does the government recognise the Kibaki regime? Furthermore, in your view, Minister, what protocols or treaties or even declarations in the context of the precepts and goals of the AU and such institutions have been violated in the Kenyan crisis, if we want to get to the bottom of the problem? Thank you. The MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Well, the government has not even written a letter of congratulations to the President, precisely because of the problems that are attached to the elections. What we consider important is that the AU, as part of the AU, asked the former Secretary-General of the UN Kofi Annan to take charge of that situation, stop the violence and negotiate a short-term settlement but also to identify all the root causes and make sure that there is a long-term programme that is going to make sure that this situation doesn’t arise again.

In terms of what has been violated, clearly, if there is a dispute about the elections, it means something went wrong with the elections. South Africa did not send a team to observe the elections, so I cannot say exactly what went wrong but, clearly, something went wrong. We all recognise that and that is why Kofi Annan is spending all his time trying to deal with that crisis on behalf of all of us. Thank you.

    Departmental investigation into murder of person at hospital

1. Mrs S A Seaton (IFP) asked the Minister of Correctional Services:

   (1) Whether his department has concluded its investigation into the murder of a certain person at a certain hospital (details furnished) on 14 March 2005; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will the investigation be concluded; if so, what were the main findings of the investigation;

   (2) whether any personnel of his department were found to have been negligent in carrying out their duties during the incident leading to the said person’s death; if so, what steps have been taken against the relevant person(s)?NO604E

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Hon Seaton, yes, the investigation was completed on 24 June in 2005. The main findings of the investigation were as follows: The offender, Lunga Luke, was escorted to Groote Schuur Hospital by the emergency support team members for a medical appointment. Four members escorted the offender in a panel van and a sedan vehicle to the hospital. The members were in possession of bulletproof vests like all our Emergency Support Teams, ESTs, but they did not wear them during the escorting of the offender. The members were issued with 9mm pistols and an R4- rifle. The offender, Luke, was under the direct supervision of Mr Horne and Mr Hendricks in the reception area of Groote Schuur Hospital when the attack took place. Mr Hendricks was shot in his arm and the bullet went through his stomach. One of the attackers was carrying an AK-47 rifle and fired shots at all of them. Mr Horne was shot in the process and he received emergency treatment at the hospital but later died because of the injuries he sustained. As a department, of course, and as the executive authority, we passed on our condolences and sympathies to the family.

The officials who were there prevented their awaiting trial detainee, Lunga Luke, from being freed. The aim of these unknown attackers was to free him from the officials and spring him out of prison, as you may put it. We do know that these attackers were part of the gang that had robbed the Blue Route Mall in Tokai. The incident was also criminally investigated by the SA Police Service.

With regard to the second part of the question, eight members were charged with disciplinary hearings and two of them were found guilty and received serious written warnings. Three of the officials had their cases withdrawn

• one was acquitted; one was dismissed in another unrelated case and one passed away before the finalisation of the case. Thank you. [Interjections.]

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, before we allow any supplementary questions, I just want to understand what ESTs are – for my own benefit – just in case people refer to that.

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: ESTs are emergency support teams of Correctional Services. These are trained officials who make sure that there is order and they always escort prisoners from one point to another.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, sir.

Mrs S A SEATON: Madam Deputy Speaker, my concern is that it is now nearly three years and we have been trying to find out what happened about this for three years. Why has it taken so long? Why did it require a question in the House for us to get some answers?

Lastly, are precautions now being taken? Is there now a mandatory wearing of bulletproof vests in these instances so that we don’t have any sort of situation like this one in the future?

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Hon Seaton, the report has been available for some time, but you haven’t asked a question on it. That is why I am answering the question. I will make sure that the report is available. I promise you that.

On issues of … [Interjections.]

Mrs S A SEATON: Chairperson, on a point of order: With all due respect, the question has been put in portfolio committee meetings on numerous occasions, including last year, and we have not had any answers.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Order! Well, that is something else. Respond to that question, hon Minister.

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Yes, Chairperson. I was not aware of that. But, since I am now, I will respond and say that we took disciplinary steps against those officials who did not wear their bulletproof vests. This is mandatory. This was mandatory even then that when they escort, particularly awaiting-trial prisoners and heist gangs, they must wear bulletproof vests. But these guys are taken by SAPS most of the time and we assist the SAPS in the process. It is mandatory for officials, when escorting dangerous offenders, to wear their bulletproof vests.

Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister, you will agree with me that this is not an isolated incident. This is symptomatic of a bigger problem and at the heart of this problem lies the level of corruption that prevails within our correctional facilities which also includes corrupt officials.

Minister, over and above the steps you have taken in this instance, for example, what other concrete measures have you put in place to address this problem on a broader level? We see, increasingly, that violent escapes continue to happen from time to time in different parts of the country with the complicity or involvement of corrupt officials. What other measures can you put in place as a deterrent? Thank you.

The DEPUTY MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Chairperson, on a point of order: I think the hon Sayedali-Shah must not make a blanket statement on corrupt officials. He can say “some corrupt officials” because we acknowledge that there are some people within our ranks that practice corrupt acts, but you cannot make a statement like “corrupt officials” because it would imply that all officials in the Department of Correctional Services are corrupt, and that is not the case.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Thank you, hon Deputy Minister. I think … [Interjections.]

Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: Chairperson, it is correct. I should say: “some corrupt officials”. I withdraw the general remark and specify “some corrupt officials”.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Thank you very much.

The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Thank you very much, hon Deputy Minister. You have really assisted me because I was going to respond in that kind of way as well.

Yes, there are some incidents like this one. You are right. Sometimes they are not as isolated as all that but we have put regulations in place – regulations that govern the transporting of dangerous offenders from one centre to another. There are very strict regulations on what to do and what not to do. I must also add, in the same vein, that when we had to transport offenders to courts and sometimes to other areas, particularly to hospitals, we would give them dates for the offenders’ hospital appearances, for example. But, in terms of hospitals now, we have stopped that. It is us, the department, who will know when offender A or B goes to a hospital. We had about two incidences where appearances in hospitals were known and offenders then phoned the other offenders for them to try and spring them out. We have put precautions in place and I am quite happy with the way we are dealing with things.

Mr D V BLOEM: Minister, thank you very much for the response but you see, Minister, sometimes your departments officials are not very helpful because we have asked this question in the committee about this specific issue. They said they would come back to us. I am asking you, Minister, to ask the department to give us a report. I hope that, Minister, you will do that so that we as a committee can get that report. Thank you very much. [Applause.]

         Constitutional grounds for a single police service

1. Mr S N Swart (ACDP) asked the Minister of Safety and Security:

   On what constitutional grounds does he rely when arguing for a single police service in the country as justification for incorporating the Directorate of Special Operations into the SA Police Service? NO627E

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you very much, Chairperson. There are two instances that I have brought into the public domain and, in particular, when conveying our attitude towards this matter. One of those instances I have already mentioned; it was when I participated in the debate on the President’s state of the nation address, and the second one was when we did a media briefing for journalists in Parliament. What I said, which is the rationale for the amalgamation, is that we need to have a better central command and control point which must improve the co- ordination of the work of all law-enforcement agencies that deal with organised crime.

I went on to say that the ANC is not reckless when it determines that the fight against organised crime requires a re-look, and the better utilisation of the services the country has, the easier it is to deal with that scourge in a better co-ordinated manner under the aegis of a single command and control point. We want to place on the table, therefore, a proposal for the creation of a better crime-fighting unit to deal with organised crime where the best experience of the Scorpions and the police’s Organised Crime Unit will be merged.

Secondly, of course, it was when we addressed the media on 19 February, and on that occasion, this is what I said:

Among weaknesses we identified were lack of co-ordination and parallel investigations with different entry points and even different results on the same issue in question.

Those problems have often translated into conflicts within the law- enforcement environment. We are looking at the best options to improve our work.

It will be recalled that one of the options government was given was the recommendation by the Khampepe Commission that the Scorpions remain under Justice but report, in terms of their investigative work, to Safety and Security. I never used the single police service concept to justify the incorporation of the Directorate of Special Operations, DSO, into the SA Police Service. Those are the points I raised on this issue.

Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Chairperson. Arising from your response, hon Minister, the ACDP, like most others, has not had sight of the Khampepe Commission’s report into the future of the Scorpions. We find it unacceptable that the future of the Scorpions seems to have been decided upon without due consideration to the findings of the Khampepe Commission with even the majority party admitting in media reports that many of them have not had sight of the committee’s report.

However, hon Minister, you referred to the Khampepe Commission. Is it not correct that you argued before that commission that there must be “a single police force in terms of section 199 of the Constitution”, but, that that argument was rejected by the Khampepe Commission, relying on the 2002 Constitutional Court’s decision, and that the commission found that there was nothing unconstitutional with the Scorpions separately sharing a mandate with the SAPS? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: I am sure you will appreciate that that was not the only argument. In any event, I have told you what I raised as the rationale for the relocation and it does not include the concept of a single police service.

Ms M M SOTYU: Ndiyabulela Mphathiswa ngempendulo yakho, njengokuba sele kucacile ukuba eminye imibutho ithe phithi ncithi ludaba lwezi Scorpions. [Thank you, Minister, for your response. It is clear that other political parties are obsessed with the issue of the Scorpions.]

Minister, arising from your response on the issue of the single police service to fight crime, are there any other areas where government is consolidating its programmes to fight the very same crime that you are talking about? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: There are various areas of the criminal justice system where we are reorganising. The consequence of that reorganisation is, of course, the emergence of new structures. What we are doing is that, with respect to the criminal justice system, we ordered a review and there are certain decisions, therefore, that we have taken at Cabinet level.

The decisions are twofold - they relate, in the first instance, to those matters that, as a matter of routine, we should attend to - they are administrative – to enhance the capacity of the criminal justice system. The second set of issues is matters that we’ll have to take to Parliament for further elaboration. Those impact on our law and, therefore, we are going to suggest some changes to the law to further strengthen the criminal justice system. That is one set of matters but inherent in that is, obviously, the restructuring of our crime-fighting machinery.

Secondly, there is interaction that has been happening between the SA Police Service and the municipal police structures, which is designed to look at how we can better utilise the metro police or the municipal police structures as a force multiplier in order for us to be able to fight crime where it actually happens - on the ground. To that extent and via that experience, there are certain things we believe need to be changed. Again, we are going to be coming before Parliament in order for us to effect some of those changes. As you appreciate, the municipal police system relates only to the enforcement of bylaws but what we want to do is to give more power to police at that level so that they can participate, as I have said, as a force multiplier in fighting crime. In other words, what they will be expected to do, when we have the go-ahead from Parliament, is to participate in crime prevention as well as combating crime directly as a force multiplier. But those matters are going to be looked at continuously and through Parliament … [Time expired.]

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Minister, just to refresh your memory, what you actually said was that the Scorpions will be dissolved and the organised crime unit of the police will be phased out. That’s in your speech of 12 February and it is written right there. I thought perhaps you must have had a little lapse of memory.

Many of the ANC’s spokespersons, and you do have so many these days, are referring to this notion that the country needs a single police service. Are you not now claiming that the steps the ANC took initially in setting up the Scorpions are somehow illegal, unconstitutional or is it, as the world believes, simply because they’ve become illegal and more illegal as they’ve exposed the crimes committed by the majority of the newly elected members of the ANC’s National Executive Committee, NEC, and are using this extremely questionable logic about closing them down? Does this not then mean that should the national commissioner, Jackie Selebi, be found guilty, we are going to have to shut down the SAPS too?

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Firstly, I am not going to speak on behalf of the ANC and, therefore, things that are said by the ANC people are the matters of the ANC. They have nothing to do with me. Of course, I am not going to go into an argument of: If this happens therefore that must also happen. I am not going to go into that kind of speculation, but, let me just respond to this other issue. I belong to a party that takes policy positions and it is those policy positions of that party that has majority support in this country - that constitutes policies that are adopted by this country. [Applause.]

On that basis, when I stand in Parliament and say the ANC will do the following, it does not mean that Parliament will not be part of that. What it means is that the ANC - having 70% support in the country and speaking on behalf of that 70% - says, as that grouping of people: This is what the ANC will do. [Applause.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Order, hon members!

Mr M T LIKOTSI: Mr Minister, what I would like to know is that when these two units are brought together to form a stronger unit to fight crime, don’t you think it would also be advisable to bring on board the units from the SA National Defence Force to make this animal much more stronger?

I think we need to calculate that crime in our country, especially the white collar crime, is so sophisticated and it needs a crime buster that is much stronger than the Scorpions. And, if you do not have a new name that could be given to this unit, then I would propose that this unit be called “Cobras”. [Laughter.]

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Chairperson, fortunately the hon Likotsi is going to be participating in these discussions when the matter comes to Parliament. So, the suggestions he made will be tabled before Parliament for further elaboration. But I saw that members were laughing at you, hon member. I didn’t laugh because there is merit in what you are saying. You say we must be mobilising for this and choose people from various units that are involved in the fight against crime.

We have what is called military intelligence. Of course, military intelligence does not only investigate crimes but there is a lot of information that they generate relating to what is happening across the world. Therefore, it may be possible that some elements there may be drawn into a structure that will form part of this unit on the basis of information gathering. We want to rely, to a very large extent, on the intelligence that we will get from the intelligence community in South Africa, and military intelligence is part of that community. But we don’t know what is going to happen in the end. All I can say at this time is that we are soon going to approach Cabinet and raise all elements that relate to this project so that, quite soon, we can come to Parliament and share those thoughts in a better co-ordinated fashion through engagement by these public representatives here, and also with the public out there. [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Hon Sayedali-Shah, unfortunately only four supplementary questions are allowed. So, we will be moving to the next question.

Query regarding the fitting of safety-pins to anti-aircraft cannon involved in Lohatla deaths

1. Mr P J Groenewald (FF Plus) asked the Minister of Defence:

 (1)    Whether the anti-aircraft canon which caused the death of nine
      soldiers at Lohatla was fitted with safety-pins (stoppers); if
      not, why not; if so,


 (2)    whether the pins were in position at the time of the incident;
      if not, why not?                                          NO24E

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Thank you, Chairperson. First of all I do need to draw the attention to the fact that hon Groenewald’s question speaks of the safety pins. I am not sure exactly what that refers to because, as will be seen from the information that has been tabled before the House, the equipment that we were dealing with is called spring pins. So I don’t know whether he meant spring pins or something else.

The report before the House relates to the matter of the nine members of the SA National Defence Force who were injured at Lohatla. The finding of the investigation is that a critical failure occurred on Gun 124 when the interface between the hand or motor actuator selector lever and the transverse gearbox broke during the engagement. This was caused by a spring pin that sheared and disengaged the control mechanism and rendered the gun uncontrollable when it was fired. That was the mechanical cause of the accident. The spring pin itself is not a mechanism to keep the gun from firing in the direction in which it was firing. What happened is that as it broke, it caused the gun to lose control of itself and therefore turn, swing to the left and, in that 15 seconds or so, it shot and killed the people involved.

The mechanical failure was caused by these spring pins. If you speak about safety pins, that might suggest a pin that is manually managed by the operator. On the other hand, this spring pin is the unit of the gun that is inside and is not touched by any human operation.

The finding that has been made further is that the necessary maintenance of these guns had been done assiduously over the years.

But the third finding is that the original equipment manufacturer did not include and does not include in their manual, to date, any provision that, in the servicing of the gun, this particular spring pin is to be checked as part of servicing.

Although we are in possession of information now, the board found that the gun had failed in another country without causing loss of life and had failed as the result of the same spring pin.

The original equipment manufacturer did not advise South Africa that they had found that this equipment had the shortcoming. They did not advise South Africa right up until this accident happened. That of course raises the issue that the matter cannot rest there and in terms of this discussion, one has to be cautious what one can assert or not because it is not unlikely that the matter may end up in legal suits. I only say it to the House that the SA National Defence Force had consistently stuck to the manual supplied by the original equipment manufacturer and assiduously attended to the upgradings and that the only cause of this was its mechanical failure which the SA National Defence Force could not have anticipated as they had not been advised of anything by the equipment manufacturer.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela: Hon Minister, I gave you additional time just on that question because it was important.

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Dankie, agb Voorsitter. Agb minister, ek praat nié van die “spring pin” nie. Ek praat van die “safety stoppers”. Ek het ’n bekommernis as die Minister van Verdediging en sy lede nie weet waarvan ons praat as ons van ’n “stopper” praat nie. Dit is juis die veiligheidsmeganisme vir wanneer iets fout gaan met die kanon, sodat hy dan binne sy skootvlak bly skiet.

Daarom is my vraag aan die agb Minister: ek weet daar was ’n opgradering van hierdie kanonne. Was daardie stoppers met die opgradering nog steeds in gebruik; indien nie, hoekom nie? Dan wil ek ook vra, as hulle in gebruik was, hoekom was die stoppers nie in hulle plekke nie? Ek kan vir die agb Minister verduidelik. Dis ’n pen wat ’n mens indruk sodat, as die kanon beweeg, hy nie by daardie penne kan verbygaan nie, en dan kan hy net in sy skootvlak skiet.Die vraag is dus dit, want alle veiligheidsmaatreëls maak juis voorsiening vir die onvoorsiene.

Dan wil ek die agb Minister vra: U het gesê alles moet bekend gemaak word. Wanneer maak u die volledige verslag bekend sodat ons ook as Parlementslede die publiek daar buite kan verseker alle stappe word gedoen om ’n soortgelyke ongeluk te voorkom? Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.) [Mr P J GROENEWALD: Thank you, hon Chairperson. Hon Minister, I am not referring to the spring pin. I am referring to the safety stoppers. I am a bit concerned that the Minister of Defence and his members do not know what we are referring to when we speak about a stopper. These are precisely the safety mechanisms that helps the cannon to remain within its firing range, should something else go wrong with it.

I know that those cannons had been upgraded. That is why my question to the Minister is: Were those stoppers still in use after the upgrade? If not, why not? Then I would also like to know why, if the stoppers are in use, they were not in place. I can explain this to the hon Minister. The stopper is a peg which, once inserted, prevents the cannon from moving beyond it, thus allowing it to fire in its firing range only. This, therefore, is the question, precisely because all safety precautions make allowances for the unforeseen.

Then I would like to ask the hon Minister: You have said that everything should be revealed. When will you release the complete report, so that we, as Members of Parliament, can assure the public out there that everything is being done to prevent a similar accident? Thank you.]

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: I am going to be very brief with regard to the response to the hon member. The guns in question had been used for the whole day the previous day, focused on horizontal shooting held by the mechanism that keeps them focused in a particular way. On the previous day, those guns fired more than 400 rounds and that mechanism that keeps it in control, kept it in control throughout.

On that day in question, the shooting commenced and went on for some considerable time but at some point the spring pin broke, leading to the fact that, once it broke, it resulted in the loosening of the control mechanism and that is what caused the accident. It is not because the mechanism that keeps the gun focused on the target was not in place. It had been in place for some time throughout the shooting because the breaking of this spring pin occurred whilst the shooting had been going on for some time. It couldn’t have stayed in place if the spring pin and the control mechanism, what you talk about as safety pins, did not have it under control.

The full report here suggests, by no means, that there was a human error of overlooking the mechanism that keeps the gun focused where it is. Hon Groenewald, unless you have another board of inquiry that has returned a different finding, this finding is that the spring pin broke; there is nothing else.

Dr E A SCHOEMAN: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister, we would like to express our appreciation for your involvement in and handling of this whole tragic incident. The fact is that when manufacturers are omissive like this

• as you described the original manufacturer - and when they provide equipment like this, usually as standard practice in the contract they also make provision for upgrading this equipment to prevent it from becoming obsolete. Now my question is: Was there such provision in the contract and was certain upgrading done since this equipment was acquired by the SA National Defence Force? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Chairperson, may I just place on record that this equipment, having been procured in the early ‘70s as MK1, was upgraded to MK2, then in the 1980s it was upgraded to MK3 and MK4. In 1991, it was further upgraded and recommissioned as MK5. There is no evidence that the national Defence Force has not stuck to the programmes relating to this equipment.

The most important question with regard to this matter is that this failure occurred already in other countries and not just in South Africa. It was not the first time this thing happened. I have said it had happened in other countries without causing loss of life because there was no deformation as we had on this occasion. If it had been negligence on the part of the national Defence Force members or engineers, then it would mean that, in the other countries where it had already occurred, they too would had been negligent.

The question that confronted the original equipment manufacturer is: Why did they not advise us that this spring pin has caused this malfunction? On checking further, it was found that 10 other guns of this class had similar sheared pins already. Indeed it was quiet possible that you could have had more than one of them malfunctioning and causing further damage. One can therefore not come and suggest that there was some human being around this particular gun who was negligent, as was implied in a comment made by the hon Groenewald.

Moulana M R SAYEDALI-SHAH: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Minister, is there any particular reason why you chose to share the contents of this internal investigation - the report itself on the Lohatla incident - with the media and the public first whilst the Portfolio Committee on Defence was deprived of the same privilege? Why haven’t you submitted this report to Parliament as yet? The parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Defence has yet to interrogate this report.

However, in view of what you’ve said, hon Minister, can’t the manufacturer of these weapons be held liable in terms of failing to report the first mechanical failure that happened outside South Africa, which you referred to? Do all contracts with weapons manufacturers not include some kind of a liability clause whereby the manufacturers are responsible for reporting all technical and mechanical failures to the clients?

Finally, have you done a full, urgent safety audit of these 35 Mark 5 guns in order to ensure that this incident doesn’t occur again? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Well, first of all Chairperson, members of the House will remember that on the occasion when this accident occurred, I hastened to come and inform the House of the nature of the accident, indicated that a board of inquiry was being instituted to investigate and even made an appeal that there should be no speculation because the media had begun to make certain speculative observations.

When the board of inquiry had completed its work, the House was in recess. But, as members, we will appreciate that there was a lot of anxiety on the part of the members of the families and all of that. We were quite concerned that it must not appear as if we were dragging our feet in terms of making known what the findings were. Under the circumstances, I took a decision to give at least a brief indication that a mechanical failure of the gun had been established as the precise cause of the accident. I say that because I did that and the House was not in session, and I couldn’t have asked the House to be convened so that I can come and table that before the House. So, that delay is as a result of that.

With regard to the question of shouldn’t the manufacturers have done this or that, I have already indicated that that is an area that the lawyers are looking at. Even the insurance companies are looking at that because some liabilities are bound to arise here. I can’t go ahead on the legal process; suffice it to say that our legal people are on top of the situation and we have to see what needs to be done and so on. Thank you.

Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Chairperson. I have been relatively covered but I just wanted to ask the Minister something regarding legal liability. I’ll appreciate it but can’t go into that in great detail. I do understand from your response that the inquiry ascertained that it had happened in other countries. There seems to be some working together with other countries and, therefore, is there not some obligation on the side of the manufacturer to warn other countries at least that this could be an error? Therefore, to what degree, at this stage, are you liaising with the manufacturer so that this becomes known internationally because it could be an issue that is of international importance where this gun is being used. Thank you.

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: Well, first of all, I just want to say that the original equipment manufacturers had to be drawn in by us so that when, for instance, the failure review board was set, they had to be represented on it. They had to see that this was what had happened etc.

Ordinarily, that’s why the finding of the board makes a specific mention of the fact that this failure had occurred in other countries but the original equipment manufacturers had not informed South Africa of that because, surely, that must give rise to some responsibility or liability of one type or another with regard to that. I can’t go ahead of it because that matter is going to be dealt with. It’s not included in the manual for servicing. One would have expected that when it occurred, under normal circumstances, the original equipment manufacturer would alert all its customers who bought the equipment that they should be cautious of this. One would expect that if they had taken steps to correct that it would have been impossible to happen with the other equipment. They should have done that for all of the customers who acquired that. All of those steps that otherwise one would assume would happen did not happen. So, they must raise the issue, therefore, as to what extent that implies liability on the part of the original equipment manufacturer. That matter is receiving attention at the present time. Thank you.

       Evidence of success of restructuring SA Police Service

1. Mrs D G Nhlengethwa (ANC) asked the Minister of Safety and Security:

 What is the visible and measurable evidence to illustrate the successes
 achieved as a result of the restructuring of the SA Police Service more
 than a year ago?                   NO615E

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you, Chairperson. The strategy behind the organisation of the structures of the Police Service was to send better and more resources, human and otherwise, to the local police stations which are at the coalface of the fight against crime. Policing on the ground is already showing great improvement. The best indicator that things are changing for the better is the better relationship that is emerging where changes have happened to the command structures. The new police leadership has created a better working environment that includes partnerships with the community and other relevant stakeholders.

A new partnership between the communities, civil society organs and the police called Community Building Credible Ownership has taken root in the Eastern Cape, connecting police stations such as these at Motherwell, New Brighton, Kwazakhele, Walmer and Galvindale to the people. In Gauteng that includes Mamelodi, Eersterus, Orange Farm, De Deur, Evaton and Moroka police stations. In KwaZulu-Natal that includes Lamontville, Mariannhill and Loskop stations and in the Western Cape that includes Manenberg, Mitchells Plain and Grassy Park.

The partnership is based on the street committee concept that was used to mobilise communities against apartheid. The police introduced a mechanism to track performance across the service to monitor the impact of the restructuring. All-round performance by the various police stations has improved, especially in Limpopo and the Northern Cape. Crime levels in the areas where the police and the communities are working together have dropped drastically. Thank you.

Mrs D G NHLENGETHWA: Minister, in your response you made mention of crime levels dropping drastically in areas where the police and communities are working together. You also added that the police have introduced a mechanism to track performance across the service to monitor the impact of restructuring. Do all provinces have those programme in place in implementing the strategies of working with communities, and also, what is the relationship between the community policing forums with other organisations? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: What we call the performance chart is available in all our provinces and in all police stations because part of the tracking requires that commanders must be able to have access to computers that are located at the various police stations in order to determine the levels of performance in those police stations. Therefore, every province has this mechanism. We had occasion to come and brief the portfolio committee on this particular instrument. Of course, members of the House were able to interact with the police who were displaying this particular mechanism. And, with respect to the community policing forums, indeed, they have taken a central role in co-ordinating the relationship between the communities and the police.

In fact, we have a very good example of what happens when there is that kind of co-ordination with respect to the Free State. In December last year, as part and parcel of the work to deal with crime during this festive season, they put together a system where the community forums were central in relating to the broad communities in the Free State, but particularly so with respect to Thabong and Mangaung where crime levels have been high.

What they did specifically for schools, Minister of Education, is that they located in the schools and, of course, other points what is called point offices, and any complainant is able to go to that point office, if the various police stations are far from the communities, to lay complaints, and those point offices, in the main, were populated by students who have passed their Std 10 but are unemployed. They were used for this purpose and at each point there would be some professionally trained police persons. Thank you.

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Minister, if you are claiming that the restructuring of the SA Police Service has been such a success, could you explain to this House how it is, as revealed by an investigation by the DA, that the vast majority of station commissioners are unqualified to do the job you hired them to do?

Indeed, the latest SAPS figures given to the portfolio committee on Monday at a strategy session you were too busy at the Luthuli House to attend show that only 14% of station heads have completed the management and leadership modules: that zero out of 110 of those in the Free State; only one of the 86 in the North West; only 31 of the 187 in KwaZulu-Natal, and that 19 of your 147 station heads here in the Western Cape have passed the investigation and intelligence modules.

I could go on and on but tell us, Minister, how this exercise has not just been a move to place ANC party members, qualified or not - but mostly unqualified - in those top positions around the country in one great purge of non-ANC members from positions for which many of the original incumbents were eminently qualified?

The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Well, I don’t understand how you are able to determine who of the more than 130 000 functional police members are ANC or non-ANC. I don’t how you get to that determination. I am a member of the ANC but I don’t have that information you seem to have. Secondly, you know, there is never a project where everybody involved in that project will be at the same level of development. There is nothing such as that.

I am happy that there is something that is being done to prepare police officials for this important work of fighting crime in South Africa, and anything that is being designed to deal with that, to me, is acceptable. You have the luxury of sitting where you are and criticising everything that is being done to improve the system of fighting crime. I don’t have that luxury.

See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES

Mr M T LIKOTSI: Chairperson, I move without notice that the House notes that today marks the 30th anniversary …

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Hon member, we are dealing with notices of motion and you said you move without notice. Will you wait for that slot, please? Are there any notices of motion? None?

You can go ahead now.

Mr M T LIKOTSI: Thank you for that correction.

        30th ANNIVERSARY OF DEATH OF ROBERT MANGALISO SOBUKWE

                         (Draft Resolution)

Mr M T LIKOTSI: Chairperson, I move without notice: That the House —

(1) notes that today marks the 30th anniversary of the past outstanding leader of the African Liberation Struggle, a thinker, a visionary and a revolutionary for all times, Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe, who passed away on this very day and month in 1978, after being given an indeterminate sentence in isolation on the notorious Robben Island, and released from Robben Island due to ill health and banished to Kimberley in the Northern Cape until the time of his death;

(2) further notes that Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe will always be remembered for his strong conviction to the ideology of Pan- Africanism, Africanism and a Scientific Africanist Socialist Democratic order, as a direct response to the challenges the African continent faces;

(3) appreciates that Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe was in a class of his own in the liberation struggle and may be equated to the giants of the revolution such as Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, Nnamdi Azikiwe of Nigeria, Patrice Lumumba of Congo and many other ardent Pan- Africanists of his time; and

(4) expresses a special tribute to the ‘‘Son of the Soil’’ by quoting two of his famous quotations, where he said — ‘‘You have a mission We all have a mission — A nation to build — God to glorify — A contribution towards the blessing of humankind” and, on the Unity of Africa — ‘‘The sacred duty of every African State is to strive ceaselessly and energetically for the creation of a United States of Africa, stretching from Cape to Cairo, Morocco to Madagascar.’’

Long live the spirit of Robert Magaliso Sobukwe, long live!

The MINISTER OF DEFENCE: On a point of order, Chairperson, I think I must correct the statement. The fact is that the late Sobukwe was never sentenced to life on Robben Island. He did stay for an indeterminate period but not for a lifetime. Izwe lethu! [Our land!] [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Thanks for that, hon Minister. If there are no objections, I put the motion. No objections? Agreed to, and that correction will be taken on board.

The House adjourned at 17:07. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

               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, 28 February 2008 at 14:15 in order for Mr Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France, to address the Joint Sitting.

B MBETE, MP M J MAHLANGU, MP SPEAKER OF THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs

 (a)    Strategic Plan of the Department of Agriculture for 2008-09 to
2010-11.