THURSDAY, 6 MARCH 2008 __

                PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
                                ____

The House met at 14:00.

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

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY

THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC

Government’s economic strategies to reduce gap between rich and poor

1. Ms N N Sibhidla (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   Whether the Government’s economic strategies are reducing the gap between the rich and the poor; if not, what measures does the Government intend implementing to achieve this goal; if so, what are the relevant details? NO660E The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, the question posed by the hon Sibhidla as to whether the government’s economic strategies are reducing the gap between the rich and the poor is complex in nature and cannot be answered with a simple yes or no. I trust that the hon member and other members of the House have had the opportunity to study the report of 2005- 06 on income and expenditure of households which was recently released by Statistics SA. If not, I would suggest that hon members should indeed do so.

With regard to the Gini coefficient that is used to measure inequality, Statistics SA reports, and I quote:

Inequality continues to remain high between population groups and within individual population groups. The Gini coefficient, based on disposable income, from work and social grants, for the whole country was 0,72. Within individual groups the Gini coefficient was highest at 0,63 among black African households, with the other population groups ranging between 0,56 and 0,59. If social grants and taxes are excluded, the Gini coefficient for the whole country would be 0,80 rather than 0,72, ie the reduction of inequality through redistributive policies reduces the Gini coefficient by 8 percentage points.

I am certain that we would therefore all agree that we continue to be confronted not only by an unacceptable high level of inequality, but by one that has tended to increase - though slightly. However, we must also make an important point that this does not mean growing impoverishment among sections of our population. In this regard, the Statistics SA report says, and I quote:

From 2000 to 2005–06, black African households’ share of consumption expenditure rose from 42,9% to 44,3% (and black Africans’ share of the population rose from 78,3% to 79,4%). Black African households experienced increases in their share of expenditure in each expenditure category except for miscellaneous goods and services, with the largest percentage point increases occurring in food and nonalcoholic beverages (+8 percentage points); furnishings, household equipment and maintenance (+10,7 percentage points); and communication (+9,7 percentage points).

White households’ share of consumption expenditure fell from 44,1% in 2000 to 42,9% in 2005-06, (and the white population fell from 10,1% to 9,2%).

It is sad that there was little change in the shares of the Coloured and Indian population groups – that includes their share of expenditure as well as the share of the population.

Furthermore, I quote:

Mean real per capita income increased in all income deciles between 2000 and 2005-06 (based on income excluding imputed rent). But the increases were uneven, with above-average increases occurring in deciles 1, 2, 3 and 10, and below-average increases occurring in deciles 4 to 9 (where decile 1 refers to the 10% of the population with the lowest income and decile 10 refers to the 10% of the population with the highest income).

This means that real income per capita increased at above average rates of 30% for the poorest of the population and 10% for the richest of the population. It would then be the higher rate of the increase of 10% that would account for the increased inequality.

A desegregation of our population would however show that there has been some significant change in the racial and gender composition of the middle class and the section of the working class made up of skilled and semiskilled workers. This means that within these strata, there has been a definite reduction of the level of inequality with regard to both race and gender. This has been reflected in the increases in expenditure items such as mortgages, automobiles and household durables.

It is obvious that the single most important factor that drives inequality is the gross disparity in skills levels. As the economy has continued to change, requiring fewer and fewer unskilled workers and showing a keen appetite for an educated and skilled working population, those with these skills have taken an increasing share of the national income, on the one hand. On the other hand, many of the poorly-educated and the unskilled end up being unemployed. This means that we must continue to focus on the critical task of reducing the unacceptably high level of unemployment in our country. In turn, this means that we must further intensify our efforts to raise the skills level of all our people, with particular reference to the poorest sections of our population which are most affected by the scourge of unemployment.

But, of course, I am not suggesting that this is the only intervention that we should make to address the challenge of inequality. Perhaps I should stop here for now, Madam Speaker, to allow the hon Sibhidla to pose a follow-up question. There is more to this answer. Thanks, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Nksz N N SIBHIDLA: Ndiyabulela, Somlomo .Ndibulele kuMongameli ngempendulo asinike yona enenkcazelo eyanelisayo.Kodwa ndicela ukuqonda kuMongameli ukuba ingaba uyaneliseka na yinkqubela- phambili kulo mba, ukanti nendlela ushishino labucala elenza ngayo ekuxazululeni lomba? (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)

[Ms N N SIBHIDLA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Let me thank the President for giving us a satisfactory response. However, I would like to know from the President whether he is pleased with the progress in this matter, and the manner in which the private sector operates in resolving this matter.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, as I have said, we would therefore all agree that we continue to be confronted not only by an acceptably high level of inequality, but by one that has tended to increase. But to accelerate the process of the reduction of the gap between the rich and the poor, we had to direct the entirety of government machinery and resources to deal with all elements pertinent to the high inequality gap. In this regard, we have, since 1994, introduced a number of measures to redress the exclusion of the majority in this country – from ownership and management, to control of the economy.

We have also embarked on a variety of programmes aimed at increasing ownership and access to resources, as well as delivery of better services to all our citizens. These include such measures as the broad-based black economic empowerment, employment equity, preferential procurement and special interventions aimed at empowering SMMEs, women, people with disabilities and the youth. Because of the many government interventions such as BEE, employment equity, access to resources, delivery of services and others, inequality between different races has declined from 61% in 1993 to 40% in 2006. This is still a big gap, yet it also indicates that progress is being made. Accordingly, many government programmes, including the Apex Priorities we announced in the state of the nation address, Asgisa, Jipsa and others, continue to focus on the challenge of poverty reduction and the narrowing of the inequality gap. As we know, part of this ongoing work which is central to our efforts to close the gap between the rich and the poor includes the comprehensive social security interventions. This is with the understanding that social assistance support would over time decline as other second economy interventions start to make a significant impact. These include programmes around housing and services such as health, clean water, electricity, sanitation and others; access to capital for the poor in the form of microcredit for productive purposes as well as support for SMMEs; human resource development strategies; specific interventions in the school system and other areas of education and training; the Expanded Public Works Programme; sector investment strategies; and land and agrarian reforms. All these measures and others which constitute the government’s programme are a critical part of our efforts to close the gap between the rich and the poor.

Although we are dealing with a difficult legacy - to ensure the persistence of an acceptably high inequality gap - I firmly believe that our policies are indeed correct and that they have begun as we have indicated. We have made a positive impact, firstly, in reducing the level of poverty and limiting the growth of the inequality gap. For example, one of the paragraphs of the Statistics SA report we have cited says, and I quote: “The reduction of inequality through redistributive policies reduces a Gini coefficient by 8 percentage points.”

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I hope that answers the question of the hon member. [Applause.]

Mr S J F MARAIS: Mr President, although the expansion of the social grant system might ultimately reflect a lessening of income equality in our society, although making it more dependable on the state, the income divide between the rich and the poor remains high, with the rich having 20%, earning 70% of the income. Throughout their lives, the poor are confronted by ever-increasing prices of maize, bread, paraffin, transport and fuel, electricity and municipal tariffs, amongst other things; and high levels of inflation are exacerbating the hardship faced by the poorest among us and consumers in general.

Mr President, can you, firstly, outline the government’s strategy to alleviate the effect of these deteriorating inflationary conditions on the public, and secondly, the government’s strategy to contain the price increases in staple food and essential goods and services. Furthermore, what is your message of hope in this regard to the millions of suffering South Africans out there? I thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, let me first of all agree with the hon member in terms of the identification of the problems and the challenges that we face with regard to matters he has listed. Indeed, I do hope that we will, all of us, join in answering the questions he has posed. This divide and inequality gap, which he refers to quite correctly, is of course very much embedded in our legacy. Therefore, a general comprehensive response to the eradication of the legacy is critical to addressing this matter on which both of us agree.

I think the hon member would also be aware that the matter of food prices is a global problem. It is affecting all countries in the world and therefore we wouldn’t expect, and shouldn’t expect, that South Africa would be excluded in this regard.

I am sure that the hon member also knows that we did set up, in the past, a special committee to deal with this issue – to track it – so that we can indeed make an assessment as to whether increases in food prices are justified so that we can make the necessary interventions. I am quiet certain that the committee is doing its work to follow this up. But I am saying that will have to be done in the context of rising food prices across the world. This is a matter that we shall have to address in the context of what is happening globally, knowing that there is no way that we can entirely insulate ourselves from these processes.

I am sure that the hon member knows what is being done to address these inflationary pressures which arise from these food prices and other matters over which we have no control, such as high fuel prices. There is very little we can do about the high price of crude oil. I am sure the hon member has noticed that it is now already over US$100 a barrel. But the interventions that we sought to make were partly from the intervention made by the Reserve Bank. Partly what we tried to do, from the Budget’s point of view to try and cushion the impact of these prices, particularly on the poorest, was to implement some of the interventions that were possible. So I am saying that we will indeed try and do whatever is possible and necessary; but we will be limited in what we can achieve by what is possible.

I indeed share the view of the hon member that we need to attend to all of these issues, particularly to protect the standard of living of the poor. This is indeed very, very important. Thanks, Madam Speaker.

Prof E S CHANG: Mr President, unemployment and low levels of economic participation are amongst the greatest challenges faced by South African women in rural areas who are illiterate and are the poorest of the poor. They are at a disadvantage with regard to access to jobs. Government has identified targets, but they are not specific. Mr President, what would you do to have a short to medium term strategy to help rural women who are illiterate in the second economy to have access to jobs that they can do as we meet the Apex Priority and the reality as you said in your state of the nation address. Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I think we agree very well amongst ourselves today in this House – it is very good. This is indeed a challenge. I think the hon member knows that some years ago, government precisely identified this problem and decided to designate certain rural areas as priority areas – this is what we call the Integrated and Sustainable Rural Development Programme. We selected those parts of our country in rural areas that had the highest incidence of poverty, including the unemployment and poverty of rural women. We have, therefore, sought to ensure that those priority areas thus identified, received the necessary attention. I must confess that development in these areas has been uneven. There has been better progress in some areas than in others. But, indeed, we continue to focus on this, including other programmes.

I am sure the hon member knows that if you take, for instance, the EPWP in these areas, it will focus, among other things, on attracting rural women into training employment programmes that are afforded by the programme. There are many interventions of this kind. So, I agree with the hon member that we have to focus on this matter; we are indeed focusing on it. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Mr M N NGCOBO: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hon President, a total of 2 billion people around the world are estimated to be lacking electricity. The World Energy Association states that the situation is particularly bad in rural areas, with 56% of the world’s rural population having to manage without electricity. Historically, many public utilities in the world have undertaken great extensions by setting targets and financing investments through levies or cross-subsidies, with a notably disappointing outcome. [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Excuse me, hon Ngcobo. Is that a follow-up question to the first question?

Mr N W NGCOBO: Yes, it is.

The SPEAKER: Ok!

Mr M N NGCOBO: On the contrary, Eskom in South Africa has reached its target of 350 000 connections – in fact, it exceeded it during the 1990s. [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: It seems as if this might be a follow-up question to a different question. Therefore, I will call upon hon …. What happened to the names now? Someone removed the names from the screen.

Mr M N NGCOBO: I must thank the hon member, Madam Speaker, for alerting me to what is coming. [Laughter.]

Mr N SINGH: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Hon President, whilst we acknowledge that there are a number of pro-poor interventions to help particularly the youth and women, would you not think that poverty is at such high levels that it is important to establish a war room in the Office of the Presidency where we can deal with issues related to poverty? I say this because there are a number of duplications, we believe, between various departments and the message that goes out, particularly to able- bodied youth, is not clear. So possibly a more co-ordinated manner in which projects can help the youth, especially, would be something that could be considered in the Office of the Presidency. Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: I agree fully with what the hon member says. Indeed, he will recall that in the state of the nation address, we addressed this matter of the establishment of that war room and, as he says, in the Presidency. So the decision that government has taken is that indeed we must have that war room properly staffed, with the full capacity to co-ordinate all of these programmes and to focus them and so on, immediately under the leadership of the Deputy President. So, indeed, I agree fully with what the hon member says. Thanks, Madam Speaker.

The SPEAKER: We now come to Question 2 asked by the Leader of the Opposition.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I don’t want to take over the direction of the House. I was told that … [Interjections.]

The SPEAKER: Oh, we did. Yes! The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Yes!

The SPEAKER: We did. We did agree that we will swap so that we can enable the hon De Lille to catch the flight. So, now we’ll go to Question no 5 asked by the hon De Lille.

Retention of power of prosecution by Directorate of Special Operations

1. Mrs P de Lille (ID) asked the President of the Republic:

   Whether, with reference to his state of the nation address and his reply to the debate that followed, the Directorate of Special Operations will retain their power of prosecution after their envisaged restructuring; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? NO733E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I said before that government will approach Parliament, this House, soon with this proposal on an integrated and specialised unit dedicated to the fight against organised crime. Parliament will decide on the powers and functions of such a unit, taking into account the need to effectively address the challenge posed by organised crime. It will, therefore, be inopportune and improper for me to speculate on what power such a unit will have.

The very complex nature of organised crime and the threat it poses to our country requires that, in establishing this unit, we should reaffirm the specialist character that informs the establishment and composition of the Directorate of Special Operations, DSO, while we build on the experience we have accumulated during the years of the existence of this formation. This includes continuing to use professionals with their appropriate legal competence to ensure that all matters submitted to the National Prosecuting Authority for possible prosecution are properly prepared in keeping with everything that needs to be done to ensure that justice is done. Thank you.

Mrs P DE LILLE: Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for agreeing to move my slot up and also thank the other opposition parties. Mr President, thank you for your response. I’m just seeking clarity regarding what you said in response to the question during the debate of your state of the nation address. You said that the specialist unit will continue to be guided and assisted by the skills that reside in the NPA and our intelligence services, ensuring that its operations are both prosecution and intelligence, driven to continue the history of the high conviction rates of the Scorpions.

I also accept, Mr President, that Parliament will finally decide on the powers and functions of the specialised unit. My concern there, Mr President, is that how do you reconcile this with the resolution that was adopted at the 52nd ANC National Conference in Polokwane, which basically said that the Scorpions will be dissolved and members of the DSO performing policing functions will fall under the SA Police Services, with what you said in your reply to the state of the nation address debate?

Mr President, I do understand that the DSO is a specialised unit under the NPA and that the investigative powers of the DSO could possibly move to the police, and that is the focus of my question: What will happen to the prosecutorial powers that the DSO has at the moment? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, yes, indeed, that is the question the hon member posed but she didn’t raise anything about Polokwane in the question. She talked about the retention of the powers of prosecution of the specialised unit. That was the question I was seeking to respond to. Now, what I’m saying with regard to that is that this matter will come to Parliament and, again, as I will indicate later, the proposal that we will make takes into account the recommendations made by the Khampepe Commission.

The Khampepe Commission – if I may say this – does, in fact, address this particular matter and, therefore, we’ll have to take into account what the judicial commission says, but in the end it will be up to this House to decide on this matter. I think, really, it would be quite improper for me to say this is what the House will decide because I don’t have that kind of power, but I’m saying that the judicial commission addresses particularly the matter that the hon De Lille raises. I have said this and I will repeat it again later that we will release the reports of the Khampepe Commission when we table those proposals, and members will see the manner in which the judicial commission approaches this question that she poses. Thank you.

Dr J T DELPORT: Madam Speaker, hon President, I must say at the outset that I think the question, with all due respect to the hon De Lille, is somewhat incorrectly phrased because it’s not about a police service having prosecuting powers. It is about a prosecution with investigating powers. That is what it’s about and that structure has been proven all over the world to work and it was proved in South Africa to work.

Dit is, soos ons in Afrikaans sê, ’n feit soos ’n koei.[ As we say in Afrikaans: It is an accomplished fact.]

In more modern parlance I would say: It’s as much a fact as there are 10 million bicycles in Beijing. It’s a fact. Are we going to retain that? The hon President says it will come to Parliament. The question is: What will come to Parliament? Are you going to use your influence as the leader of this country to retain a prosecution-led investigative authority? Secondly, are you going to see to it that they will deal with the police at arm’s length? Unless they have that measure of independence, you will vacate your office without making provision for someone to do what has always been asked: “Who will guard the guards?”

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: The hon Delport is asking me to do something which I’m not going to do. He is asking me to table the proposals that government will table later in this House. I’m not going to do that, hon Delport. We have said we are going to come to the House with the proposal on this matter. Now you are asking me to table that proposal here and I’m saying I’m not going to do it.

The hon De Lille didn’t make any mistake whatsoever in the question she posed because the law that establishes the DSO does, indeed, give the DSO the power of prosecution. There’s nothing wrong at all if she is citing what is in the law. There’s nothing wrong at all with what she said. So, I’m saying that with regards to that, as with regards to all other elements that have a bearing on the specialised unit, we shall come to the House, make a proper proposal on this thing and we see what is it that we do, as Parliament, about that. I’m not going to accept that hon Delport delegates me to make that presentation today. Thank you. [Applause.] Mr G SOLOMON: Madam Speaker, Mr President, I have no question but rather a short comment to make on this matter here. The question, I think, that should have been asked is not whether the DSO will retain its power of prosecution, but whether the crime-fighting capacity in South Africa will be enhanced by the envisaged restructuring. In response to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development, the present head of the DSO admitted that to relegate the role of the SAPS to crime investigation and prevention is, in its word, a dangerous perception.

I hope that the hon De Lille does not create this perception in the minds of the public in South Africa. Since 2004 the SAPS has established a number of specialised units, which played a major role in crime investigation and prevention. Successful prosecution, Mr President, depends upon a good quality investigation resulting in a good quality docket which is then presented to the NPA, that’s the National Prosecution Authority, which has the constitutional power to prosecute.

We have no doubt in our minds that the envisaged restructuring will lead to a better co-ordination between the investigative and prosecutorial processes between the two departments, thus enhancing the crime-fighting capacity in South Africa.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, indeed, we have said this before. What we are aiming to achieve is to improve our capacity to fight organised crime. We will do everything that is necessary to ensure that we improve our capacity to fight organised crime. That, indeed, is a central point. I think the hon members will see that from the recommendations of the Khampepe Commission. That is exactly what that commission also focuses on. So, everything that is necessary to improve that capacity – I’m quite certain – will be among the proposals that we will bring to Parliament. Thank you.

Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Speaker, Mr President, my question is short and sweet – maybe not so sweet. [Laughter.] My question is: Are you personally in favour of the fact that the Scorpions should become part of the police? If you are not, why are you not in favour of that and if you are in favour of that, why didn’t we ensure that the Scorpions were part of the police in the first instance?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I don’t know how many times I must say this. I am in favour of better capacity to fight organised crime. [Applause.] The proposal that will come to Parliament will be a proposal that will be approved by Cabinet. It will, therefore, be a proposal of government and not of a particular Minister that will come and stand here to make a proposal. At the heart of that proposal is improving the capacity to fight organised crime. Thank you.

  Holding of relevant members of Cabinet accountable for crisis in
                         electricity supply

1. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) asked the President of the Republic:

Whether he will hold relevant members of the Cabinet accountable for the
crisis in the electricity supply; if not, why not; if so, what are the
relevant details?                                    NO654E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, let me restate what I have said before, that with regard to the matter of the emergency around the supply of electricity, we as government take collective responsibility for these difficulties, and again say that we apologise to the nation for the inconvenience the electricity supply deficit has caused.

In this regard, in the state of the nation address I said, and I quote:

It is necessary that we take this opportunity to convey to the country the apologies of both the government and Eskom for the national emergency which has resulted in all of us having to contend with the consequences of load shedding. I would also like to thank all citizens for their resilience and forbearing in the face of the current difficulties. No element of this statement was a slip of the tongue, a throw-away phrase or mere rhetoric. Yet again, let me restate that government takes collective responsibility for the energy emergency. Similarly, government takes collective responsibility to do everything possible, working with Parliament and all our people, vigorously to respond to the emergency.

I truly hope that the hon members will, together with the rest of the nation, do everything they can to contribute to the accomplishment of the goals we must pursue as we respond to the national energy emergency.

With regard to the question posed by the hon Leader of the Opposition, let me therefore say, one, that the government takes collective responsibility for the national electricity emergency. This means that the attempt to attribute this national emergency to particular Ministers is misdirected. The President of the Republic will certainly not join that effort.

Secondly, the urgent task our nation faces is to act in unity to respond to this emergency, consistent with the call we made in the state of the nation address: ``All hands on deck’’. Thirdly, what needs to be done has been presented in detail. Members of Parliament, who constitute an important component part of our national leadership, have a responsibility to lead and inspire the nation to act in unity, to implement the programme of action represented, for instance, by the joint statement of the Presidential Working Groups.

The energy emergency has presented all of us with the difficult question – once again I must say: Is our nation capable of acting in unity to confront common national challenges, overcoming our historical divisions, many of which continue to define contemporary South African society? Are our nation and this House capable of rising above our political differences and partisan interests to promote the greater good? The electricity emergency requires as much united national action as do the highly reprehensible manifestation of racism and human abuse at the University of the Free State, as well as the sexism and human abuse that took place at the Johannesburg Noord Street taxi rank.

For some weeks now, the President, the Deputy President, the Ministers and Eskom have repeatedly explained the origins, the history and the nature of the energy problem we share and must solve together. These explanations tell a very instructive story about the challenges posed by a process of truly revolutionary change, from which we must learn many lessons that must help all of us as we continue to pursue the objective of the reconstruction and development of our country.

It is this, the serious lessons we learn about the origins, the history and the nature of the energy problem that will help us to respond better than we have in the last 14 years to the challenge of fundamental social change. I trust that each one of us, including the hon Leader of the Opposition, will discover within ourselves the capacity to be wise, patriotic and selfless, enabling us purposefully to join the national effort to assist our country to emerge successfully from the national energy emergency. I trust that all the hon members, regardless of party affiliation will respond to this appeal, which reflects the sincere hope of the overwhelming majority of our people. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr President, you can be assured that the whole opposition – speaking for DA – can be held to account when it comes to the interests of South Africa.

Mr President, I have to ask you: Were you taken by surprise by Eskom’s latest decision to delay large-scale building projects, considering that government’s policy as per the Cabinet statement of 25 January 2008 states that ``There is no question of stopping contracted projects or freezing any new projects.’’

In the light of the possible 500 000 jobs which could be put in jeopardy by this situation, Mr President, do you still believe it is appropriate that the Cabinet is not collectively held to account?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: The Cabinet, Madam Speaker, is saying it’s collectively responsible. I’ve just said that.

As I understand it, the statement to which the hon member refers was made by a spokesperson. It was a response by somebody from Eskom to a question that was posed. I haven’t got the details of that statement, but what I understand is that what Eskom was saying is that the practice – it’s a normal practice – whereby people who intend to launch large projects apply to Eskom for the supply of the necessary volumes of electricity will continue, and that because of the emergency, it might take a bit longer to approve those applications. That’s what I understand is being said. As I said, I haven’t seen the transcript of what was in fact said, but that’s what I understand about it.

We indeed would want to insist that we must do everything possible to ensure that this does not impact negatively on economic growth, that it doesn’t impact negatively on job losses, and that Eskom must handle this matter in a way that addresses those challenges. I do not know who has already made these calculations where Eskom says that instead of taking x days to consider the application, we might take x plus five days to consider the applications, that the hon member refers to regarding job losses of half a million.

But, indeed, we would of course be very, very concerned if there was some decision taken by Eskom which would produce the negative results that she indicates. But, as I say, it was no statement from Eskom. As a response to a question that was posed, the manner in which the question might have been answered might have been unfortunate, but the policy, certainly, is that this should not result in unnecessarily slowing down economic growth and generating job losses. Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Mr E N N NGCOBO: Madam Speaker, hon President, historically many public utilities in the world, including the former apartheid government, have failed to provide access to electricity to the poor and the rural population. On the contrary, our public utility, Eskom, was able to exceed its target of 350 000 connections per year in the years since the dawn of our democracy in 1994.

Was this achievement due to the correct energy reform policies of our ANC government? If not, what are the relevant details, hon President? [Laughter.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Yes, indeed, Madam Speaker, we took this decision quite deliberately that electricity, like other services such as health, education, housing, sanitation and roads, and that kind of infrastructure should also be available to the poor and our rural communities. I think that, indeed, we should be very proud of what has been achieved with regards to that programme of electrification.

I must say that, hon member and Madam Speaker, in the context of the national emergency, we have continued to insist that that particular programme should also continue and, in this instance, with a harder push with regard to using alternative sources of energy. Yes, the outcome that you described is an outcome that we decided upon quite deliberately because, as I said earlier, our programme must continue to focus on improving the standard of living and the quality of life of the poor in our country, including the rural people. Thanks, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER: The hon Van der Merwe. [Interjections.] It’s a follow-up question on Question 2.

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Madam Speaker, I was hoping to ask a follow-up on the question dealing with the Khampepe Commission.

The SPEAKER: Ok.

Mrs C DUDLEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr President, South Africa has electricity blackouts at least in part because alternative electricity generating companies have been kept out of the market. Foreign generating companies, for example, were told that they could erect generating plants in the country, but that government officials would fix the price at which they could sell their electricity and decide whom it could be sold to and, not surprisingly, they declined.

Our question would be: How many other avenues of alternative power have been discouraged? You have accepted, we know, collective responsibility and apologised. Is government policy to blame, or bilateral agreements, perhaps? Has this situation arisen as part of a strategy to create a receptive atmosphere as nuclear solutions are speedily imposed without public debate regarding toxic waste and proper procedure as set out in the Green Paper? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: No, Madam Speaker, I don’t know. Perhaps we need to explain to the hon Dudley, once again, the history of this problem. It may be that when we did explain, she wasn’t around. Maybe we should do that again, and she would understand that it’s got nothing to do with any bilateral agreements or any subterfuge to advantage nuclear power stations.

There is a problem that arose. She referred to independent power producers. Indeed, there is a problem that arose. It actually arose as a result of a good thing that we were trying to do. The good thing we were trying to do was to keep the cost of electricity down. Indeed, we prided ourselves on this notion that we produced the cheapest electricity of any country in the world, as indeed we do.

The consequence of that was that when we put out tenders to try to attract independent power producers into this market, they said, Your electricity is too cheap, and therefore, we would not make a profit in that situation. Raise your electricity prices, and we will invest.’’ We said,No, it’s important for the poor of our country, it’s important for our industrial development, etc, that indeed we keep the price of our electricity down.’’ The consequence is what you are talking about, hon member, concerning the independent power producers. There was no conspiracy about the matter, but of course, it is clear now, that these extra low prices of electricity can’t be sustained. We have said so quite openly, that the prices will increase but, nevertheless, we will still remain among the cheapest sources of electricity in the world.

Whether those even higher prices will attract those independent power producers, I don’t know. So, there has been no attempt, no conspiracy, to exclude alternative sources of power or to advantage nuclear power stations, but the economics of the issue are changing, and in the context of that, we will see what happens; provided of course that we build up this generating capacity that our country needs. Thanks, Madam Speaker.

Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, I think the first important thing is that the President and the government acknowledge that we are dealing with a national emergency with regard to the electricity supply in South Africa. I am not sure that we have already seen the consequences of the situation that we are dealing with at the moment.

Section 91(2) of the Constitution says the following:

The President appoints the Deputy President and Ministers, assigns their powers and functions, …

…and then there is a little phrase at the end that says:

… and may dismiss them.

I think the question deals with that specific issue, and the question being asked is what is being done in that regard. Section 92 of the Constitution deals with accountability and responsibilities. Section 92(2) states clearly that:

Members of the Cabinet are accountable collectively …

That’s what the President has said. But then the section goes on, and says:

… and individually to Parliament for the exercise of their powers and the performance …

Are we not sending a very bad message out there that, in such a situation as this which causes a national emergency, it’s one thing to say that you are acting collectively, but who is taking the responsibility and the blame for the situation that we are in at the moment? Is it correct also that Eskom did supply the executive a couple of years ago with a report that indicated that if we do not take certain steps, then they will run out of power in 2007, as basically happened in the end?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I am sure the hon member is quoting from the Constitution quite correctly. Indeed, I am quite certain that if Parliament wanted any of our Ministers to come and account, Parliament is perfectly at liberty to ask them to come. The Ministers were never stopped. If Parliament hasn’t done that, it can’t be our fault. If Parliament wants to call Ministers to come and discuss anything, Parliament indeed is perfectly at liberty to do so. So, by all means, do that.

What I have been saying is that we take collective responsibility for this. The reason is inherent in the nature of the problem. That is why I was referring to the history and the origins of the problem. If the hon member understood the history and the origins of the problem, the hon member would understand why I take that position.

You see, it’s not as though you have life that operates in silos. There is a particular element of life that would be defined by what the Minister of Minerals and Energy says in her portfolio. This problem arises from many sources. Indeed, I referred to the matter of the independent power producers. We had indeed understood that we are going to require more generating capacity, more electricity, some time back, and that is why we said that we must then create the space for these independent power producers, among other things, to ensure that Eskom continues to have the resources to address the poor and the rural communities.

I explained why the independent power producers did not come on board: because they had said that our electricity prices were too low and would not guarantee them the profits they would need. It was precisely to address this problem. So, no, it’s true. It would be incorrect if I said that we woke up with this problem now in January or December, hence the decisions that had been taken some time back to say, therefore, that Eskom must have its own building programme with all of the various power stations, some of which are already being built.

That’s the answer, hon member, but what I am saying is that if you understand the nature, the history and the origins of this challenge, you would understand why the Cabinet says we must take collective responsibility for this matter. It can’t be farmed out. We can’t resort to fall guys and scapegoats and things like that. We have got to say as government, all of us were present as this problem emerged and we each contributed in our various ways.

I’m saying that that was not, as I said, a rhetorical statement. It’s an actual reflection of reality. It’s a reality that I am afraid I cannot change, hon member. Thanks, Madam Speaker. [Applause.] Progress made towards continental integration at Heads of State Summit of the African Union

1. Mr M P Sibande (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:

   What progress was made towards continental integration at the Heads of State Summit of the African Union held in Ethiopia recently? NO659E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, hon members, you will recall that the grand debate on the formation of a union government was held in Accra, Ghana, on 1 to 3 July 2007. The outcome of that debate is settled in the Accra Declaration where the Heads of State and Government agreed that to ensure that the African Union is a union of peoples and not just a union of states and governments, this debate must involve the African peoples living both on the continent and in the diaspora. I am pleased that we have this opportunity once again to discuss this important matter here in this home of elected representatives of the people of South Africa.

Hon members will recall that there is general agreement on the objective of ensuring the integration of the African continent. The Accra Summit decisions set out in the Accra Declaration confirms that the Heads of State and Government agreed to accelerate the economic and political integration on the African continent, including the formation of a union government for Africa with the ultimate objective of the African Union being to create a United States of Africa.

In taking this decision the Heads of State and Government were informed by a division of the founding fathers of the OAU, the need for common responses to detrimental challenges of globalisation and the need for intra- Africa, political and economic integration. The differences that arose on this matter related to the process by which we reached the agreed objective of a United States of Africa and there are essentially two views in this regard: The first is that we proceed immediately to set up a United States of Africa and appoint Ministers in charge of a number of portfolios to be agreed upon.

The second view, which was a view that was accepted by the Accra Summit, was that we should approach this integration in a gradual manner – building from below, as it were. The Accra Declaration sets out the steps that need to be taken, which include: rationalising and strengthening our regional economic structures, especially the regional economic communities; to conduct an audit of the organs of the African Union; to examine issues such as the relationship between the union government with national governments, it’s domains of competence and the related impact on the sovereignty of member states; and to examine timeframes for the formation of the government as well as its sources of finance.

We are of the view that these matters do indeed need careful consideration. To illustrate this, the Accra Summit agreed that the union government would be built on common values that need to be identified and agreed upon. The question that we need to answer is what these values are that would underpin a union government. For instance, are we all agreed on the principle that all who seek to govern must do so on the basis of the will of the people, expressed through regular elections based on one person, one vote? What would be the economic policies that we would seek to advance and protect us as a collective? Similar questions can be posed about foreign policy and a range of other matters.

After the Accra Summit, the then Chairperson of the African Union working with the AU Commission, established a ministerial committee of ten, which included South Africa, to examine all these issues and report to the executive council at their next meeting, which was held just before the February 2008 Addis Ababa Summit. The ministerial committee of ten could not provide a definitive answer to these questions. Having considered the report of the committee, the executive council recommended to the summit that it should be allowed to hold an extraordinary meeting to discuss the matter. However, the summit decided that this matter should be elevated to the Heads of State and Government and accordingly decided to reconstitute the committee of ten at that level with the addition of the immediate past and current chairpersons of the African Union.

The membership of this committee, therefore, is as follows: Tanzania is the current Chair of the AU, Ghana is immediate past chair, Botswana, Cameroon, Gabon, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, Nigeria, Senegal, South-Africa and Uganda. We will be participating in the deliberations of this committee of ten informed by the view of both our Parliament and government that we should approach this matter in a manner that would ensure that we create a strong foundation upon which the union government would be built, so that we have a union government that is not such in name only. The meetings of the committee of ten are scheduled to take place soon. Thank you very much.

Mr M P SIBANDE: Madam Speaker, hon President, what impact does the European Union economic partnership agreements with African countries have on regional and continental integration? Last year the European Union and the African Union held a summit in Portugal and certain commitments were reached. Is the economic partnership agreements, as proposed by the European Commission, advancing the objectives of the summit or reversing the gains made at the summit? I thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, I think this particular question would of course require a discussion of its own. It is a very important question. Indeed, the hon member is correct, it does bear on the matter that we are discussing about regional integration and African unity. It is clear to us that various provisions in these economic partnership agreements would work in an adverse manner - if we just talk about our region here – with regard to this process of regional integration. If you just take a very simple fact to start with: SADC is made up of 14 countries, but in fact the group that is called SADC that is negotiating with the European Union is seven of the members of SADC. The other members of SADC belong to different groups. That already indicates to you the impact that the process of these EPAs can have in hampering regional integration.

We have, therefore, been discussing these matters among ourselves, first of all, and with the European Union to indicate to them the consequences of various provisions in these economic partnership agreements, both with regard to Sacu and SADC. I am sure the hon member is aware that the SADC group of the seven countries met with the EU Trade Commissioner, Peter Mandelson, in Gaborone on Tuesday to discuss this matter in particular.

That meeting did agree that a process would be put in place to discuss the concerns that we have raised, which concerns - and indeed, as the hon member indicates - we did raise at the Africa EU Summit in Lisbon last year, pointing to the negative impact of elements of these economic partnership agreements on this matter of regional integration on our continent and African unity.

It was agreed then that the European Commission would indeed engage the African continent on those concerns. The AU Summit at the beginning of February came back to this matter and reaffirmed the need for the African continent to interact with the European Commission to address this particular matter. It is a matter that remains very much on the agenda, not for us only as a region, but for the continent as a whole. We would want to pursue the decision that was taken in Lisbon, that there should be that engagement between Africa and the EU, to make sure that the economic partnership agreements don’t act as an obstacle to the achievement of the goal of regional integration on our continent and African unity. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr W J SEREMANE: Madam Speaker, hon President, just on a sideline, perhaps Africa’s development has made the term “continental” a bit nebulous. I wasn’t sure whether we were talking about Europe or Africa. Perhaps a redefinition of “continental” has to be explored?

To expand the question a little further, what effect do conflict areas such as Sudan or Darfur, Kenya and even Zimbabwe - without ignoring the efforts to resolve the conflict in these areas- have on the integration of the continent and its endeavours to retain skilled professionals to assist in meeting the dire need for the integration of Africa and the global competitive challenges facing her? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, obviously, as the hon member indicated, those conflicts do have a negative impact on the matter of integration and indeed do result in the outflow of skills, which the countries themselves and the continent need, but I’m sure that the hon member is aware that this matter of conflict resolution on the continent is indeed one of the high priority matters in terms of the agenda of the African Union. Even this current discussion we are having concerning the question that was posed about progress with regard to the matter of an African Union, a union government and all that. This matter remains a central point to the resolution of conflicts on our continent. It must continue to serve as such, because you wouldn’t be able to achieve the sort of integration that all of us are looking for on the continent were you to continue having fires burning in these various countries on our continent. It remains also, from the point of view of our government, an area of particular focus, the matter of the resolution of these conflicts, wherever they may occur. Thank you.

Dr S E M PHEKO: Madam Speaker, Mr President, the USA government seems to be working hard to impose Africom on African states. This seems to be dividing these states in that some states are in favour of the establishment of Africom, while others are not.

African heads of state are conscious of the divisive danger of Africom. Are the measures in place by Heads of State to resist the USA in its interference with progress towards continental integration? Thank you.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, the hon member refers to some African states being in favour of the establishment of what is called Africom. I don’t know which ones those are; I haven’t heard of them. What I do know is that the general position that the continent has taken with regard to this is that indeed this isn’t necessary. It is not necessary to establish such an Africom on the continent.

I am not aware of which particular countries might be in favour of this. I haven’t heard any African countries say that. I am quite sure the continent is fully conscious of this matter and I would think that, for instance, the hon member will remember the statement that was made from here last week by the President of France who said that they are going to discuss with relevant African countries the continued presence, military agreements and continued presence, of French troops in those countries. I am quite sure that if those African countries said they don’t need those troops indeed those troops will leave. I think it’s a reflection of the sentiment on the continent that we do not need these foreign troops.

The hon member might also have heard the comments made by President Bush when he was in Ghana where he very vigorously denied that there was any plan on the part of the US government to position US troops on the African continent. Certainly the view of the continent is that, no, we do not need that Africom. Thank you. [Applause.]

Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, hon President, in the run up to the African Union Summit in Ghana in 2007, the President of Libya, Gaddafi, asked the following question:

How can an African country face a Europe that is united, negotiate with the USA, Japan or China?

He went on to say, ``Africa would be on equal footing when we have one single government’’.

That’s his point of view. The President also adequately pointed out the current process within the structures of the African Union, and thank you for that. May I ask what the South African Government’s position is with regard to this process? What would that exactly be, if I may ask?

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, as I indicated, the position that we have taken with regard to this was the second option, which, as I said, is building this process of African integration and African unity from below. Therefore, the option that was accepted and is reflected in the Accra Declaration, is let us strengthen the regional economic communities, let us from those communities address the matter of economic integration. The declaration says, “where possible” and also the matter of regional political integration must be built up from there. That is the position we have taken with regard to this matter, and, as I said, that is the position that was decided upon by the summit.

So the Accra Declaration reflects exactly the positions that we have taken

• and also in this committee of ten - as we discussed the matter of how do we then take the matter of that Accra Declaration further. We will have to operate strictly within the confines of the mandate contained in that Accra Declaration. We do not believe that a proclamation of an African government and the appointment of Corné Mulder as African Minister of Defence is going to mean anything. Let’s come at it from below and perhaps we will, by the time he is 100 years old, get to the point where he will be Minister of African Defence. Thank you. [Applause.]

     Recommendations of Khampepe Judicial Commission of Inquiry
  

1. Rev K R J Meshoe (ACDP) asked the President of the Republic:

 (1)    Whether Cabinet has accepted any of the recommendations of the
      Khampepe Commission of Inquiry into the future of the Directorate
      of Special Operations; if not, why not; if so, which
      recommendations were accepted;


  (2)   whether these recommendations will be made known before public
      hearings are held; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant
      details?                                            NO734E

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, in response to this question, let me again restate what I said in my response to the debate on the state of the nation address. This was that at the time that we approach Parliament to seek its view on and agreement with the proposals, we will also release the recommendations of the Khampepe Judicial Commission to enable the hon members and the country to better understand the overall context within which we must address the specific challenge of intensifying the fight against organised crime.

As a consequence of this commitment, which I confirm again, I would like to make the appeal that instead of engaging in a discussion now on the decisions of the government in respect of the recommendations of Justice Khampepe and related matters, let us rather wait for a few more weeks and deal with all these issues comprehensively when we table the government’s proposal relating to improving our capacity to fight organised crime. This will take into account the recommendations made by Justice Khampepe, which indeed, hon member, we will release.

Rev K R J MESHOE: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thank you, Mr President. I appreciate what you are saying. I have a very straightforward follow-up question – a very easy one for you.

The ACDP believes that the decision taken by the ANC at the Polokwane Conference to disband the Scorpions before they even saw the recommendations made by the Khampepe Commission of Inquiry was ill-advised and a severe blow to successful crime-fighting in this country. It is a decision that fails, I believe, a test of rationality when one considers the unit’s excellent prosecution record. It was reported that the Khampepe Commission found out, among other things, that the Scorpions obtained a conviction rate of about 90% compared to 8% for the police’s serious and violent crime units within its first three years of operation. I’m sure, Mr President, you will agree with me that these are great results. Members of the public, we believe, must know about all these successes. [Time expired.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Madam Speaker, let me remind the hon Reverend Meshoe about the question that he asked: whether Cabinet has accepted any of the recommendations of the Khampepe Commission of Inquiry into the future of the Directorate of Special Operations, and if not, why not, and if so, which recommendations were accepted; and secondly, whether these recommendations would be made known before public hearings are held, and if not, why not, and if so, what are the relevant details. I believe I have answered the question, Madam Speaker. The rest of what the hon Reverend Meshoe said is entirely irrelevant, even to the question he asked. Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Madam Speaker, I’m sure we all know that the whole country was upset when it appeared from Polokwane that the Scorpions will be dissolved. But when I listened to what the hon President debate and the Minister of Safety and Security said in the state of the nation and what we know from Khampepe, it now appears that there will be an improved capacity. In other words, there will still be a structure, with improved capacity, to fight crime. My question is … [Interjections.] Somebody is answering on behalf of the President but I would like to hear the President – am I correct if I say that, in fact, a better crime-fighting unit will replace the Scorpions? If so, Mr President, I suggest you call them ``the Mambas’’. [Laughter.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Do you really want me to repeat myself, hon Van der Merwe?

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: [Inaudible.]

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Hon Van der Merwe, truly, what I was saying is that this matter of organised crime is a very serious challenge. We can’t, as a country, afford to lose the capacity to fight organised crime. It can’t be done! It will be wrong if we destroyed our capacity to fight organised crime. We can’t. Therefore, we are saying as government let’s take into account what Judge Khampepe has said – account everything else as necessary - in order to ensure that we improve our capacity to fight organised crime.

And we will bring those proposals here in the National Assembly and we will have all the proposals and the time it needs to discuss those proposals. Which is more dangerous, the scorpions or the mambas? I don’t know, but certainly, if greater effectiveness is represented by a mamba – green, black, I don’t know what colour – I am quite sure that there will be no opposition to what hon Van der Merwe proposes. But I had actually thought that Koos was more deadly than mambas. [Laughter.]

Ms D KOHLER-BARNARD: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Hon President, how is it that a Minister in your Cabinet, the Minister of Safety and Security, was allowed by you to announce that, and I quote, ``the Scorpions will be dissolved’’ before the matter was ever discussed in the relevant portfolio committees or indeed debated in this House or before we had sight of the Khampepe Commission report? With all due respect, how could you, as President of this country, allow such a thing to happen? The result of this is that our citizens, heads of security services around the world and indeed other parliaments have been scandalised? Please tell us: Did you know that he was going to make that statement? The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: You know, Madam Speaker, when Members of Parliament participate in debates on the state of the nation or the Budget of the Presidency, none of them submit their statements to the President. We are not a censoring board. We don’t maintain any censorship of this particular matter.

But, Madam Speaker, I think I have explained sufficiently what we intend to do on this matter and we will indeed do as we have said we will. We shall come back here and make proposals. Parliament must look at this as the only legislative body that we have. Government has no power to legislate. So the National Assembly will decide as to what happens in this regard. Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Applause.]

Ms A VAN WYK: Madam Speaker, it is clear from the President’s answer that we are going to get the Khampepe Commission report before we start with our public hearings. I think that it is the answer that we wanted to achieve. What we need to do from here on is to focus, I think, more broadly, Mr President, than simply on the Special Investigating Unit and the SAPS but rather look at the integrated justice system and the progress that we can make there.

The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: You are quite correct, hon member. That’s why I’d said when I addressed this matter earlier in Parliament when I responded to the debate on the state of the nation that this specialised capacity to fight organised crime rests in various institutions of the state and to say let us increase our capacity, our effectiveness with regard to that fight, we have to look at all these various institutions – the police, intelligence, the DSO, everywhere – so that indeed we make sure that we bring this into a pool. And we are talking about a specialised unit to fight organised crime. Other units that fight organised crime will remain. It is therefore, as we indeed indicated, a matter that relates to the entirety of the criminal justice system and indeed it’s integral to that process we described as the revamping of the criminal justice system on which we reported from this podium. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

See also QUESTIONS AND REPLIES.

       DEBATE ON MATERNAL AND NEWBORN CHILD HEALTH (IPU TOPIC)

Ms I W DIREKO: Madam Speaker and hon members of this House, maternal and child health is a national priority.

Numerous treaties, initiatives and programmes have been introduced and formulated to improve the wellbeing of women and children. The latest effort, to which South Africa subscribes, is the Millennium Development Goals, which aim to drastically reduce maternal and child mortality specifically, and to address diseases related to challenges by 2015.

However, despite numerous efforts and commitments, the health status of women and children remains poor in South Africa despite its middle-income status. Data shows that the mortality and maternal health status of infants and children under five are not optimal. To rectify these alarming occurrences, concerted efforts must be made to address the core contributing factors to poor maternal and child health.

Whilst many of the underlying challenges lie outside of the health sector, the health services have a significant contribution to make and, at the very least, health interventions must be implemented in the best possible way. In addition, all other sectors need to be accountable for their role in improving maternal and child health. For children, in particular, all sectoral policies and plans need to be viewed through a child-rights lens and child impact assessments must be done to ensure that children and their families enjoy a better life.

Health for women and children is a basic human right and a non-negotiable human right that has found expression in various international treaties and programmes and should not be seen as an issue of pure economics. According to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities department of health, in 1998, the maternal mortality ratio in South Africa was 150 deaths per 100 000 live births. The number of maternal deaths per annum in South Africa runs into 1 600. The lifeline risk of maternity death is one in 70. South Africa compares favourably to the average developing world regions, but poorly to that of the developed world. South Africa has a high HIV infection rate; therefore, the proportion of indirect deaths may be higher with infection, with TB as a significant factor. Similarly, maternal morbidity patterns follow those for maternal deaths. For every maternal death there is an estimated 30 to 50 women who survive, but with short - to long-term complications.

The ANC government has adopted an approach that women’s health is paramount and, therefore, has advanced numerous policies in this regard. In 1995 government accepted that women and children should be at the top of the health prioritisation agenda. One of government’s earliest pronouncements was on free care to children under the age of six years. This was to ensure access to health for pregnant women and young children irrespective of economic status.

Great strides have been made since the pronouncement by former President Nelson Mandela. New clinics have been built, others have been upgraded, and antenatal clinic attendance has improved significantly. The demographic and health survey of 1998 highlighted the fact that 94% of women surveyed attended antenatal care at least once compared to 89% in 1994. This is indicative of the fact that women realise the importance and, therefore, the necessity to get antenatal care.

Delivery in health care facilities increased from 78% to 83%, suggesting that user fees acted as a deterrent to health care access. The child support grant, which is available to children up to 14 years, and which is to be extended gradually to children of 18 years, has an uptake rate of between 78% and 84% across provinces.

Although our government’s policies are excellent, we need to do more to ensure that these policies are real for women and children. We need to attend to the socioeconomic situation. Access is the lowest for the poor, of which the majority is African. Steps must be taken to address the equitable provision of health care and inequalities in health outcomes. The aggregation of indicators at provincial level masks gross interprovincial disparities. This must be addressed. Much more must be done to ensure that those who need it most access the services.

We welcome the Department of Health’s recent announcement of an inquiry into maternal deaths in the country. We trust that this exercise will ensure renewed commitment at all levels to ensure better and improved maternal and child health. I want to conclude by saying: forward to a caring society. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mrs S V KALYAN: Madam Deputy Speaker, most of the times when a woman is pregnant, there is celebration and joy. Much planning takes place to ensure that when the little person arrives, it is welcomed into a cocoon of love and comfort. However, sometimes there is no happy ending. A 2005 World Health Organisation Report states that 11 million children worldwide, under the age of five, die annually, mostly from causes that could have been prevented.

The number of child deaths in South Africa is high. Despite greater national wealth and rapid economic growth, it is estimated that every year in South Africa, an estimated 23 000 babies die in the first month of life. This number is equal to a daily crash of four minibuses full of passengers, whereby everyone on board is killed. While the crash will make a front page story, the daily deaths of babies occur silently, with no news coverage. One in three deaths in South Africa is that of a newborn and one in five deaths could have been clearly avoided.

The major causes of death can be attributed to pneumonia, diarrhoea, birth trauma, malnutrition, vaccine preventable diseases and HIV infection.

The MDG’s Goal 4 centres on reducing child mortality. The lack of progress toward achieving this in South Africa is disturbing. A report entitled ``Saving Children 2005’’ suggests that the infant mortality rate is increasing and the thinking is that this increase is closely linked to the HIV epidemic. While the debate on monotherapy vis-á-vis dual therapy has been raging in South Africa, hundreds of babies have died.

The Portfolio Committee on Health heard this week that guidelines for dual therapy for PMTCT have finally been approved, but regrettably the roll-out and operational effectiveness is nowhere near ready and transmission from mother to child is occurring at disappointingly high rates.

The MDG’s Goal 5 is to improve maternal health. This goal aims to reduce the number of women who die in pregnancy and childbirth by three quarters by 2015.

Currently, the rate of maternal deaths is 124 per 100 000. This is considered to be too high for a middle-income country such a South Africa.

Again, maternal HIV infection is the most common underlying cause of maternal and infant deaths in South Africa. Aids is the single most common cause of maternal death, reported as being responsible for 20,1% of all deaths.

However, conclusive statistics to support this suggestion are unavailable, because in South Africa HIV and Aids cannot be recorded on the death certificate as the underlying cause of death. Many women are still ignorant about certain health-threatening conditions and have not fully developed effective health-seeking behaviour.

Long distances from medical facilities, the high cost of transport, poor patient records, long queues and staff shortages are major contributory factors.

The right to life is implicated when a pregnant woman dies, because government has a duty to adopt positive measures to prevent death where it can be prevented. The right to health is also implicated because government has an obligation to ensure access to quality health care.

There are major difficulties which affect implementation of this policy, with the shortage of trained nursing staff being the most critical.

The PMTCT programme is an integral part of the continuum of mother-baby- child care and prevention of paediatric HIV infection is potentially the most effective life-saving programme in South Africa today. Every antenatal HIV diagnosis represents the chance to save the life of a child.

If South Africa is serious about realising the MDG goal of reducing child mortality, the child health agenda needs to be energised, with particular and specific emphasis on reducing the burden of disease among children. A faculty-based perinatal death review must be instituted and the results forwarded to the provincial and national health information system. This is one of the most important ways of improving the quality of care.

The Department of Health needs to be more proactive in recruitment and retention strategies to ease the critical shortage of nursing staff. It is very clear that intersectoral action is required to accelerate progress towards achievement of the health-related MDGs and the DA calls on the social cluster to develop and improve concrete plans as a matter of urgency. [Applause.]

Ms C N Z ZIKALALA: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is a well-known fact that many African countries have been struck by mass departures of skilled medical staff for overseas destinations in recent years.

Partly as a result of this exodus, large numbers of African women, newborns and children die from preventable causes. While the medical interventions that could have saved their lives are generally well-known, they are often not available to those most in need. For instance, internationally, only 42% of births are attended by skilled medical practitioners.

According to global statistics, this large-scale migration of skilled medical workers results in an annual figure of 60 million women delivering at home without skilled care. About 530 000 women die from pregnancy- related complications with some 68 000 deaths resulting from unsafe abortions. About four million babies die within the first month of life, and more than three million children die as stillbirths. More than 10 million under the age of five die annually. A shocking fact is that most of the maternal newborn and child deaths occur in the low - and middle-income countries, including our own country, South Africa.

A serious challenge faced by governments all over the world to improve the health of women, newborns and children is to educate the community at large. It has been established that community education about healthy practices that result in behavioural change can safeguard health and improve fertile and maternal wellbeing. Also, childbirth education of mothers and family members is imperative in maintaining the best possible health condition preceding birth.

Furthermore, governments need to strongly focus on the two dimensions of the continuum of care and ensure that each dimension is well taken care of. The first dimension is the maternal-newborn-child health continuum of care, with its concept of maternal-newborn-child health based on the assumption that the health and wellbeing of women, newborns and children are closely linked and should be managed in a unified way. The second dimension is that of the household-to-hospital approach that ensures the availability of and access to quality maternal and newborn care. There is no doubt that proper and sufficient funding of maternal and child health services are vital for their wellbeing. Money is not the only requirement though. There is also a great need for political will and accountability. Political will is required for designing an appropriate health care system and to implement them, while accountability refers to the manner in which governments report to the people whom they serve. Thank you. [Applause.]

Mr R B BHOOLA: Madam Deputy Speaker, it is reported that more than 10 million of the world’s children die before reaching the age of five each year. What is even sadder is that two out of every three of these children die of easily preventable and treatable diseases.

Furthermore, globally, more than 60 million women deliver at home - as indicated by the previous speaker - placing both the mother and the child in danger. Babies do not have any better a chance as four million babies die within their first month, and more than three million are stillborn. Ninety-nine per cent of these deaths occur in middle - and low-income countries such as ours.

In a country whose healthcare is challenged, however, by the harsh reality of poverty, what interventions can be made? While in South Africa we have legislation that has legislated abortions and facilitated healthcare facilities with family planning guidance, we are haunted by the statistics as girls still opt to have backstreet abortions. Good nutrition, as indicated and encouraged by our hon Minister, is extremely important in pregnancy. The fight against HIV and Aids still finds pregnancy further complicated by the infection, and orphanages are filled with the children orphaned by this horrific disease.

Individual motivation to respect our babies and take responsibility for them and their preservation needs to be firmly instilled with interventions at school level and even through municipal efforts. We need to seriously address the issues of the health of the mother and child. I thank you.

Ms M L MATSEMELA: Deputy Speaker, hon members of Parliament, the ANC in its 96 years of existence has put the interest of all the people of South Africa at the top of its agenda. In 2002 the people’s contract demonstrated that the journey we have thus far travelled gives us confidence that we shall reach our goals of a society that cares by building a healthier nation with programmes to defeat TB, malnutrition, malaria and other diseases, and in doing so we will turn the tide against HIV and Aids so as to achieve a better life for all.

Thus in the 2004 ANC manifesto, President Thabo Mbeki said, “Today South Africa has a caring government with clinics being built close to where people live.” This literally says that health makes development possible and in turn development contributes to health. This, therefore, says that there is a nexus between development and a healthy society. In this regard health services have to be closer to where people stay. Looking at the improvement in the maternal mortality rate and the reduction of it by three-quarters between 1990 and 2015, it is important to focus much on health-related Millennium Development Goals with special reference to Goal 5, that is, improving maternal health. The reduction of maternal health and neonatal mortality and morbidity are some of the key indices in meeting the MDGs.

Given this fact, women are at a greater risk. They are becoming infected at an earlier age than men. Contrary to popular belief South Africa is on track in decreasing maternal and infant mortality, taking into consideration the paradox of being a developing and yet middle-income country. Most important is the reporting of enquiries into maternal deaths, and this is relatively new in South Africa. The first report was published in 1999. The maternal mortality ratio in countries such as the UK is 10 per 100 000 maternities while in poor countries it is at 650 per 100 000.

In South Africa, a middle-income country, the National Committee on Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths reported a maternal mortality ratio of 150 per 100 000 conducted through the demographic and health survey in 1998. In 2002 Statistics SA reviewed all registered deaths and estimated that to be 124 per 100 000 - a figure that I don’t think we can be proud of. To quote the Minister of Health in this regard: “I am sure we can still bring it down drastically and we must do that”.

This was followed shortly by the Perinatal Problem Identification Programme and the Child Health Care Problem Identification Programme in 2003. These audit tools are of extreme importance in that they do not only identify causes and trends of these deaths but also identify modifiable contributing factors at various levels of service delivery. Of significance is that the latter reports have included both the recommendations as well as the intervention strategies. While significant progress has been made in addressing the challenges of maternal mortality in the country, there is still more that needs to be done because women need not die when giving birth.

Women must be given information and support to help them to control their reproductive health. They need to be supported with their newborn baby, right up to childhood. The improvement of the health of women and children has always been key in the health care planning of our democratic government. In 1994 the major critical policy decision taken was free health care for pregnant and lactating women as well as children under five years.

This has already been said by hon Winkie Direko. Furthermore, we have constructed more than 1 600 clinics to which the majority of the historically marginalised people have access. Presently, more than 94% of mothers attend antenatal care at least once during pregnancy and over 84% give birth in these facilities. Family planning packages are also available and women no longer have to suffer complications or even die.

“Indeed today is better than yesterday and tomorrow will definitely be better than today”, said the President of South Africa in 2006. The PMCTC programme for HIV and Aids has been expanded to 90% of facilities with an uptake of 60% because HIV and Aids is an extraordinary global epidemic. Treatment protocol has been improved to include dual therapy and this intervention is being expanded. The PMTCT serves as an entry point for women to access a comprehensive package of care for HIV and Aids including nutrition, treatment and opportunistic diseases and ART.

Reducing maternal and neonatal mortality rates are some of the key indices in meeting the Millennium Development Goals. For instance, Sub-Saharan Africa is mostly hit hard by HIV and Aids. An estimated 25 million people are living with HIV in Sub-Sahara Southern Africa. South Africa compares favourably with other middle-income countries such as Australia, Canada and Denmark.

In our case, the confidential enquiries into maternal health have given South Africa a status of being the only country that has instituted and sustained confidential enquiries into maternal death. For instance, when you compare South Africa with Latin American countries like Bolivia, you look at a still birth-rate of 44 per 1000, while in South Africa it is at

1. In a Sub-Saharan Africa country like Cote d’Voire it is 34 per 1000, while in South Africa it is still 19.

Considerable research has been done over the past 10 years in determining the causes of maternal mortality through the work of the National Committee on Confidential Enquiry into Maternal Death. The work of the committee, which is published every three years in the Saving Mothers Report, has enriched the process of assessing deaths in an effort to improve the quality of care through clinics, hospitals, professionals and doctors.

In conclusion, the vast majority of maternal deaths could be prevented if women, for instance, like here in South Africa, have taken some strides. We have moved forward. Women, for instance, continue to have access to quality family planning services, skilled care during pregnancy and childbirth support in the first month after delivery. Over 15% of pregnancies and childbirths need emergency obstetric care because of risks that are difficult to predict. Therefore a working health system with skilled personnel is key to saving these women’s lives. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mrs C DUDLEY: Madam Deputy Speaker, a woman dies from complications in childbirth every minute and the vast majority of these are in developing countries. A woman in Sub-Saharan Africa has a one in 16 chance of dying in pregnancy or childbirth compared to a one in 4000 risk in developed countries. At the same time at least 20% of diseases in children below the age of five is linked to poor maternal health and nutrition.

Each year 8 million babies die during delivery or in the first week of life and statistics shows that babies left motherless are 10 times more likely to die within two years of their mother’s death. Major causes of death among infants in South Africa are pneumonia, diarrhoea, birth trauma and vaccine preventable diseases, malaria in some areas and malnutrition.

Almost 2 million children die each year globally from diarrhoea, a statistic which, according to studies, could be halved by a culture of washing hands with soap and water.

HIV and Aids further complicate matters and the Prevention of Mother-to- Child Transmission of HIV and Aids has been delayed too long in South Africa, where 3,1 million women and 240 000 children are estimated to be living with HIV and Aids.

New government policy and guidelines, however, which facilitate provision of dual therapy, that is, AZT and a single dose of Nevirapine are welcomed by the ACDP. Better late than never, I guess.

The effects of poverty in Africa continue to undermine efforts and conflict in emergency situations in many countries also severely impact on maternal and newborn child health. Shockingly, some have concluded that the easy way out of this dilemma is for women not to carry their babies to full term and they promote abortion.

Countries especially in Africa which present the biggest obstacle to global targets are under increasing pressure to legalise abortion on demand. Genuine solutions are not necessarily easy solutions. We must not pay lip service to women and betray them and their babies in this manner.

The ACDP calls on the South African delegation to the International Parliamentary Union to oppose this strategy. I thank you.

Ms N C NKABINDE: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the measure of a nation’s wellbeing is often the health of its expectant mothers and newborn children. On that score South Africa was correct in revamping the health care system and introducing primary health care with the focus on maternal and newborn health.

Despite these legislative and policy changes the reality is that we still do not have satisfactory maternal and newborn statistics. One of the major factors is HIV/Aids and mother-to-child transmission of the disease. Government’s failure to produce an adequate policy and the subsequent slow pace of implementation once the policy was developed, have contributed to shocking numbers of newborns succumbing to the disease. Unfortunately, there has also been confusion about the government message regarding newborn feeding whether breastfeeding is appropriate or not.

The pandemic has taken a terrible toll amongst newborns. Another major factor affecting maternal and newborn child health care in many IPU countries is the question of poverty and nutrition. The ability of government to provide not only primary health care but also education, nutrition and welfare assistance to expectant and new mothers is a vital determinant of whether all children get an equal start in life.

Now that South Africa has begun to roll out on a large scale, the mother-to- child treatment programme, we are perhaps in a position to provide our fellow nations in the IPU with a case study in responding to the HIV/Aids in particular, as well as maternal and newborn child and health care management in general. I thank you.

Ms R J MASHIGO: Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, according to our Constitution, everyone has the right to have access to health care services, including reproductive health care, and every child has the right to basic nutrition, shelter, basic health care services and social services.

One of the Apex Priorities’ main categories is accelerating our advance towards the achievements of the goal of health for all. This debate will look at the Millennium Development Goals of the reduction of child mortality and improvement of maternal health by two thirds between 1990 and 2015.

On 25 February 2008, at the launch of the Committees for Maternal Mortality, Perinatal Mortality and Infant Mortality (Children under Five) in Boksburg, the Minister of Health stated that, “We chose to focus on this group because maternal and child health are the basic indicators of the performance of the health system.” It is within this context that we are today launching the three committees which I have already mentioned. These committees will consist of experts, who will monitor the death rate, the causes and what steps are taken in order to reduce the mortality rate and improve the mother’s health.

Newspapers have written articles about baby death and stillbirth rates at several hospitals. These articles could not escape anybody’s eyes because there were also pictures. These are public hospitals and the majority of South Africans rely on them for their health. You know these hospitals because they are in our communities and, as public representatives, we are very much hurt because the National Treasury allocates a reasonable budget to the Department of Health, as well as conditional grants to provinces, and it is our responsibility as public representatives and Parliament to ensure that the money is properly spent on improving the lives of our people.

I’m going to refer to Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital and the Star that reported on 1 October 2007 about Khosi Seshange who thought she had stomach pains and went to Baragwanath, where she gave birth to a healthy baby boy, with no complications reported. Khosi should have actually gone to the local clinic, where she could have been assisted by our capable midwives to deliver a healthy baby. We also know that Baragwanath is a referral hospital surrounded by many clinics, and people from other provinces also use Baragwanath Hospital.

The Financial Mail report dated 19 October 2007 carried an article entitled “Baragwanath Hospital in numbers”. This article can help us to objectively address the issue of primary health care as public representatives, and assist in discovering why communities do not have confidence in primary health care centres. Are our communities well educated about their functions, and what programmes are available to promote primary health care? It is our responsibility as public representatives to go out there to educate and assist whatever structures are in the community on the use of primary health care centres.

Coming to Sub-Saharan Africa, the Paper on Child Mortality and Socioeconomic Status in Sub-Saharan Africa between 1960 and 2000 has data that shows the seven top-ten causes of death in Africa are infectious diseases. They have been mentioned right throughout the speeches. Some 11 million children under the age of five die annually in the world, of which over 10 million are in the developing world, and Sub-Saharan Africa is the most affected.

Nearly three-quarters of child deaths in the developing world are caused by diseases, for which practical low-cost interventions exist, including immunisation, oral rehydration therapy use and antibiotics. Many sub- Saharan countries’ response to maternal and child care are compromised by other factors such as HIV/Aids, malaria, political disturbances and civil war as well as poverty.

There is a huge gap between the developed and underdeveloped countries. Numerous studies have shown an association between child mortality and socioeconomic status. In the 1970s to 80s, support from International Aid Programmes substantially contributed to the positive and rapid improvement in health, and particularly in child survival, but there was a decline towards the 90s in most of these countries. The poor performance was attributed to the conditions that were attached by some international sponsors to the issues that might not have been the priorities in those particular countries. If they rely on international sponsors and the priorities are given, that contributes more to the death rate in our sub- region.

Inexpensive interventions using universal coverage could have prevented over half of these 4,4 million deaths of children under the age of five that have occurred in Sub-Saharan Africa. Health infrastructure is important in helping health care workers to perform their functions. This is inadequate in most African countries and rural areas; access to health facilities is still a problem due to distance.

Funding for health care in Sub-Saharan Africa is inadequate. There seems to be more reliance on foreign donors and funding, which might be withdrawn at any time and cause a decline in health care. Like South Africa, I hope some African governments prioritise health in their national budgets.

South Africa relies on its own budget from our revenue resources. South Africa has a good working relationship with the Southern African Economic Development Community countries on the following programmes: sexual reproduction health and rights, confidential enquiries into maternal death and expanded programmes on immunisation. A ministerial meeting was held in Maputo, which was prepared here in South Africa. The theme was “Re- operationalisation of the Sexual and Reproductive Health Rights”, which I’ve mentioned earlier.

Following this Maputo plan of action, South Africa has achieved the following: The amendment of the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Act, hon Dudley, and the development of a curriculum in sexual health care. This curriculum is being piloted. There are efforts to reposition family planning so that it should be integrated into the HIV and the Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission programmes; and men in our country are being involved in sexual and reproductive programmes.

When we come to immunisation, the overall immunisation coverage had increased so much that it had gone up to 83% by 2006. In the same year, this country was declared polio-free by the Africa Regional Certification Commission. South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland have a close working relationship with regard to polio eradication, and have formed an Inter- country Certification Committee on polio eradication. They meet annually and, as a result, we’ll also know about polio trends in our country. During the polio outbreak in Namibia, South Africa provided vaccines whilst conducting campaigns in the border areas of Namibia as well as those areas in South Africa where coverage was low.

Sub-Saharan Africa remains mostly affected by HIV and Aids; I won’t repeat it because most of the speakers have referred to it. Let me refer to the fact that health care alone cannot reverse this trend in maternal and child health. Social interventions are needed to promote education and food security as well as the policies to support good health care.

The PMTCT high-level Global Partners Forum met in November here in South Africa. Before referring to it, it’s important to mention that South Africa, which was already mentioned by other speakers here, has already submitted its policies and guidelines on the new PMTCT. In this report released in 2007, national government, through the MDG and United Nations General Assembly Special Session Declaration of Commitment committed towards improving maternal child survival by 2015, halving infection among infants by 2010. This was a call for an integrated and effective PMTCT and paediatric HIV services to reach at least 80% of pregnant women and their infants through a family-centred approach.

This Global Partners Forum has a comprehensive four-element strategy, which is primarily the prevention of the HIV infection; preventing unintended pregnancies among HIV-positive women; preventing HIV transmissions from infected women to their children; and providing care, treatment and support to infected mothers and their children.

The objectives of the Global Partners Forum are to analyse and document progress made by national governments since the endorsement in Abuja, and the PMTCT call to action towards an HIV and Aids-free generation in 2005, and to review and share lessons learned by the different governments. Progress reports over 2004-05 show government in South Africa should invest in the health of the people by financing their health care services, education, research and development. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

The House adjourned at 16:13. ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister of Defence


      a) Defence Amendment Bill [B 6 – 2008] (National Assembly –
         proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice
         of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 30803
         of 22 February 2008.]
         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Defence of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the
         Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of
         Joint Rule 160.


         In terms of Joint Rule 154 written views on the classification
         of the Bill may be submitted to the JTM within three
         parliamentary working days.

TABLINGS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1. The Minister of Health

 a) Strategic Plan of the Department of Health for 2008/09 to 2010/11.