National Assembly - 19 June 2008
THURSDAY, 19 JUNE 2008 __
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
____
The House met at 15:37.
House Chairperson Mr K O Bapela took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.
NOTICE OF MOTION
Mr G R MORGAN: Chairperson, on behalf of the DA, I give notice that I shall move:
That the House debates measures to minimise the effects of extreme weather events on all communities while noting the likelihood that extreme weather events will increase under advancing climate change and that such events are likely to affect vulnerable communities the worst.
CONGRATULATIONS TO PROTEAS FASTBOWLER DALE STEYN ON HIS ACHIEVEMENTS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr H P MALULEKA: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes that on Tuesday, 17 June 2008, the Proteas fastbowler Dale
Steyn won the Mutual and Federal South African Cricketer of the Year
award;
2) further notes that in addition to the Cricketer of the Year award,
Steyn was also named the Castle Test Cricketer of the Year, the
SuperSport Fans Cricketer of the Year and the much-sought after
Players’ Player of the Year;
3) believes that the fastbowler serves as an inspiration to his peers
and to young people in general; and
4) congratulates Dale Steyn on winning these awards and wishes him well in his future endeavours.
Agreed to.
WORLD REFUGEE DAY
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M J ELLIS: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
(1) notes that Friday, 20 June 2008, is World Refugee Day;
2) further notes that this day provides a formal opportunity for
governments across the world to re-affirm the values upon which
international agreements of refugee protection are based;
3) acknowledges the plight of refugees who have been driven from
their homes by fear, conflict and persecution and now face many
uncertainties in foreign countries;
4) recognises that this day provides an opportunity for all South
Africans to honour those who have been so deeply affected by recent
xenophobic attacks across the country; and
5) calls on all South Africans to stand together to ensure that
communities are protected from genocide, war crimes, ethnic
cleansing and crimes against humanity and that they are afforded
the dignity and respect they so justly deserve.
Agreed to.
FLOODING IN KWAZULU-NATAL
(Draft Resolution)
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
(1) notes the terrible rains that have flooded the areas of Umzinto, Umkomaas, the small towns of the South Coast of KZN and the rural areas of Malangeni, Mistake Farm, Ama-shongwe and Amandawe;
(2) further notes the serious damage and critical situation that have displaced hundreds of residents of these areas, informal settlements and low-cost housing to relief stations;
(3) further notes that the situation has resulted in collapsed houses, businesses, schools and roads;
(4) conveys its condolences to the families who lost their loved ones, children and adults, in these floods and to all the victims displaced from their homes;
(5) believes that the MEC of Provincial and Local Government, the Mayor of Durban, MPs, councillors and community leaders, have acted fast and worked rapidly to bring relief to flood victims;
(6) calls on all spheres of government, members and communities to visit these areas and offer assistance in whichever way possible; and
(7) further calls on the task team to join us in evaluating the damage and deciding on a recovery mechanism.
Agreed to.
THIRD ANNIVERSARY OF WORLD ELDER ABUSE AWARENESS DAY
(Draft Resolution)
Mrs M M MADUMISE: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes that last Sunday, 15 June 2008, was the third anniversary of
World Elder Abuse Awareness Day;
2) further notes that the elderly are vulnerable to all forms of abuse
and neglect, and are taken advantage of by family members,
relatives and even public servants, and usually when such abuse
happens, the elderly do not know how, where and to whom to report
them;
3) recognises that all of us have to work together to raise awareness
and ensure that perpetrators of this crime are brought to book;
4) recognises must love, protect and care for our elderly, that we and
appreciate that they play a critical role in our communities and
that many orphans and vulnerable children in our country are cared
for by grandparents, who continue to be the backbone of many
families, giving children a sound beginning in life, and also
continue to contribute to the economic development of our country
and remain economically active;
5) recognises that there is a need to encourage closer and positive
contact between generations and to foster positive attitudes
towards elders and believes that the social isolation and neglect
of elders needs to be broken; and
6) urges the youth during this Youth Month to look after the elderly
in general and their grandparents in particular. Agreed to.
WORLD DAY TO COMBACT DESERTIFICATION AND DROUGHT
(Draft Resolution)
Mrs J CHALMERS: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move without notice:
That the House –
1) notes that Tuesday, 17 June 2008, was the World Day to Combat
Desertification and Drought;
2) further notes that the day is meant to deepen awareness amongst
South Africans and the world community on the impact of drought and
desertification;
3) recalls that desertification occurs in arid, semi-arid and sub-
humid areas, where the soils are especially fragile, vegetation is
sparse and the climate is particularly unforgiving and that these
areas are inhabited by one fifth of the world’s population;
4) further recalls that one third of the earth’s land surface (4
billion hectares) is threatened by desertification and over 250
million people are directly affected by desertification, that 24
billion tons of fertile soil disappear annually and that from 1991
to 2000 alone, droughts have been responsible for over 280,000
deaths and that these accounted for 11% of the total number of
water-related disasters;
5) acknowledges that climate change is a new threat on a global scale
and poses a challenge to South Africans and Africans as a whole,
because we are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change and
the risks to the poor are particularly severe;
6) remembers that our vision of the future includes a sustainable
economy where all South Africans, including present and future
generations, will realise their right to an environment not harmful
to their health and well-being; and
7) commends the work done by the United Nations, some governments,
environmental organisations and many individuals in their efforts
to combat desertification and raise awareness amongst the people.
Agreed to.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF TASK TEAM OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT
PROBING VIOLENCE AND ATTACKS ON FOREIGN NATIONALS
There was no debate.
Mr S K LOUW: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move:
That the report be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
SOLIDARITY WITH AND SYMPATHY EXPRESSED FOR VICTIMS OF XENOPHOBIC ATTACKS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S K LOUW: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move without notice:
That the House, noting that the spate of violence which broke out on 11 May 2008 in Alexandra township in Gauteng and later spread to other provinces, mostly affected nationals from other African countries, but also claimed South Africans amongst its victims, recalls that in the preamble to our Constitution we honour those who suffered for justice and freedom in our land, we respect those who have worked to build and develop our country and believe that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity, therefore resolves to –
1) thank the governments and people of the continent for the
solidarity and support shown during the struggle against
apartheid;
2) express its appreciation for the contribution of the continent and
the region in helping to build the economy of South Africa;
3) reaffirm its commitment to African solidarity and integration of
the region and continent;
4) assure Africa and the world that these incidents were not
indicative of the views, nor the conduct of the majority of South
African citizens;
5) acknowledge the sterling work done by government, political
parties, civil society, non-governmental organisations, community
organisations and individual South African citizens to provide
humanitarian relief to displaced persons;
6) convey the remorse of the Parliament of South Africa, as the
representatives of the people of South Africa, to all parliaments,
governments and peoples on the African continent; and
7) express its sincere sympathy with the persons affected by the
violent attacks.
Agreed to.
REVIVAL OF CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT — HEARINGS CONDUCTED BY COMMITTEE ON OCCASION OF REVIEW BY PARLIAMENT ON ASPECTS OF EQUALITY IN SOCIETY, 16 OCTOBER 2006
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S K LOUW: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move without notice:
That the following item, which was on the Order Paper and that lapsed at the end of the 2007 annual session, be revived for consideration by the National Assembly:
Consideration of Report of Portfolio Committee on Justice and
Constitutional Development (Announcements, Tablings and Committee
Reports, 12 April 2007, p 650 Hearings conducted by Committee on
occasion of review by Parliament on aspects of equality in society 16
October 2006).
Agreed to.
SUSPENSION OF RULE 253(1)(b) AND SUSPENSION OF JOINT RULE 154(2)
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S K LOUW: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move without notice:
That the House -
1) suspends Rule 253(1)(b), which provides that the debate on the
Second Reading of a Bill that has not been referred to a committee
may not commence before at least three working days have elapsed
since the Bill was introduced, for the purposes of conducting the
Second Reading debate on the Repeal of the Black Administration Act
and Amendment of Certain Laws Amendment Bill [B 50 – 2008] (National
Assembly – proposed sec 75) today; and
2) subject to the concurrence of the National Council of Provinces,
suspends Joint Rule 154(2), which provides that the Joint Tagging
Mechanism may not classify a Bill before the expiry of the period
stated in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, in
respect of the Bill (see Announcements, Tablings and Committee
Reports, 17 June 2008, p 1199).
Agreed to.
EXTENSION OF MANDATE OF AND DATE BY WHICH AD HOC COMMITTEE MUST CONSIDER AND REPORT ON NATIONAL STRATEGIC INTELLIGENCE AMENDMENT BILL
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S K LOUW: Chairperson, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I hereby move without notice:
That the House, noting its decision of 13 May 2008, establishing an Ad Hoc committee on Intelligence Legislation to consider and report on the Protection of Information Bill [B28–2008] (National Assembly – sec 75) -
1) extends the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee to consider and report
on the Intelligence Services Amendment Bill [B37– 2008] (National
Assembly – sec 75) and the National Strategic Intelligence Amendment
Bill [B38– 2008] (National Assembly – proposed sec 75); and
2) extends the date by which the Ad Hoc committee must report on all
three Bills to 29 August 2008.
[Interjections.] Agreed to.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Hon Mike Ellis, raise it outside with him! [Laughter.]
ISSUES AROUND GENDER PARITY
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs F MAHOMED (ANC): Chairperson, the discussion at the World Economic Forum has rightly acknowledged the global gender gap in almost all economies of the world.
It needs to be noted that the world has a huge resource capital potential in terms of women, and I am glad to admit that South Africa is poised to take up this challenge head-on by our 50% quota of women in politics. Our skills development also points towards the same objective by giving trade incentives to women-owned businesses, so that they are able to grow existing businesses or start new enterprises. Further, our Employment Equity Bill also aims to ensure that women are given a fair chance to compete in order to occupy the higher echelons of employment. The ANC, at its last conference, adopted a policy of gender parity in all structures of the movement. This has served to deepen our efforts to confront sexism, gender inequality and discrimination. Thank you. [Applause.]
ZIMBABWE ELECTIONS AND DEMOCRACY IN AFRICA
(Member’s Statement)
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION (DA): Chairperson, we do not believe that the establishment of a government of national unity, as reportedly proposed by President Mbeki to President Mugabe, is an appropriate response to the situation in Zimbabwe at this point.
The establishment of a, Government of National Unity, GNU, will only be helpful if it is done after a successful election and … [Interjections] … is called by the winning party, not if it is forced upon the people to accommodate Zanu-PF’s wish to cling to a vestige of power.
It sends out a message that Africa cannot cope with democracy, that presidents need only incite violence to escape the prospect of having to relinquish power which they lost through the ballot box. Kenya has set a dangerous precedent in this regard.
In Africa, as with democracies elsewhere, power must change hands through the ballot box. It is the duty of the region, through the Southern African Development Community, SADC, and the African Union, AU, to ensure that this happens. Regimes that do not comply with SADC and AU guidelines should be expelled.
Instead of pushing for a premature government of national unity, President Mbeki should use all diplomatic avenues still available to him to convince President Mugabe to allow peacekeeping forces into Zimbabwe to help ensure that the electoral process on 27 June is free and fair. [Applause.]
OPPOSITION TO CALL TO ESTABLISH STREET COMMITTEES TO FIGHT CRIME
(Member’s Statement)
Mr M B SKOSANA (IFP): Chairperson, Sidney Anglo, in his essay “The anatomy of political and military decadence”, interprets Prince Niccolo Machiavelli’s warnings of the signs preceding a potential national predicament. Among others he warns of the advancement of evil men, irreligiousness, lasciviousness, lack of unity, desire for empty honours, in-fighting and the pursuit of party interests at the expense of the greater commonwealth.
The persistent call to establish wholesale street committees to help fight crime presents the country with extremely frightening prospects. This will in practice prove to be an unintentional invitation to widespread lawlessness and eventual anarchy, when political no-go-areas are re- established, antagonistic party political armies or militia are formed, lives are lost and properties destroyed. And criminal gangs will obviously find umbrage in the ensuing chaos. In the idiom of Chinua Achebe, “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold, mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.”
The IFP appeals to this House and the leadership of the ANC to reconsider this potentially harrowing social engineering at a time when our democracy is in its most fragile state. Moreover, this resolution is an inappropriate admission to the nation and the world as a whole that the law enforcement agencies of this country are failing to combat crime, that churches and religious leaders are failing to reverse the tide of moral degeneration, and that schools, communities and families are failing to instil in their members, young and old, the hallowed values of Ubuntu/Botho.
This is not the message we want to send. Such a situation cannot be conducive to foreign investment and social development. Let us strive for the legitimate reinforcement of the existing law enforcement agencies, including reorganising, if necessary, restructuring and resourcing them adequately to deal with all manner of crimes. Thank you.
LIVING CONDITIONS IN VRYGROND
(Member’s Statement)
Prof B TUROK (ANC): Chairperson, the House notes that local government has failed to improve the living conditions of the poor people of Vrygrond in Cape Town. I am the MP for the area and I am frequently embarrassed by the deficiencies in that area.
Eight years ago, the Vrygrond Development Trust, led by Mr Jonathan Schrire, forced the City of Cape Town to create a Reconstruction and Development Programme, RDP housing scheme of 1 800 houses. Since then, the same Schrire has raised private funds to build a primary school. During the same period, local government has done nothing substantial for the people of that area. Instead, public funds have gone into supporting a luxury village at West Lake and maintaining a luxury commercial park.
We have heard the speech of the hon Motlanthe earlier this afternoon. Clearly, we must pay attention and pay heed to the lives of the poor. The inequality in allocating public funds in the City of Cape Town is staggering, yet the poor and the rich are equal members of our society and we must pay heed to their needs.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND NUCLEAR ENERGY
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs C DUDLEY (ACDP): Chairperson, the ACDP notes that government, in a recent briefing, has finally come clean about its commitment to nuclear energy for South Africa. However, the ACDP regards it as outrageous that government has made this commitment without public participation.
The ACDP submitted a question to the Minister of Minerals and Energy asking when a decision was made by Cabinet to commit South Africa to nuclear power as the major component of its energy, and whether government intends meaningful public participation on the implementation of its nuclear energy plans. These questions were due to be answered in Parliament this week, but the Minister was overseas.
After causing havoc and danger to life, in mines and factories and millions of homes, Eskom then halted power outages altogether and the increased demands at the start of the winter’s cold weather have not necessitated new cuts. This has only increased the suspicion that outages never did have anything to do with supply. Allegations that cuts were part of an elaborate, if clumsy, plan to manipulate the nation into accepting nuclear power without questioning its deadly dangers in terms of toxic waste and huge expense, are still a cause for great concern.
The ACDP and concerned members of the public have called for public participation to take place its, and for government to reveal plans for toxic waste. The White Paper on Energy promised public participation, but then a Nuclear Summit in 2004 was cancelled at the last minute by government after delegates had already arrived in the city.
It is the public who will pay for this industrialisation, which has been said by Minister Erwin on Carte Blanche to be an investment largely for massive opportunities, meaning to sell pebble-bed reactors to other countries.
Apart from toxic waste, the question is: Is it possible we have a “Nucleargate” pending? [Time expired.]
CONDITIONS IN ZIMBABWE NOT CONDUCIVE TO FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs P DE LILLE (ID): Chairperson, I visited Zimbabwe yesterday and I was able to secure a meeting with the MDC and the crisis coalition in Zimbabwe, but I was not able to meet and secure an appointment with Zanu-PF. While I had hoped that there was something that could be done to salvage a democratic process in Zimbabwe, I am very sad to say that the conditions are not at all conducive for free and fair elections. There is absolutely no free political activity. Zanu-PF’s election campaign has been run by the military and the police, and young militias are criss-crossing the country on a daily basis with the sole aim of intimidation and brutality.
In my meeting with Morgan Tsvangirai yesterday, he raised the following issue, namely that the outcome of the election is not the problem anymore. It is a transition from one government to the next which is the greatest challenge.
Mugabe will refuse to hand over power, whatever the outcome of the elections. He said: ``Only a negotiated settlement before 27 June 2008 can stop the crisis in Zimbabwe.’’
I hereby make an appeal to all SADC leaders to assist our president, President Mbeki, to find a peaceful and amicable solution in Zimbabwe.
REMARKS BY LEADER OF IFP ON ELECTIONS
(Member’s Statement)
Ms M J J MATSOMELA (ANC): Chair, during the Inkatha Youth Brigade’s 16 June celebrations in KwaMashu on Monday, the leader of the IFP said:
Since 1994, when our freedom dawned, there has not been a single election in which some rigging and fraud has not taken place. It may not have happened on as large a scale as we have seen in some of our African countries, such as Nigeria, Kenya or Zimbabwe. All you can guarantee is that such shenanigans do not continue to take place during our own election next year.
This is a reckless and irresponsible statement to be made by a member of this House. It casts aspersions on the credibility of the Independent Electoral Commission and the people who lead it.
The ANC believes that there is a need for members of this House, first and foremost, and the public in general to respect and defend the institutions of the democratic state, especially those entrusted with supporting and defending our democracy.
VIOLENCE AGAINST AND ABUSE OF ELDERLY PEOPLE
(Member’s Statement)
Ms S RAJBALLY (MF): Chairperson, the fight against violence and abuse of women and children has had a great impact on decreasing the incidence of crimes of this nature and giving victims of these abuses a voice. We are, however, concerned about the violence against and abuse of the elderly, especially pensioners who are victims of similar abuse. It is reported that in Pretoria alone, 15 cases are reported every month. I believe if we were to do a countrywide investigation into the abuse of violence against the elderly, we would be shocked by the statistics.
I call on the House to unite against violence against and abuse of women, children and the elderly. We need to create awareness of abuse of elders and mobilise communities against it. We call on the executive to denounce all forms of violence against and abuse of the elderly.
AFRICA MUST PUNISH ITS OWN PEOPLE
(Member’s Statement)
Dr S E M PHEKO (PAC): Chairman, African leaders who have the propensity for dictatorship and tyranny and commit gross violations of human rights must be punished in Africa through the appropriate judicial institutions of the AU. This is not meant to cast aspersions on the integrity of the International Criminal Court.
It cannot be disputed, however, that sophisticated guns that kill Africans in civil wars in Africa come from outside Africa. The AU must be careful that it does not compromise the sovereignty of its member states in an international political game which is not clean and whose credo is: Might is Right!
The PAC observes that there is still a great deal of selective morality and legality in international politics. For instance, America and Britain occupied Iraq and killed thousands of Iraqi women and children under the false cover that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but President Bush and former Prime Minister Blair have not been summoned before the ICC. Countries such as America have not even signed the statute of the ICC.
Meanwhile, former Liberian president, Charles Taylor, who claims to have been initially supported by the American government in Liberia and Sierra Leone, has been hauled before the ICC. Now recently, another African leader has been summoned before the ICC. Sooner rather than later the ICC will be full of violators of human rights from Africa, but none from Europe or America.
COMPLAINT AGAINST CAPE JUDGE PRESIDENT JOHN HLOPHE
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs S M CAMERER (DA): Thank you, Chairperson. As a member of the Judicial Services Commission and on behalf of the DA, I would like to express our deep concern about the revelations reported in today’s media relating to the Constitutional Court’s complaint against Judge President John Hlophe, presently before the JSC.
This concerns the allegation by the court that Hlophe had approached Constitutional Court judge, Bess Nkabinde, about a note on the issue of privilege in relation to the Thint-Zuma cases recently heard by the court, which she was drafting for the Chief Justice. A surprised Nkabinde was allegedly told by Hlophe that he knew she was drafting the note because, among other things, he was connected to members of the National Intelligence Agency.
The implications of this are extremely grave, namely that our Constitutional Court judges are being spied on by our National Intelligence Agency. If this is true, then the white-anting of the institutional framework of our democracy is even worse than we suspected.
Indeed, as DA leader Helen Zille has said, our entire constitutional order is under threat. We have already seen how we are reaping the whirlwind of the ANC’s policy of cadre redeployment, as cadres from one ANC faction undermine and, lately, threaten and even attempt to kill, cadres from another.
We had hoped that our judiciary was immune from such shenanigans, but this no longer seems to be the case. If intelligence services have been abused to the extent of spying on judges, the damage inflicted by Polokwane has reached a new low.
The DA demands that the Minister for Intelligence, Mr Ronnie Kasrils, immediately engages with the JSC and the Constitutional Court to launch a full investigation into this apparent appalling abuse of the security services. Thank you. [Applause.]
DEATH OF MOSES MAGONGWA
(Member’s Statement)
Mnr P A GERBER (ANC): Huisvoorsitter, Moses Magongwa is tragies oorlede ’n week voordat hy in die Lephalale Landbouforum se Plaaswerker van die Jaar kompetisie, die prys vir die tweede plek ontvang het. Die organiseerders het besluit om die prys postuum aan sy familie te oorhandig.
Sy werkgewer, mnr Willie Motsamai Vos, het ’n emosiebelaaide huldeblyk, volledig in Setswana, oor Moses gelewer. Hy het, onder andere, gesê: “Vir my vrou en myself was hy soos die seun wat op die plaas gebly het om na sy bejaarde ouers om te sien. Nou sal ek na sy vrou, Francina, en sy twee klein kindertjies omsien. Hulle is nou my kinders, my verantwoordelikheid en ek sal sorg dat, solank ek lewe, hulle niks sal tekortkom nie.”
Die pragtige verhouding tussen hierdie boer, mnr Willie Motsamai Vos, en sy plaaswerkers, spruit uit die filosofie dat die boer en sy werkers se welstand vervleg is met mekaar, soos die twee kante van dieselfde muntstuk.
Die ANC doen ’n beroep op boere en plaaswerkers om, gesamentlik, ’n kultuur van wedersydse respek, vertroue en omgee te bou, soos wat die geval was tussen mnr Willie Vos en … (Translation of Afrikaans member’s statement follows.)
[Mr P A GERBER (ANC): Chairperson of the House, Moses Magongwa died tragically a week before he was to receive the second prize in the Lephalale Agricultural Forum’s Farmworker of the Year competition. The organisers decided to hand over the prize to his family posthumously.
His employer, Mr Willie Motsamai Vos, delivered an emotional eulogy to Moses, entirely in Setswana. He said, amongst other things: “To my wife and I he was like the son who remained on the farm to care for his elderly parents. Now I’ll take care of his wife, Francina, and his two little children. They are now my children, my responsibility and I will see to it that for as long as I live they will lack for nothing”.
This wonderful relationship between this farmer, Mr Willie Motsamai Vos, and his farm workers, arises from the philosophy that the wellbeing of the farmer and his workers are intertwined, like the two sides of the same coin. The ANC appeals to farmers and farmworkers, collectively, to build a culture of mutual respect, trust and caring, like in the case of Mr Willie Vos and …]
… Moses Magongwa, who passed away a week before the award ceremony of the Lephalale Agricultural Forum’s Farmworker of the Year competition, in which he was the runner-up. The organisers decided to honour his memory and handed over his prize to his family.
His employer, Mr Willie Vos delivered the eulogy in Setswana, which demonstrated the kind of a relationship he had with the deceased. Amongst other things he said,
To my wife and I he was like a son who lived on the farm to take care of his aging parents. Now, I’ll take care of his wife, Francina, and his two little children. They’re my children now, my responsibility and I will see to it that they will lack for nothing as long as I live.
The relationship the farmer has with his farmworkers arises from the understanding that his fortunes are intimately linked with the fortunes of the workers. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
CHINESE PEOPLE INCLUDED IN DEFINITION OF BLACK PEOPLE
(Member’s Statement) Prof E S CHANG (IFP): Chairperson, the IFP welcomes the ruling by the High Court that Chinese South Africans will be included in the definition of black people in legislation which is intended to benefit previously disadvantaged groups.
This will mean that Chinese people are eligible for the benefits reserved for those who were discriminated against during apartheid. Under the apartheid regime, Chinese people, who were classified as Coloured, also suffered the discrimination, humiliation and abuse that were meted out to nonwhites.
The Chinese community is proud to be part of this great country. It was therefore really disheartening that we were, once again, marginalised after the elections in 1994, by not being included in the definition of black people in terms of the Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment Act and the Employment Equity Act.
The ruling is the result of a lot of hard work, as Chinese South Africans had been struggling for many years to obtain clarity on this important issue. We hope that the necessary amendments will be made to relevant Acts as soon as possible.
Now that the High Court has made its ruling, I believe that the Chinese community will be able to make an even greater contribution to the growth of the economy and the creation of jobs in South Africa. Thank you. HOUSES IN POORTJIE BUILT BY LEEUKOP PRISON INMATES
(Member’s Statement)
Mr G D SCHNEEMANN (ANC): Chairperson, on Friday, 30 May 2008, the City of Johannesburg’s housing department and workers from its municipal-owned entities, the Department of Correctional Services at the Leeuwkop Prison, and members of the community and sponsors came together to build 10 houses in Poortjie.
Forming part of the team of builders were 30 inmates from the Leeuwkop Correctional Services facility. They worked together with members of the community and the Department of Housing to improve the living conditions of 10 families.
We agree with the Deputy Minister of Correctional Services that the housing project will go a long way in providing shelter and warmth to their new owners, and that it showcases best practices in terms of co-operative governance, restorative justice, giving back and demonstrating that hands that hurt should also be hands that heal. This project also helped the department to promote correction, rehabilitation, reconciliation and forgiveness between criminals and victims of crime and violence.
We applaud the initiative by the various stakeholders as one among many efforts that South Africans are engaged in, in pursuance of the goal of a better life for all. I thank you.
OVERPRESCRIPTION OF STIMULANTS AND ANTIDEPRESSANTS TO CHILDREN
(Member’s Statement)
Mrs S V KALYAN (DA): Chairperson, drugs destroy millions of lives every year and the increase in the incidence of drug abuse among children and teenagers is indeed quite alarming.
While there may be many factors contributing to the increased drug use, including social and moral decay, one of the main reasons for drug abuse can be attributed to the overprescription of stimulants and antidepressants to children as young as five years. There is enough evidence to confirm that the use of so-called ``gateway drugs’’ from an early age can lead to dependence on harder drugs like cocaine. Quite often it is a case of misdiagnosis that leads to the initial prescription.
The DA calls on the Minister of Health to provide statistics using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, to determine how many children have been prescribed antidepressants and stimulants and to enforce stricter legislation around the prescription of narcotic drugs for children.
ROOTING OUT CORRUPTION IN MTHONJANENI MUNICIPALITY
(Member’s Statement)
Mnu B J MNYANDU (ANC): Ngiyabonga Sihlalo. UKhongolose ulishayela ihlombe igalelo likaNgqongqoshe wesifundazwe woMnyango Wezenhlalakahle Nokuthuthukiswa Komphakathi, uNgqongqoshe uMeshack Radebe, lokulwa nenkohlakalo ebhokile kulo Mnyango eMelmoth, eMthonjaneni Municipality. Bese kunemoto esuka nabantu eThekwini imbala ikhukhuse nabo ibanga elingamakhulu amabili amakhilomitha idlula amadolobha namadolobhanyana kuyiwa eMthonjaneni lapho bezimbiwe khona yintsele yazishiya.
Abantu bendawo bona abangakwazi ukugwaza bebetshelwa ukuthi amafomu aphelile. Abanye bebesuswa ngabomu kwikhompiyutha ukuze babuye bezoncenga, ngakho phela ukugwaza. Nabantu abaphunyelwa izimali zabo bebethola ucingo ngasese betshelwa ukuthi abakhokhe nxa seyiphumile le mali kapoyinande phela. Ngaphandle kwaleli hhovisi bese kunendoda elokhu izulazula nohlu olunamagama abantu nomazisi babo bezobhaliswa lapha emuva kokuchama phela.
Lo mkhankaso wokulwa nobugebengu emahhovisi ezenhlalakahle ne-SA Social Security Agency, i-Sassa, uthathe elinye igxathu lapho izigilamkhuba zidubule zabulala inhloko yentsha ebiyisishoshovu sokulwa nobugebengu kulo Mnyango. Kuso lesi sifunda sasenyakatho neKwaZulu-Natali, eNgwelezane, emasontweni amabili edlule inezinsuku ezimbili vo iqalile kulo msebenzi. Emndenini kaMnu Dlamini oshonile elwa nalokhu kuxhashazwa kwemali yezibonelelo sithi: “Dudu.” Iqhawe liwile lasala empini lilwa namasela. Kubabulali sithi: “Ingalo yomthetho yinde futhi kayisoze yakhathala zingakavalelwa izigebengu.” Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu member’s statement follows.)
[Mr B J MNYANDU (ANC): Thank you, Chairperson. The ANC commends the role played by the provincial Minister of the Department of Social Welfare and Population Development, the hon Meshack Radebe, for fighting corruption, which is rife in this department, in Melmoth, in the Mthonjaneni Municipality. A car which used to carry people from Durban and travelled a distance of about two hundred kilometres passed through towns and villages heading to Mthonjaneni, where everyone did as they pleased.
Local people who couldn’t pay bribes were told that there were no more forms, whilst other people’s names were deliberately deleted from the system so that they could come back and ask for help through bribery. And people who were receiving social grants, were secretly contacted and told that they should pay a share to these officials. Outside this office, a man was walking up and down with a list of the names of people and their Identity Documents to be registered there after they had paid the bribes, of course.
This campaign of fighting corruption in the offices of the Department of Social Welfare and Population Development and the South African Social Security Agency, Sassa, had taken a new dimension when the criminals shot and killed the youth leader who was the activist in fighting corruption in this department. It happened here, two weeks ago in the same region of Northern KwaZulu-Natal, in Ngwelezane, and he only worked for two days.
To the family of Mr Dlamini, who passed away fighting the squandering of the state’s grants, we extend our condolences. A hero has fallen while fighting thieves. And to the killers we say: The arm of the law is long and it will not rest until the culprits are caught and locked up. Thank you. [Applause.]]
DEATH OF MOSES MAGONGWA
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER OF LABOUR: Chairperson, may I start with the statement made by the hon member Gerber about the farmer. Luckily, this confirms what I have been saying but nobody seemed to have been listening. Not all farmers are bad. You can therefore not paint all farmers with the same brush. There are many good farmers. I have seen plenty of them and I have visited a number of them. They are very good and treat their workers very well.
Yes, there are bad farmers, but we always want to use the good farmer to be an example to the bad one. We always preach to the sinner but it is important for those who do not sin to show the good course to those who are bad. How I wish this farmer looked after the kids, the wife and the entire family of this worker before he died!
In elk geval, ek is baie, baie dankbaar dat die boer dit gedoen het. [In any case, I am very, very thankful that the farmer did that.]
He was looking after his workers and loved them like his own sons and daughters. In particular, the paragraph that says:
To other people in a place that they visited together, this might have seemed strange to stay together in one bungalow, a boss and his worker eating together, sharing accommodation, but Moses and I were just two friends working side by side.
That is exactly the type of labour market regime that the ANC has promulgated in this country to make sure that there is stability and peace. Workers and their employers must work side by side.
According to the information I have just received from my lawyers in the department, nothing will change in the employment equity legislation. If the judge says you as a Chinese are black, then that is what the law says. Black means the following: If you were classified as Coloured in the past, the law covers you because there are South African Swazis, there are South African Basotho, and there are South African Batswana. I hope they all understand the complications of what they have done. There is no problem with the employment equity legislation, hon member. Do not give yourself much hope. [Time expired.]
OPPOSITION TO CALL TO ESTABLISH STREET COMMITTEES TO FIGHT CRIME
COMPLAINT AGAINST CAPE JUDGE PRESIDENT JOHN HLOPE
(Minister’s Response)
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Thank you very much, Chairperson. It is going to be difficult for me to respond to the issue you are raising, given that you are now in the Chair. But I would assume that it is being raised by your party, and so, I am going to be addressing your party. I am so surprised that there are still public representatives here who do not understand the concept of “community policing”. I am very surprised, but I am going to ask those who are involved in such a concept to give lessons to those who do not understand it.
One of them is the hon Patricia de Lille. She, together with a number of people where she lives, have grouped themselves into units who are working with the police. That’s community policing. Here in the Western Cape, all the townships - Gugulethu, Khayelitsha and so on - have what they have called the Bambanani Campaign. That is community policing.
I am not going to talk about what the ANC is doing but let me indicate that as a consequence of community policing in those areas where a number of our people have joined the police to work together, the crime levels have gone down. I am not going further. There are people here who can give lessons on that concept of community policing.
The last point that I want to make relates to what the hon Sheila Camerer has said about, firstly, her membership of the Judicial Services Commission and some of the work they will do there. Hon member, I think you have disqualified yourself from further participation; at least with respect to this particular case. How can you formulate a strategy that talks to issues which will come before that commission and right away you are saying that this matter has to do with the ANC? You have disqualified yourself and I do not believe that in your position you should serve on the commission to discuss this particular matter. You can sit on other commissions. You have preconceived ideas about the issue that is going to go under investigation. You have disqualified yourself. [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr M B Skosana): Hon Minister, I think I am also shackled by the Chair not to correct you. HOUSES IN POORTJIE BUILT BY LEEUKOP PRISON INMATES
(Minister’s Response)
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF EDUCATION: Chairperson, I would like to thank the hon G D Schneemann for his statement. What the statement clearly indicates is that where there is an integrated approach the beneficiaries - the women, the children and the disabled – indeed benefit from these efforts. Therefore, we would to like to thank the Department of Housing, the Department of Correctional Services as well as the City of Johannesburg for their integrated approach. We fully subscribe to the adage that the hand that harms can indeed become the hand that heals. indeed, we think this step by the Department of Correctional Services has contributed in a very meaningful way to the quality of life of our people, and we say that this is an indication of the fact that it is business unusual where government departments and spheres of government unite in an effort to ensure that there is service delivery. Then a difference can be made in the lives of the poorest of the poor and the vulnerable. Thank you.
REPEAL OF THE BLACK ADMINISTRATION ACT AND AMENDMENT OF CERTAIN LAWS
AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
Mr J B SIBANYONI: Chairperson, hon members of the House, accept my apologies. The Black Administration Act started as the Native Administration Act. It was later amended by the previous government as the Bantu Affairs Administration Act and, finally, as the Black Administration Act. The major portions of the Act were repealed in 2005, and it was crucial that some of the provisions were retained for the following reasons, and I quote:
Some of the provisions of the Black Administration Act dealt with the African value system, which has evolved over time and is seen as vital in attaining the goal of access to justice.
The process of passing alternative legislation, namely the Traditional Courts Bill, is still underway. This Bill that I’m talking about has as its aim to ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the traditional court system in the administration of justice, and to harmonise the traditional justice system with the Constitution.
Gadesi ngifuna ukukhuluma ngalokho esele kwenziwe malungana nomthetho namasiko wesikhethu. UmThethomlingwa lo i-Traditional Court Bill, sele uthuliwe ngaphambi kwePalamende, begodu wagadangiswa nephephandabeni lombuso.
Ukukhulumisana nokufaka iimphakamiso sele kuthomile. A makhosi wendabuko neenhlangano zomphakathi ziyikhambele imihlangano ebizwa yi Komiti yezoBulungiswa nokuThuthukiswa komThethosisekelo ngePalamende.
Kubonakele bonyana isikhathi angeze sanela sokubana kuqedwe ukukhulumisana begodu kuphasiswe umthetho lo kungakapheli sigaba somnyaka lesi esikiso, ngombana soke siyazi bona umnyaka ozako kuyiwa emakhethweni. Begodu kunengi ekusafanele kukhulunyiswane ngomthetho lo, Nendlu yesibili yesiBethamthetho kufanele ithole nesikhathi esaneleko soku wukhulumisa umtheththo lo ngokulandela isahluko 76 somThethosisekelo.
UmNyango wezoBulungiswa nokuThuthukiswa komThethosisekelo begodu neKomiti le, bakhulumisene namakhosi wendabuko kwavunyelwana ngo “ngelethu”. Sikuthokozela khulu kwamambala lokho. Azange kube khona ukurarana namkha kube nomraro.
Kuvunyelwene ngokubana kube khona isiqhema namkha ihlangano efaka nezinye iinhlangano ngaphakathi esiyibiza ngokuthi yi-Multi Party Committee. Ikomiti le inamalunga amahlanu ahloniphekileko wePalamende, ibe namalunga amahlanu ajamele iNdlu yamaKhosi, kubekhona iinhlangano ezingekho ngaphasi kombuso ezinamalunga amahlanu, ngikhuluma ngeenhlangano ezifana ne-Cosatu begodu neKomitjhini yamaLungelo woBuntu, abantu beNgubo nebeMbaji.
Ikomiti le izokuqalisisa beyithole lokho ekufanele kukhulunyiswane ngakho ukuze bebabonisane ngalokho ekutholileko. Izakuvumelana bonyana kuzokuthiwani ngalokho, nokuthi ngiziphi ezinye godu okufanele bonyana zilungiswe. Siqale bonyana imikhulumiswano iragele phambili njenganje ukuze sikghone ukuvumelana kungakapheli inyanga kaRhoboyi.
Ikomiti le izakunikelwa ithuba elinengi lokukhulumisana nokubonisana nabantu begodu neenhlangano ezijamele umphakathi. Sinethemba kwamanikelela bonyana kuzakuba netjhebiswano nokuvumelana emaswapheleni.
Ngithokoza khulu amakhosi wendabuko ngokukghona kwabo ukubonisana nathi. Siyazi bonyana amakhosi wendabuko abavikeli bamasiko nemithetho yesikhethu.
Ngithanda ukuthatha ithubeli ngithokoze bakaPhunga nomaGeba, nakini bakaMantantisi, nakini bakaSikhukhune. Angifuni ukutjhiya ngaphandle namunye umuntu begodu nabunye ubukhosi obujanyelweko eSewula Afrika. Ngabe ngiyatjhapha nangeze ngathokoza nesizukulwana sikaMusi noMhlanga. Kuwe kosi yakwaBaloyi, iLunga elihloniphekileko lePalamende, umhlonitjwa uShilubana, njengabavikeli bamasiko nomthetho wesikhethu, ngithi endabeni le yomthetho wamakhotho, siyathokoza ukubambisana kwenu nathi. Ngithi Ndabezitha! Ngithokoze Sihlalo. (Translation of isiNdebele paragraphs follows.)
[Now I would like to talk about the progress made concerning the Traditional Courts Bill. This Bill has been tabled before Parliament, and published in the Government Gazette.
Discussions that include the public have already started. Traditional leaders and community structures have attended the public hearings called by Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development.
It seems that there will not be enough time to complete the public hearings or to pass this Bill before the end of the current session, since we all know that next year we are going to have an election. There is still a lot to be discussed in respect of this Bill, and the second House of Parliament also needs enough time to discuss the Bill as per section 76 of the Constitution.
The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development and this committee have held discussions with the traditional leaders and have reached a unanimous decision. We appreciate that. There were no misunderstandings or problems.
The agreement was that there should be a team or an organisation that would comprise of other organisations that we would call the Multi Party Committee. This committee will consist of five Members of Parliament, five members representing the House of Traditional Leaders, and five members from the non-governmental organisations. Here I am talking about organisations like Cosatu, the Human Rights Commission, women and men.
This committee will look at and find out what needs to be discussed and share ideas about their findings. It will agree on what is to be said and what areas need fixing. We are looking forward to seeing those discussions proceeding from now so that we can agree before the end of August.
This committee will be given enough time to hold discussions and share ideas with the people and organisations that represent communities. We are hopeful that there will be co-operation and understanding at the end.
I thank the traditional leaders for engaging in sharing ideas with us. We know that traditional leaders are custodians of our culture and traditional laws.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank those from Phunga and Mageba, those from Mantantisi and also those from Sikhukhune. I don’t want to leave out even one chieftaincy that is represented in South Africa. I will be making a mistake if I do not thank the grandchildren of Musi and Mhlanga. To you, Chief of Baloyi, the hon Member of Parliament, hon Shilubana, as custodians of our culture and traditional laws, I say on this issue of the Traditional Courts Bill, thank you for co-operating with us. I say: Hail to the King! Thank you Chairperson.]
There was no debate.
Bill read a second time.
NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY AMENDMENT BILL
SOUTH AFRICAN POLICE SERVICE AMENDMENT BILL
(First Reading debate)
The MINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY: Hon Chairperson and hon members of the House, the Bills that are before this House today are a culmination of various discussions that have been taking place at government level, and in other instances, within the ruling African National Congress. Dominating all of those discussions was the matter of crime in South Africa, generally, and organised crime, specifically, and how to prevent and combat this scourge.
I would like to suggest, Madam Speaker, that representatives of the ANC, in this or other debates in future, talk about such engagements in the past, leading up to the ANC’s policy conference, as well as the Polokwane National Conference in December last year. As an ANC member, I know about the earlier discussions. And those of us who were, for instance, at the Stellenbosch Conference in 2002, know that the matter was suggested at that conference. I have participated, also at government level, in a number of instances where crime was analysed and strategies and tactics were developed to deal with the matter.
The crux of the discussions was that we needed to evaluate the organs of state that deal with crime and, where weaknesses existed, rectify the problem through various interventions. The interventions included the allocation to law enforcement agencies of better resources, human and material, better training of personnel, and the restructuring and realignment of the relevant units.
One of the matters that came under focused attention at Cabinet level was organised crime, which impacts negatively on the psyche of our nation, given its violent nature and the increased circulation of illegal drugs that are a generator of serious and violent crime.
State institutions that play a crucial role in the fight against organised crime include the South African Police Service’s Organised Crime Unit and Commercial Branch, the Directorate of Special Operations or Scorpions, Special Investigative and Asset Forfeiture Units that fall under Justice, the Department of Home Affairs’ National Immigration Branch, the Department of Finance, South African Revenue Service and Customs and Excise.
Also critical to the fight against organised crime is the intelligence community, which is comprised of the National Intelligence Agency, the South African Secret Service and the National Communication Centre, that fall under the Ministry for Intelligence Services, Crime and Defence Intelligence and the Financial Intelligence Centre.
Cabinet decided that our response to the strategic and tactical questions that were being thrown up by the changing face of crime and criminality in our country had to be exhaustive and cover, therefore, the entire criminal justice system. The Justice, Crime Prevention and Security cluster of Cabinet was instructed to articulate a strategy to establish a new, modernised, efficient, effective and transformed criminal justice system.
We defined our mandate as a cluster as a project to establish a modernised criminal justice system that would include the adoption of a single vision and mission, leading to a single set of objectives, priorities and performance measurement targets, as well as the adaptation and realignment of the operations of relevant departments and agencies to eliminate all manifest weaknesses in the system, including conflict and contradictions.
The implementation of some aspects of the modernisation of the criminal justice system has started. The Deputy Minister of Justice, the hon Johnny de Lange, was appointed by the President to convene the co-ordinating and management structure, which will lead the initiatives that will change the entire system for the better.
The desire to achieve effectiveness and efficiency pervaded discussions about the state institutions that we have and brought to the fore some of the weaknesses we have to address.
One of the consequences of the strategies we were formulating was the appointment by the President of the Khampepe Commission, which I shall get back to later in my input.
The two Bills before this House today, the South African Police Service Amendment Bill and the National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Bill, are part of our response to organised crime.
The South African Police Service Amendment Bill seeks to enhance the investigative capacity of the SA Police Service with respect to organised and serious crime by establishing a Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation to combat such crimes. It seeks to bring together the units that exist in the police and in the Directorate of Special Operations that are responsible for the investigation of those crimes.
The National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Bill creates the conditions that will allow for the relocation of the special investigators of the DSO to the SA Police Service to allow for the creation of the new Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
The intention behind the creation of the new organised crime fighting unit is to ensure that we deal effectively with such crime, using the best investigators and crime fighters that are available in the various units.
The Khampepe Commission, dealing with organised crime in its report, made the following observation:
Despite indications that crime levels are dropping, it is my considered view that organised crime still presents a threat that needs to be addressed through a comprehensive strategy.
At the relevant point in time, the body of the information and evidence strongly suggested a need by the government to have in place a coherent, effective strategy in the fight against organised crime. Foreign jurisdictions that I visited in the course of the commission’s work also indicate a global trend towards creating instruments of a specialised nature in addressing and combating or mitigating the effects of organised crime.
Justice Khampepe also reported that a new agency would be established in the United Kingdom called the Serious Organised Crime Agency, which would bring together the National Crime Squad, the National Criminal Intelligence Service, the Home Office’s organised immigration crime sectors and the investigation and intelligence responsibilities of Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise, whose core objective would be “to reduce the harm caused to the United Kingdom by organised crime, including the trafficking of drugs and people”.
The sentiment expressed by the Khampepe Commission is embraced in what we are doing. In our view, though, it is better to relocate the special investigators of the DSO to the police for better and effective command and control.
The Bills before this House are the vehicles we need to strengthen and consolidate the fight against organised crime. We require support as we pilot them through Parliament.
I want to reiterate, of course, the fact that those who will be transferred to the SAPS from the DSO are not going to lose any of the benefits they have.
The South African Police Service Amendment Bill also talks to the matter of investigations that are ongoing and/or before the court that the DSO is handling. Those matters will not be affected by the relocation. They will continue until finalisation in keeping with our law.
I move, therefore, hon Chairperson, that the Bills be read for the first time. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr L K JOUBERT: Chairperson, I have a press release here that was issued on 1 September 1999. It says: “Welcome the Scorpions! The sting is going to get you.” Then it goes on to say: “The new pride of South Africa has arrived.” It did, indeed, become the pride of South Africa and everybody knows how successful they were in fighting crime. Now we want to dismantle it.
We all know that this Bill is the result of a resolution taken at Polokwane last year, but in his inaugural speech at Polokwane, the new president of the ANC identified crime as a counter-revolutionary force and a threat to economic growth and social stability. Maybe the delegates did not listen to him, because shortly afterwards the resolution calling for the dissolution of the Scorpions was adopted.
There is a serious contradiction here. How can one recognise crime as a threat and at the same time kill the only successful crime fighting unit we have? Let us look at the resolution adopted at Polokwane. The relevant part reads:
… the constitutional imperative that there should be a single police service should be implemented. The Directorate of Special Operations should therefore be dissolved.
It seems that nobody at Polokwane, or thereafter, had read the Khampepe Report or our Constitutional Court judgement. Judge Khampepe clearly stated in her report that the establishment of the Scorpions was not in contravention of the Constitution. While the Constitution states that there should be only one defence force and one police service, it does not prohibit the establishment of a complementary or supplementary law enforcement agency, as was also made clear by the Constitutional Court in a judgement of 2002. In other words, the whole premise on which the decision was taken to dissolve the Scorpions was a false one, but we know the real reason, and so does everybody out there. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART: Chairperson, the issue of the future of the Scorpions is about crime and accountability. It is about crime inasmuch as it has to do with the right of all South Africans to go about their lives in the secure knowledge that the law enforcement agencies will take reasonable measures to protect them from the scourge of crime. It is about accountability inasmuch as it has to do with the fiduciary obligation of this state to act in the best interests of all its citizens.
The ACDP believes that the government has breached this obligation by reversing its decision on the Khampepe Commission’s report to further the narrow interests of the ruling party. By doing so, we believe, the government has sacrificed the wellbeing of all South Africans on the altar of political expediency. The executive and Parliament have constitutional constraints.
The hon Motlanthe referred to the rule of law earlier today; the rule of law is a foundational value of the Constitution. All law that is inconsistent with the principle of legality is liable to be set aside. It is a component of the principle of legality that government conduct must not be arbitrary. In other words, all government conduct must be rationally connected to a legitimate government purpose, failing which it will be arbitrary, and hence, unconstitutional and liable to be struck down.
It was common cause amongst all the parties in the Glenister application, including the government, that the Scorpions had been extremely successful in the fight against crime. Indeed, I don’t think anyone can dispute that fact. The ANC’s decision to disband the Scorpions was not motivated by the fact that the Scorpions have been unsuccessful, but was rather motivated by the fact that the Scorpions have been too successful, particularly in their investigations of high-profile ANC members.
I wish to repeat my appeal to members of the ruling party. Let’s talk about the issue of relocating the Scorpions. Let’s consider real concerns, such as: Does the SAPS have the capacity to accommodate the Scorpions? By what stretch of the imagination would the SAPS be able to retain and attract accountants and lawyers required for this unit? And how can the principle of constant prosecutorial oversight in investigations, which is the cornerstone of the Scorpions and its success, be maintained if the Scorpions are incorporated into the SAPS?
The Khampepe Report stated categorically in its conclusion that it is conceivable that the legislature will see fit to repeal the provisions of the NPA Act that relate to the activities and location of the DSO. We appear to be embarking on this inconceivable path. I thank you.
Ms M M SOTYU: Chairperson, organised crime is a challenge that affects South Africa at all levels. It creates fear in the community and contributes to economic instability. One can therefore not deny that it is the state’s responsibility to put in place and further strengthen measures to protect South Africa and its citizens from the effects of organised crime.
The 8 January Statement of the ANC says, and I quote:
We cannot allow criminality and lawlessness to undermine our hard-won freedoms and hinder the progress of our nation. We must act now and we must act together.
During his state of the nation address in 2008, President Thabo Mbeki indicated the need for government to overhaul the criminal justice system, in order to improve its effectiveness in dealing with crime in general and organised crime in particular, as highlighted by the Minister of Safety and Security.
These statements were preceded by the Khampepe Commission that found, amongst other things, that organised crime still continued to present a threat to the country’s young democracy, and that a comprehensive strategy to address that problem had to be found. The commission further suggested a need for government to have in place a coherent, effective strategy in the fight against organised crime.
In line with the recommendation by the Khampepe Commission, the President’s state of the nation address and the ANC’s 8 January Statement, this Bill aims to establish the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation that would fight corruption and organised crime comprehensively.
This Bill provides an opportunity for the South African community to interact with Parliament on serious issues of crime. The committees responsible for this Bill will call for public hearings soon. We intend to reach out to communities throughout the country and we will conduct public hearings, not only in Cape Town and Parliament, but also in the provinces in order to ensure the broadest possible opportunity for citizens to participate.
Ayikho into yokuba singathi singurhulumente okhokelwa yi-ANC, sihlale apha ePalamente silinde oongxowa-nkulu ukuba ibe ngabo abezayo ukuza kumamela okanye bazise izimvo zabo. Siza kuhamba siye eluntwini sifumane izimvo zalo kumaphondo onke. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[There is no way that, as the ANC-led government, we can sit around in this Parliament and wait for big business to come and listen to our debates or to make submissions. We are going to conduct public hearings in all provinces so that we can interact with people and hear their views.]
We urge all communities to make use of this opportunity. Come to these hearings and inform us about your views on the Bill. We further request that in our interaction with this Bill, we aim as a nation to find solutions and not merely be citizens without alternative suggestions. Let your voice be heard.
Yizani nize kuthetha, bantu bakuthi. Siza kuphuma siyiPalamente siye kuva izimvo zabantu. [Come and make submissions, countrymen. As Parliament, we will go out and conduct public hearings so that we can hear the views of our people.]
Crime is our common enemy. It affects our lives even if we are not directly the victims in a crime committed. It strangles development and progress, and it is the working class and the poor who are the main victims of crime. As the ANC, we are committed to fighting crime and corruption effectively in order to achieve the goals of our revolution: a free, just, safe and equal South Africa belonging to all of us and its citizens. I thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Thank you, hon member. The hon L T Landers.
Mr J B SIBANYONI: Chairperson, I am J B Sibanyoni. I pressed the button at Mr Landers’s seat by mistake because I wanted to move closer to the microphone.
Ngithanda ukwethula ikulumo le ngelimi lesikhethu, khona kuzakuzwa nabantu abadinywa amathuba wokufunda ngesikhathi esigadungileko. Ikulumo le iqalene nemiThethomlingwa emibili, yona ngile: Yi-National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Bill ne-South African Police Service Amendment Bill.
Umnqopho omkhulu womthetho lo kutjhidisa, namkha - to relocate - ngesikhuwa, aboFezela basuke hlangana nabatjhutjhisi bayokufakwa esipholiseni, ekhabo lakhona. Abatjhutjhisi bangaphasi komNyango wezoBulungiswa nokuThuthukiswa komThethosisekelo ngombana basebenza ngamakhotho. AboFezela bamapholisa, basebenza ukwenza irhubhululo begodu banjalo nje bayabopha, lowo msebenzi wesipholisa. Idokhethi bayinikela umtjhutjhisi bese kuzakuba nguye othatha isiqunto sokubana uyatjhutjhisa namkha awa.
Amapholisa angaphasi kwakaKomitjhinara wesipholisa, naboFezela kufanele babesekhabo, ngaphasi kwesipholisa. Kufanele baye ngamakoro ngamakoro, ekhabo lakhona. Indaba le yindala. Siyihlangano ye-ANC sayikhuluma eMafikeng begodu sayikhuluma ne-Stellenbosch, esiFundeni seTjhingalanga Kapa. UKhampepe, iJaji elihloniphekileko, naye khewayiqala indaba le ngombana wabekelwa umsebenzi wokubanyana ayiqale. Isiqunto se-ANC sathi isipholisa kufanele sibe sinye ngenarhenapha. Njenganje kunemihlobo emibili yesipholisa: BoFezela nesipholisa esijayekileko. IKomitjhini kaKhampepe yathi kufanele kube namano aqakathekileko, comprehensive strategies, wokuthatha amagadango wokulwisana nobulelesi ephasinapha.
Alo-ke indaba yaboFezela ayikathomi ePolokwane, eLimpopo, ngeyakade. Kuyindaba endala kwamambala, sele ingaphezulu kweminyaka elisumi seloko iphophothwa.
Siyisibethamthetho, sitjhugulula ihlelo lobulungiswa, i-criminal justice system, siyihlalisa kuhle. Sakha i-Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation, i-DPCI. Igameli umphakathi uzabe ulijwayele njengegama lama- Scorpions. Abasebenza ku-Directorate of Special Operations, ama-Scorpions ngelinye ibizo, angeze balahlekelwa msebenzi wabo, bazokuthathwa basiwe ku- DPCI ngemva kokutjhejwa, into okutjhiwa yi-vetting ngesikhuwa namkha ukuhlengwa. NeKomitjhini kaKhampempe yakhe yalikhuluma igameli lokuhlenga. Imirholo yabo angeze yehla, imilandu ebayiphetheko angeze yaphela, izokuragela phambili begodu umuntu ofuna ukuthokoza umsebenzi uzazithokozela yena ngokwakhe. Njengehlangano ye-ANC … (Translation of isiNdebele paragraphs follows.)
[I would like to deliver this speech in my home language, so that those who were deprived of educational opportunities during the apartheid era will be able to understand. This speech focuses on two Bills, which are the National Prosecuting Authority Amendment Bill and the South African Police Service Amendment Bill.
The purpose of this Bill is to relocate the Scorpions from the National Prosecuting Authority to the South African Police Service where they belong. Prosecutors are under the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development because they deal with issues of the courts. Scorpions are police officers. They deal with investigations and arrests; that is their job. The docket is handed over to the prosecutor who decides whether or not to prosecute.
The Police Service falls under the South African Police Service Commissioner and the Scorpions deserve to be there, under the Police Service. Actually, they are supposed to be placed where they belong. This matter has been in discussion for quite some time. As the ANC we discussed this matter at Mafikeng and Stellenbosch in the Western Cape. Justice Khampepe also looked at this matter extensively because she was tasked to look at it.
The decision of the ANC was that the Police Service in this country should be one. Now there are two types of police service: the Scorpions and the normal police. The Khampempe Commission said: There should be a very comprehensive strategy to fight crime in this country.
So the matter of the Scorpions did not start in Polokwane, Limpopo. This issue has been under discussion for quite some time. It is an old matter; it has been under discussion for more than 10 years.
We are a legislature, we restructure the criminal justice system, and we are putting it in its place. We have created the Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation, DPCI. The community will get used to this name like they did with the Scorpions. Those who work at the Directorate of Special Operations, the Scorpions, will not lose their jobs; they will be deployed within the DPCI after vetting. Even the Khampepe Commission mentioned vetting. Their salaries will not be reduced, and the cases they are working on will not be taken from them. They will continue with those cases and the persons who want to resign will do so of their own accord. The ANC is an organisation …]
… which lives and leads. We’ll also lead the fight against organised crime. [Time expired.]
Mr Y I CARRIM: Chairperson, comrades and friends, who more than the ANC stands to lose out if crime, including organised crime and corruption, persists? After all, it is our constituency, largely the working class, the poor and the marginalised, who are the main victims of crime. Moreover, it is the ANC that is leading a major national democratic revolutionary project, which requires safety and security as a key principle to be ensured. Otherwise, how can you transform society as a whole?
On the other hand, precisely by addressing issues of organised crime and corruption, we are able to advance and deepen the democratic transformation to which we have been committed over centuries. In fact, this year the ANC declared as its slogan, “the year of mass mobilisation for a caring society”.
When we talk about a caring society what are we talking about if not safety and security for all our people, which no doubt means that we must address crime and corruption in general, but particularly organised crime. Again, who are the main beneficiaries of organised crime if not the elite, and who are its main victims if not the poor?
We want to stress, though, that we in the Portfolio Committee on Justice are very clear that we cannot look at the issue of the Directorate of Special Operations and its future without looking at the overhaul of the criminal justice system, which Cabinet has been working on together with Business Against Crime. Up until now, the public has not had a say on the working progress of the government.
We were very pleased to hear yesterday that, indeed, the Ministries of Justice and Safety and Security are, by Monday morning, to present an overview, at least, of the new integrated criminal justice system that they have been working on, for public comment. So, we are especially happy that we are not just going to have public hearings on the two Bills that we are speaking about, but indeed also on the basic and broad principles, as well as an overview, of the new integrated criminal justice system.
In short, yes, we must look at the future of the Scorpions but no, we should not look purely at the Scorpions, at the DSO, we should look at it as part of the overall system, and it’s, indeed, that to which the public hearings will be directed.
May I also point out that people can whinge and whine, but the final issue is, people must come to the public hearings to express their point of view. If they are opposed to the disbanding of the Scorpions, fine, this is their Parliament. They must come and express that, but as committees for safety and security and justice, we are committed to saying, fine.
What would you do as a member of the public if you were to incorporate the Scorpions into the SA Police Service to ensure that it happens in a way that advances and does not undermine the fight against organised crime and corruption? Let’s use this as an opportunity not just to organise ourselves better, both state and civil society, to deal with organised crime and corruption, but to do it as part of a desperately needed, as we all agree, new criminal justice system. So, here is an opportunity. We want to have, as my colleague Comrade Maggie Sotyu has said, massive public hearings. Not just here in Cape Town, where the elite can gather, but throughout the length and breadth of our country. Let’s use this and talk about organised crime and corruption, but also as part of the struggle against crime and corruption in general, which is, ultimately, what concerns the average person on … [Time expired.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, crime in South Africa has been one of our greatest challenges, second to poverty. They say that when a country becomes democratic it may either end up in rebellion or sinking into serious crime; and we are experiencing serious crime. It is not to say that crime was not rife during the apartheid regime, but we just had less of it and much of it was allowed.
We are pleased about the efforts to smoke out organised crime and the focus it is being given. We respect the challenges the Directorate of Special Operations had to face and the reasons for amending these Bills and incorporating the DSO into the SA Police Service.
The major concern, however, is that the SAPS is seized with own challenges of corrupt officials and the possibility of the specialised unit being prevented from exercising lengthy investigations. This may be a threat.
However, we are certain that, given time, this may actually turn around the situation of the SAPS and actually deliver on seriously addressing the crime challenges and restructuring the SAPS with specialised and trained members of the force.
If working together can curb and reduce crime, then the MF is pleased by the amending Bill with its provisions and amendments. Thank you.
Mr L W GREYLING: Chair, these two Bills are aimed solely at destroying the Directorate of Special Operations and establishing a new unit under the control of the South African Police Service.
The ID is strongly opposed to these Bills as they will serve to weaken our country’s crime fighting abilities, which are already under enormous strain. The ID maintains that the continued existence of the Scorpions in its current form, with prosecutorial powers, is an essential component in the fight against crime – a position that has been reinforced by the Khampepe Commission report.
When the Scorpions were first established 10 years ago, it was greeted with widespread approval from all sectors of our society and was seen as a measure of reviving public confidence in the country’s crime-combating agents. The ID maintains that all of the initial reasons behind the setting up of the Scorpions still exist today. It is clear that the specialised work that the Scorpions undertake cannot simply be done by the existing structures of the SAPS and a vacuum will once again arise if they are simply disbanded.
The question can rightfully be asked as to who would have investigated the Police Commissioner, Jackie Selebi, if the Scorpions did not exist or if they were under the police? The public can justifiably feel suspicious that this latest move to incorporate the Scorpions is due to their success in investigating and prosecuting, amongst others, high-level ANC members.
It is of great concern to the ID that all the different organs of our security apparatus have been used in some way or another to fight political battles for factions of the ANC. If government is serious about fighting crime, it is imperative that politics should be removed from the equation and that all sections of the security apparatus should be allowed to pursue criminal elements in our society, no matter what office they hold, without fear or favour.
The ID will, therefore, closely monitor the passage of these Bills and ensure that full public participation takes place, so that the views of the public can be heard on this issue. We will not allow the ANC to simply ride roughshod over the constitutional rights of the South African people, while crime and corruption continue to plague our country. I thank you.
Mr H J BEKKER: Chairperson, let us call a spade a spade. The aim of this legislation is to kill the Scorpions. Therefore, the choice before us today is a simple one: Do we accept a recommendation by a High Court Commission or do we accept the dubious and sinister Polokwane political intervention? That lies at the heart of this matter - a choice between the High Court and political manipulation.
We in the IFP have faith and confidence in Judge Sisi Khampepe. We do not have confidence in the manner in which the ANC is manipulating this controversial matter. One can, of course, ask what lies at the heart of this killing of the Scorpions and there is clearly but one answer: the Scorpions have wandered into unwelcome territory. They have exercised their right of independence to investigate anyone, irrespective of position. That was their sin. For that they are to be assassinated. The ANC itself is clearly scarred by recent events: Pikoli, Selebi, and now the Scorpions.
After Polokwane the ANC could no longer be the same. The ANC cannot expect of us to support this proposal. We cannot rescue you from yourself. I thank you.
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, the hon Minister just said that the decision was actually taken to better the position of the Scorpions. Hon Minister, with great respect, in what way are the Scorpions going to be better? You know very well, hon Minister, that this is a political decision and not a decision based on facts or on merit.
Hoekom sê ek dit, Voorsitter? Wat is die kern van die Skerpioene se sukses? Die kern daarvan is dat dit ’n vervolgingsgerigte ondersoeker was. Dit was vervolgingsgerig juis omdat daar ’n samevoeging was van die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag aan die een kant, en die ondersoekers aan die ander kant, om sodoende te verseker dat daar sukses is met, spesifiek, die bekamping van georganiseerde misdaad.
Georganiseerde misdaad is hoogs gesofistikeerd. Dit is mense wat al die middele tot hulle beskikking het, wat die geld het om van die beste tegnologie gebruik te maak, maar nou kom die regering van die dag en hy ontbind ’n suksesvolle eenheid en gaan die kernelement van hulle sukses net eenvoudig uit die stelsel verwyder.
Dis ’n politieke besluit en ek wil sê… (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Why do I say that, Chairperson? What is the essence of the Scorpions’ success? The essence of it is that it was an investigator aiming to prosecute. It was directed at prosecution precisely because there was a union of the National Prosecuting Authority on the one hand, and the investigators on the other hand, in order to ensure that there was success, specifically, in combating organised crime.
Organised crime is highly sophisticated. They are people with all the means at their disposal, who have the money to make use of the best technology, but now the government of the day comes along and disbands a successful unit and will simply remove the core element of their success from the system.
This is a political decision and I want to say …]
… hon Minister, a couple of political decisions have been taken by you, as the Minister of Safety and Security, and they have all been mistakes. This one is going to be your biggest mistake. I warn you on this. Thank you.
Dr S E M PHEKO: Chairperson, because of the limited time that I have, I simply want to say that we should be careful as a nation not to destroy institutions of state, particularly with reference to those of national security. The institutions must be reviewed and adjusted where necessary. Under no circumstances should our institutions be interfered with for the sake of parochial objectives.
Our institutions must serve the broader public interests. Much has been said about the Scorpions. Rightly or wrongly, the subject has reached fever pitch emotionally. There are those who have argued that the purpose of this Bill is to protect certain leaders from being charged for criminal offences such as corruption. Indeed, if this were to be the case, it would be despicable.
This past year, we saw the SA Police Service arresting members of the Directorate of Special Operations, and members of this directorate arresting members of the SAPS. Surely, this warfare between two national security structures compromises the national security of this nation? They are supposed to co-operate with each other, not to indulge in power struggles.
If this Bill transforms the Scorpions into Mambas, it will have served a splendid national purpose, but if it is politically motivated, this will shatter national confidence in the effectiveness and professional integrity of our security forces. State institutions serve, not the interest of governments, but of nations.
True democracy and the rule of law cannot exist without sound, permanent state institutions which do not rise or fall with the ups and downs of national politics.
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: I stand to support that Parliament proceed with processing these two Bills. I think a lot of anxiety will come to pass when serious engagement in Parliament begins around the Bills. I would like to tell of my experience in office, in the context of what my colleague Comrade Charles has just said.
We held our first section-31 Ministers’ Committee meeting in late 2004. Before us was the issue of making the criminal justice system work, in particular, because that committee, in terms of the law, sits to consider matters of policy around the Directorate of Special Operations. The matter before us was the working relationship operationally between the DSO and other Justice, Crime Prevention and Security cluster members, namely, other units.
It was clear that there was operational tension and poor co-ordination. This is the reality and this is what my colleague was referring to - that in considering tactical and strategic approaches to crime fighting, and in the context of the bigger thrust, which was an activity that happened starting in 2005, namely the consideration for review of the criminal justice system, not that the idea had been there all along, but in terms of actual work being done.
It was clear that something had to be done to refocus. In other words, our criminal justice units have to fight organised crimes in a coherent and co- ordinated way. The result was the Khampepe Commission, which made recommendations. By the way, I’m not sure whether it follows all the time that if recommendations are made the President has to, without using his discretion, follow to the letter recommendations that are put before him. However, we must also understand that it happened, simultaneously, when there was a review of the criminal justice system.
I think, colleagues, that I have to repeat this: I want to single out two very important areas because these are pertinent to how our crime-fighting agencies were working, especially in delicate areas like organised crime. What came out was clear, and this was a recommendation adopted by Cabinet, that we should have a single vision and mission leading to the adoption of a single set of objectives, priorities and performance measurement targets for the cluster and for criminal justice as a whole. That’s very important.
We couldn’t, tactically and strategically, not recognise that this was a very good recommendation; that, in fact, we needed to have this kind of coherence within the system for it to function properly. I like the other objective - there are seven of them, but I want to mention this one - modernise in an integrated and holistic manner all aspects of the systems and equipment of the criminal justice system, including the fast-tracking of the implementation of present projects and modernisation initiatives. Surely, you can’t have that kind of thing if you don’t have the kind of co- ordination and coherence that was required, especially at operational level.
And I dare say that, in fact, if we were to say that we don’t have that kind of co-ordination, we’d also be admitting that we are vulnerable as a state. The move to revive and strengthen and upscale - not downscale - our capacity to fight crime is one that compelled us to amend the Bills, to have the Bills we are putting before you.
I want to quote what the President said, and this is what President Mbeki said on 8 February …
Mr P J GROENEWALD: This year?
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Yes. I quote:
Informed by the imperative to intensify the offensive against organised crime as well as the recommendations of the Khampepe Judicial Commission on the functioning and location of the Directorate of Special Operations and continuing reflections on this matter, including the reform of the criminal justice system, we shall, by the end of March, interact with Parliament on legislation and other decisive measures required further to enhance our capacity to fight organised crime.
And this is what we’ve brought before Parliament. We are late; it’s not March, but this is what we are putting before you.
Let us have a festival of ideas around how we effectively fight crime. Let’s hear the ID, the PAC, the DA. Let’s have it here, let’s have it in our areas where there will be hearings.
Mr P J GROENEWALD: Will you listen to it?
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: No, I am saying …
Mr M WATERS: [Inaudible.]
The MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: I am saying ours – and that’s the focus – is to fight organised crime and corruption.
This is an objective of our party and we have been seized with this matter from Mandela’s Presidency to the one we have today and as the ANC - if the ANC comes in, as it should - in the next administration, we will focus on fighting crime.
We do need, though, to remove uncertainties and this is the commitment I want to make. I’m saying we will do what is required by the practice of good governance as we transfer the detectives into the new elite crime fighting unit. It will have adequate resources; it will have the best personnel; it will have capacities that it ought to have in order to fight crime. If need be, the best will be drawn from the best that we have in the area of crime fighting. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
AFRICAN PEER REVIEW MECHANISM REPORT (COUNTRY REVIEW REPORT NO 5)
(Debate)
The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Chairperson, hon members, in July last year, South Africa became the fifth country on the continent to be reviewed by the African Peer Review Forum of Heads of State and Government. This was an achievement for us as a country and particularly a boost for the values of good governance.
Under the leadership of President Thabo Mbeki South Africa has long championed the peer review process. As a matter of fact, South Africa was one of the five founding countries that actually germinated the idea and hence, our full participation in the country review bodes well, and also bodes well for the promotion and maintenance of democracy and socioeconomic development in our country.
In the words of Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, the chairperson of the African Peer Review Forum: The African Peer Review Mechanism, APRM, is a bold and unique African- owned initiative designed to ensure that the policies and practices of participating countries conform to the agreed political, economic, and corporate governance values, codes, and standards contained in the Nepad declaration on democracy, political, economic, and corporate governance.
It aims to set in motion a strategic reorientation towards the validation of universal, as well as African, values of governance and to accelerate the process of national growth and development of intra-African co- operation and integration. The APRM is becoming a prime mover of the African Renaissance, and the centrepiece of the Nepad process for the socioeconomic development of Africa.
He went on to say:
As an instrument for peer learning and experience sharing, the APRM should not be construed as a scorecard of a pass-or-fail nature, or as a new conditionality for donor assistance. It should rather be viewed as an instrument for improving governance and building consensus amongst all stakeholders for development within a state, while sharing best practice and problem-solving techniques across states.
We know that there is a panel of eminent persons appointed by the APRM Secretariat that oversees its implementation throughout Africa. We know that the process has a number of stages, and I am not going to go into them or spell them out today.
South Africa’s process officially began in September 2005 when President Mbeki officially launched the African Peer Review Mechanism in South Africa at the first national conference in Midrand and we embarked on an exciting journey of inclusive participation and sober introspection in developing our Country Self-Assessment Report. A National Governing Council was established, comprising of government and civil society representatives. Provincial governing councils were also established.
This House, and Parliament as a whole, played a significant role in the popular participation process. I am sure this may be further referred to during the course of this debate. I would like to take this opportunity to thank hon members of this House for their participation, which added considerable value to our Country Self-Assessment Report.
We had a validation process of our Country Self-Assessment, which took place at the second national conference held in Kliptown on 4 and 5 May
- After the conference, the draft Country Self-Assessment Report was revised, based on the inputs received at that conference. We also conducted workshops in all nine provinces and the revised Country Self-Assessment Report and preliminary programme of action were also placed before Cabinet. The National Governing Council gave unanimous approval to the report.
Following the submission of the Country Self-Assessment Report, we were honoured to host the Country Review Mission, headed by Prof Adebayo Adedeji, during the second half of 2006. He travelled across our country, interviewed stakeholders ranging from parliamentarians to members of political parties, rural villagers and so on. The purpose of the visits was for the Country Review Mission to see and hear for themselves, to solicit different and differing views from the people of South Africa.
They made their draft country review available to me as a focal point at the end of 2006 and, as required in the base document, government was given an opportunity to respond to the report. There were numerous engagements between us and the Country Review Team in the first half of 2007 and many of the issues and concerns we raised were addressed by the team. In May we submitted our final response, which can be found in appendix 2 of the Country Review Report document.
The issues South Africa raised in response to the panel were not simply editorial. They were methodological issues around the use of data and causality. In addition, there appeared to have been an underestimation of the overriding legacy left by three and a half centuries of colonialism, racism, oppression, and apartheid. Of equal concern was the apparent underestimation of the full extent to which the developmental state in South Africa had in fact moved swiftly and decisively to improve the quality of life of the majority of citizens in a relatively short period of 12 years. We would not argue that we fully achieved a developmental state, but we are moving in that direction.
On 1 July 2007 in Accra, Ghana, President Thabo Mbeki welcomed the African Peer Review Panel’s Country Review Report on South Africa and presented South Africa’s response to the Report in the true spirit of peer review.
He commended members of the African Peer Review panel for their hard work and dedication to the process. The report on South Africa was viewed as a positive report that acknowledges the huge strides made by South Africa in transforming the country into a vibrant democracy with one of the most progressive constitutions in the world.
Furthermore, in his foreword to the report Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, chairperson the APRM, commented:
The transformation that South Africa has undergone since its democratic transition in 1994 is nothing short of a miracle. The democratically elected governments, led by the African National Congress, have managed to create a stable and peaceful political regime with an exemplary record of civil liberties and political freedoms.
The report identified the following strengths which characterise South Africa: We have, as I stated earlier, one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, which guarantees both civil and socioeconomic rights; the existence of a political environment conducive to political debate, dialogue, and contestation; significant progress made in signing, ratifying, and implementing international standards and codes; first world economic and physical infrastructure; the largest and most sophisticated economy in Africa; sound, transparent, and predictable economic policies; a strong public financial management system; well-positioned technology to be able to compete in the global market; ranking amongst the best performers in corporate governance in emerging markets; a robust legal system that ensures lawful protection of property rights and intellectual property rights; an adequate regulatory framework for economic activity in the country supported by a wide variety of regulatory institutions; a good framework for the protection of human rights and labour rights; the existence of credible institutions such as the public investment corporation; and the industrial development corporation as well as a number of well-known multinational institutions and world class universities; self- sufficiency in development financing; and strong representation of women in the public sector.
Chairperson, hon members, both the country report and South Africa’s Self- Assessment Report point to the need for us to continually engage with issues around forms of democracy and accountability of elected officials in order to maintain the momentum of postapartheid reconstruction, development, and economic growth. Confronting these challenges requires attention and national effort, not only by government, but by society as a whole. The solutions do not lie exclusively in report writing and problem identification. Effective partnership to speedily improve the material and social conditions of all South Africans and to improve social cohesion and inclusion are critical.
The country report commended South Africa for its flexible and innovative implementation of the APRM. Innovations included the shortening of the questionnaire and its translation into all languages; inviting research institutions to participate as partners; the validation process of the second national conference; involvement of civil society through the South African Economic and Social Council, Ecosoc; the establishment of provincial governing councils; the role of the community development workers in enhancing popular participation in the APRM process and the use of outside broadcasts; the APRM song that was composed by Babsy Mlangeni; and blitzes at taxi ranks and on major street corners to popularise the APRM process.
A further innovative approach utilised by South Africa was the deployment of a gender, disability, children, and youth sensitive lens in undertaking the country review. The APRM review member states strongly endorse the process we undertook as a country in completing the Country Self-Assessment Report and agreed that the South African process was inclusive, participatory, and innovative.
The report identified 18 South African best practices worthy of emulation. I don’t have time to touch on all of them now, but I will mention two. They include co-operative governance, popular participatory governance practices and Batho Pele, amongst others.
They also identified 11 crosscutting issues that we must focus on as a country going forward: unemployment, capacity constraints and pockets of poor service delivery, poverty and inequality, land reform, violence against women, violence against children, HIV and Aids, corruption, crime, racism and xenophobia, and the management of diversity.
Deputy President of the ANC, it is against this kind of background that you raised this question; that is precisely the kind of approach we should use as we confront, and deal with, this challenge that is there.
The report further argues that South Africa needs to transform its economic base and the structure of society to maximise its strengths and that it should take the necessary corrective measures to remove or ameliorate its weaknesses. This will create an environment in which the majority of the people will participate fully in development and benefit correspondingly and equitably from the dividends of development. The report urges all stakeholders to work together in implementing the recommendations of the National Programme of Action, arguing that in this way we will truly emerge as a rainbow nation.
As the National Governing Council, we have embraced the report and its recommendations. South Africa profoundly supports the APRM and is absolutely committed to its sustained success in order to promote good governance, democracy, accountability, and transparency. For us, the spirit of peer review is one of frank debate and dialogue in order to strengthen both governance within a country and the APRM.
I think I could state, at this point, that subsequent to our review in July last year, we were given the opportunity to share with other member countries the lessons that we had learnt during the implementation of the African Peer Review process, including some of the aspects of the process that must be reconsidered and strengthened. Our positive lessons included the importance of having a representative and engaged National Governing Council to simplify and revise the questionnaires I have mentioned earlier and taking great care with its application, and of course, securing agreement on the research methodology, including the relative weights of qualitative and quantitative research.
Hon members, I would like to say that there is a need for every member - not only of the National Assembly and National Council of Provinces, but all the legislatures across the country, for all of us – to read the Country Review Report and to study it. I thank you, Chairperson.
Mr M R BALOYI: Mutshami wa Xitulu, Deputy President ya ANC, Yindlu leyo hlawuleka. I nhlekani. [Chairperson, Deputy President of the ANC, this august House, good afternoon.]
Our participation in the African Peer Review Mechanism is a voluntary move for us to open ourselves to scrutiny by our peers who are fellow member states of the African Union. We entered into that voluntary engagement with due consideration that what is at the centre of co-operative sovereign states is mutual respect, accompanied by a desire to complement one another through experience-sharing, regional co-operation and offering constructive criticism and advice, all for regional peace, stability and development.
We know that the only way to achieve this peacefully is to avoid the temptation to be fooled by the notion of adopting a stance that will see us flex our muscles and revere our strength against our neighbours and fellow African states, as if to position ourselves as a messenger of those who would want to use us in a disguised and false sense of being a special superpower in Africa.
The country review report that we are debating today is a product of a process of self-assessment that we, as the citizens of this country, embarked upon to mirror ourselves against the objectives set out in terms of the memorandum of understanding guiding the voluntary instrument called the African Peer Review Mechanism.
The report reflects the views of the people of this country on democracy and political governance, economic governance and management, corporate governance as well as socioeconomic development.
As the ANC, we accept this report and say that the people have spoken. We urge all the people of this country to accept this report, appreciating that this is the first time that our country has participated in a public process of self-evaluation, and that there is room for improvement.
We also commend the role that various institutions have played in making the assessment process a success. This includes the facilitation role played by Parliament and our provincial legislatures, broader civil society and the supportive stance of our democratic government. Importantly, we commend, and we want to thank, Minister Fraser-Moleketi for her role.
We give an unqualified commitment to ensuring to the full implementation of the programme of action identified in the report. Participating on the occasion of the consideration of this report of the APRM gives us an opportunity to debate some of the issues raised in the report. I want to reflect on issues of democracy and political governance.
One of the major key fundamental achievements in a democratic South Africa is the Constitution that we have developed for ourselves, at a pace we set for ourselves, and informed by the real factors that define who we are as South Africans.
As people reflected on the report that we are debating today and commented on the home-made Constitution of South Africa, they said the following, and I quote:
The South African Constitution is more of a contract among parties who in the past had little trust in one another, rather than a covenant born from shared experience. This negotiated contract literally becomes a sole document that binds multiple and diverse communities together and is the basis for the legitimacy of their quest to evolve as a nation. Therefore, the South African Constitution is not only the most important document in the construction of the state, but the most crucial instrument in forging a nation.
The Constitution defines and provides the basis for our democracy and how that democracy finds expression as we relate to one another as citizens, further also to sharpen our interactions with the entire continent of Africa and the world. This Constitution confirms the position of the Freedom Charter, that, “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white”.
This Constitution that the APRM report acknowledges as placing a responsibility on all South Africans to celebrate, cements the view that the leadership of the ANC has been expressing from generation to generation and continues to express today, that the freedom of South Africa is the freedom of all the people in South Africa, in Africa and in the world.
To cite a few examples, when urging the United Nations to take action to destroy apartheid, O R Tambo said in a statement at the meeting of the special political committee of the United Nations’ General Assembly on 29 October 1963, that, “South Africa’s freedom is freedom for all”. He further referred to statements made by other South African leaders. To this end, he quoted Chief Albert Luthuli as saying, and I quote:
The main issue is that the government and the people should be democratic to the core. It is relatively unimportant who is in the government. I am not opposed to the present government because it is white. I am opposed to it because it is undemocratic and repressive. My idea is a nonracial government chosen on the basis of merit, rather than colour. Appeals to racialism at elections should be a legal offence in law.
O R Tambo also quoted Nelson Mandela, who said at his trial, and I quote:
I am no racialist and I detest racialism because I regard it as a barbaric thing, whether it comes from black man or white man.
He also quoted Walter Sisulu, who was amongst those facing trial at the time, when he said the following, and I quote:
The fundamental principle in our struggle is equal rights for all in our country and that all people who have made South Africa their home, by birth or adoption, irrespective of colour or creed, are entitled to these rights.
Today, the words of these great heroes of our liberation struggle find practical expression and meaning from the articulations of the people of South Africa, who participated in the African Peer Review Mechanism.
Through the APRM, we are sharing with African Union member states as to how to develop and seek to sustain the democracy project. The people proclaimed that South Africa is a democratic country characterised by respect for human rights, the rule of law, the separation of powers as well as an effective and responsive public service, all entrenched to ensure sustainable development and a peaceful and stable society.
A democratic country is also one where there are consistent, peaceful, free and fair elections. Since 1994, our country has witnessed free and fair elections, even with our very first elections in 1994.
We have an Independent Electoral Commission that runs elections from time to time, according to the programme of elections in the local, provincial and national spheres of our government. It is on record that since then, we have a clean record.
The independent Municipal Demarcation Board complements the work of the IEC. We have already had three local government elections declared free and fair, and three provincial and national elections declared free and fair. We are preparing for the fourth provincial and national elections to be held next year, and we are confident that they will be free and fair. We want to say that it is our responsibility - all of us present here and outside - to contribute towards that at all times during elections. We always open ourselves to international observer missions and it is only out of choice that some will decide not to come as, to some of them, sending an observer mission would only seek to confirm how well we run our elections. They do not see it as a priority.
A case in point in this regard is that the European Union, the Commonwealth and the United Nations did not send observers for the 2004 provincial and national elections. They said that they were confident that South Africa’s ability to run free and fair elections is unquestionable. This is according to the IEC report on the 2000 elections accordingly submitted to this Parliament. I believe that members of this House made an effort to read that report.
It is important to note that political parties participate freely in the election process, even those parties that only exist during elections, such as the “so-called” Pro-Death Penalty Party that contested elections in Gauteng in 2004, and many others that keep on falling as they attempt to rise during elections.
This is democracy at its best, and it can only be to the shame of those advocates of doom and gloom whose agenda it is to project our elections as badly run, simply to introduce such foreign, wrong and dangerous assumptions that there is some foul play in our electoral processes. They are bad losers, enemies of democracy and messengers of disorder.
A simple trace of their history will tell you that they are actually sharing their own experience of what they are capable of doing; not the ANC; not our government; and not our country. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr W J SEREMANE: Chairperson, hon Speaker and hon members, it can never be enough to tackle the critical challenges facing us in South Africa post-
- Therefore, let me not get into the web of self-justification through the smokescreen of statistics and archaic rhetoric. Let’s cut to the chase; and cut the frills out. There are issues that face us directly.
Last year, the government committed itself to addressing racism, xenophobia and managing diversity better in the African Peer Review Mechanism in country report no 5, which I also dwelt on, Minister. I am sure that you also saw how important it is. Since the birth of our fragile democracy, there has been some progress in tackling racism, but the disgusting behaviour of the Reitz students shows that we still have a long way to travel. Indeed, the APRM is a sound vision and principle; nobody is against it, but it is time to tackle the problems that face us, depending on the outcome.
We need to do a little introspection, which is sometimes unpalatable. The outbreak of the xenophobic attacks that have ravaged the country in the past month indicates that we have not done enough as a society to deal with the discrimination and bad treatment of foreign nationals, for lack of a better term.
While, during apartheid, state-sponsored violence divided the country along racial lines, in the last few weeks, we have seen South Africans take the lives of our brothers and sisters from all over the continent. Is that the perfect imprint of apartheid–racism that has been left on our minds and psyche? If so, then we are still a defeated people, slaves in fur-lined iron shackles for as long as we indulge in such things.
These unjustified acts that have also claimed the lives of innocent South Africans are a shame and blot on the country‘s nation-building initiatives. Any claim that we are truly a rainbow nation has been seriously challenged by the violence against the foreign nationals in question, because who is really a foreigner? Does being a foreigner make one less human? That is the question. If I don’t belong to the clan, am I less human? If I don’t belong to the party, am I less human? If I don’t belong within the boundaries, am I less human? That is the big question. And the APRM seems to be searching for these answers.
The hostile treatment of foreign nationals in the country reflects the inadequacy of government interventions to raise awareness about the importance of tolerance. Xenophobia has been taking place for some time but it was never dealt with, despite various warnings that it was a ticking time bomb. For many years, foreign nationals have been treated badly in public hospitals, Home Affairs offices and other institutions in our society.
A classic illustration of this is evident at the Lindela Repatriation Centre, which has a reputation for human rights violations against foreign nationals. A UN working group that visited the centre in 2005 found that South Africa is contravening international human rights regulations by detaining foreign nationals at the venue. Even today, foreign nationals are still treated unfairly compared to locals. I sometimes wonder whether we listen to Bra Hugh Masekela. It has been over seven years that he has been singing this song … wena MaNgobese musa ukubiza abanye ukuthi ngamakirimane nabo ngabantu. [… you, MaNgobese, stop calling foreign people derogatory names – they are, after all, also human beings.]
It seems as though he is joking, but it is the truth. We can also listen to
his second song related to the APRM findings, Everything must change’’.
Despots must go when it is time to go, and he lists the names. You know the
song -Everything must change’’.
The hatred of foreign nationals has extended to South Africans taking on fellow South Africans along ethnic lines. There have been incidents were Tsonga and Venda people have been subjected to violence because, according to their attackers, the darkness of their complexion makes them less South African.
Ke makwerekwere; ke makwenyaponi; ke matebele; ke magrigamba. [They are referred to as makwerekwere; makwenyaponi; matebele and magrigamba.]
Where are we going to? How deep will we take these lessons from the APRM? [Time expired.] Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr A M MPOTSHANE: Mhlonishwa, Sihlalo … [Hon Chairperson …]… colleagues, I am standing in for my colleague hon Seaton who suddenly took ill.
What follows therefore is an extract from her main speech, which she was going to use in this debate this afternoon. Not being my field of operation, I will therefore avoid going into issues which are debatable like, for instance, the issue of the freeness and fairness of previous elections. I will not go into those matters. Just a warning, hon Minister, there are technical terms in this speech and as it is not my field of operation, my tongue may not be used to some of these technical terms, but I have tried to internalise some of these. The African Peer Review Mechanism is a unique self-assessment tool to ensure that the policies and practices of participating countries conform to the agreed New Partnership on Africa’s Development’s Declaration on Democracy, Political, Economic and Corporate Governance. It can be termed a commonly agreed upon instrument for self-monitoring.
The APRM is open to all countries. From amongst a number of things, I could only remember or extract three of these from her speech. Firstly, it is an undertaking to submit periodic peer reviews; secondly, it is a commitment to implement the National Programme of Action that arises from the peer review; and, thirdly, it is a commitment to improve on governance. South Africa was one of the first states to accede to this process in 2003. Our Parliament formed part of the self-assessment process under the APRM, and we established a joint co-ordinating committee on the APRM to formulate our input.
Government and Parliament both found the APRM process an excellent tool and opportunity for introspection and critical self-assessment. The JCC input is as follows, and I quote:
The self-assessment process of the African Peer Review Mechanism is indeed a useful tool to assist our nation to conduct an honest, analytical reflection on our progress as a developing democracy. Parliament takes this opportunity to applaud the architects of this African initiative.
A very important outcome of the review process was to re-emphasise Parliament’s role of overseeing the executive and in particular the agreed upon programme of action. Our participation in the APRM process threw new light on its own weaknesses and shortcomings as well as underlying strengths. In a certain sense, it focused our minds on Parliament’s core mission and vision in relation to oversight and accountability. This critical self-assessment process pointed out internal and structural weaknesses in oversight and accountability that have since been taken on board to improve our Parliament’s performance.
But, of course, there were also a number of criticisms made by our Parliament of the APRM process. The JCC put it as follows:
The section of the questionnaire on democracy and good political governance required an assessment of Parliament. The Joint Co-ordinating Committee considered it most appropriate that an independent panel conduct such assessment. Unfortunately, due to time constraints and the unavailability of identified panelists at short notice, this assessment was not possible for the purpose of Parliament’s APRM process.
Other limitations that were identified included tight timeframes, compromised public participation and unavailability of stakeholders. Thank you. [Time expired.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, it is expected that the country’s efforts will be strengthened by the African Peer Review Mechanism process and that after the first review, countries will sustain their efforts to achieve the shared objectives identified in the APRM. This will require the updating of programmes of action on a regular basis, based on self-monitoring of progress and lessons learned from sharing with other countries. This, we expect, will be facilitated actively by the APRM.
Several crosscutting issues were identified which have a wider impact on the quality of governance, including unemployment, capacity constraints and poor service delivery, poverty and inequality, land reform, violence against women, violence against children, the HIV/Aids pandemic, corruption, crime, racism, xenophobia and managing diversity.
The ACDP will briefly highlight just one aspect of the report due to time constraints. Chapter 7 records that:
It is welcome news that appropriate steps are being taken to bring about a change in the response to HIV/Aids prevention and treatment in South Africa. Government in partnership with civil society has begun to send out uniform messages concerning the proper treatment of the disease. No one now denies that HIV/Aids deserves a higher national priority and needs to be tackled with more high level commitment and adequate resources. This shift will no doubt reassure, not only South Africans generally, but also the international community. The APRM welcomes this development.
South Africa is the fifth APRM country to undergo the peer review process and will be expected to report annually. The ACDP commends all efforts in this regard and believes it will eventually leave its mark in Africa.
Ms B A HOGAN: Chairperson, in difficult times when we don’t know the way ahead and when we become confused, we seek the advice of our elders. We look to them to give their experience and to advise us on how we can go forward. Equally, in good times, when we are prospering, when we have a focus, when we have a vision that unites us, we also seek the advice of our elders because they can warn and tell us what might lie ahead that we do not notice. That is why I believe that the APRM is an extraordinarily important process for our continent and our country.
If you look at the panel that compiled the report, it is a panel of eminent Africans, with high reputations and people with considerable experience in governance and long experience on issues confronting Africa. It would only be a fool who would ignore the counsel, advice and findings of such a body. And, indeed, we, as a country, have embraced what they have said. We have welcomed their assessment of us and we need to examine, in detail, what they have to say.
Perhaps in hindsight it is also important for us to look at and understand why, even when they pointed certain things out, we were not open to that. Why, for instance, in the official government’s response to the APRM, when the APRM noted that there is a high incidence of xenophobia in the country, did we say that is just a populist’s view. It is simply not true, as we said.
In addition, when they named crime as a major issue, we responded and said that is just a populist’s view. When they said that floor-crossing was an issue that South Africans were concerned with, we responded and said that is just an issue for the opposition; it’s not for us. What we have learned since we have responded in that way is that all these issues are, yes, the very issues that affect South Africans.
Perhaps it is a salutary lesson that when we do not listen to counsel and advice, when we tend to just set it aside, these things come back to bite us. Of course, the panel itself made some crucial mistakes. For instance, they talk about Eskom operating very well, when we all know that it is simply not the case. And that is how it is with assessments. Assessments always try to grasp the truth, but the truth is elusive. But somewhere we need to gain an intuition of what is true, and not simply dismiss things when we feel that we are been criticised or simply dismiss things because we feel that they are, in fact, unfounded. We need to be wise enough to listen to the wisdom of the elders.
Let me reflect on the process. I think it’s been a remarkable process. I think our Minister headed a panel and managed a process that was quite extraordinary. We need to reflect on how we try to reach out to the stakeholders in our country; how we try to reach consensus. It was an ambitious programme. We did not succeed in many respects, but it is the start of a programme of involving civil society.
One of the most remarkable aspects of this process was the way that the NGO community in particular would seize the opportunity and engage in it. It was remarkably stimulating to sit in discussions, to have NGOs and people from civil society talking, speaking, engaging, arguing and putting forward their points of view, because this happens so seldom in NGO forums. This is part of a gift that can be given to us by an APRM process. It is a vigorous engagement.
We need to understand why the trade union movement like Cosatu, for instance, was not particularly active. Perhaps we have too many processes. Perhaps it is difficult to reach consensus. When we plan for our next review I think it is critical that we reflect on the significant achievements that we have accomplished and how they can be improved on.
It was clear from the outset that we were going to have an overload of information and I think it is to the credit of the editing teams, government and the panel that they were able to bring together the huge volumes of information into a coherent report. The questionnaires and the questions definitely need review and I cannot agree more with the Minister about that.
The role of Parliament is still unclear and I think the Minister and all of us agree that that was a very vital part of the process, but we, as Parliament, need to understand that we were not assessed in this process. That is still something that is not being done. We have not been critical about ourselves and how we have performed as an institution. That surely should be something, even if it is not a peer review process, that we need to address.
Similarly, on the question of Parliament’s powers, the panel raised the issue of Parliament being able to amend money Bills. How proactive are we on this issue? So many Parliaments in Africa look to our Parliament for insight on how we are conducting our affairs. We need to be proactive.
The programme of action is interesting and it covers a wide range of issues. The issue is: What role is Parliament going to play in monitoring this programme of action? It is extraordinarily ambitious. We, as portfolio committees, cannot sit down and start breaking down. We have at least a year’s work just in monitoring what needs to be done. I think we need to take it seriously. This is not just another government report that must gather dust on the shelves.
This is a report of people who have spent time and effort and a great deal of energy in giving back to us a perception of what our country has achieved and they have certainly congratulated us on some extraordinary achievements, and we need to repay that by taking the issues seriously.
Quite often what we don’t hear and see is picked up by others who watch from an objective distance. If we listen to the truth, we and the people of this country would certainly benefit. So, I would like to congratulate everyone who was involved in this process. I think it is a process that has given enormous value to our country. It has been one of the processes that other countries in Africa can learn an enormous amount from, and certainly we in this country owe a debt of gratitude to the people who spent so much time on this project. Thank you. [Applause.]
Ms S RAJBALLY: Chairperson, the MF proudly notes that South Africa has been one of the first countries to receive the African Peer Review Mechanism in March 2003. It is so important that countries of Africa unite and create a sense of responsibility and transparency to each other so that we may grow and help seal the losses of our history.
South Africa, like many of our African brothers and sisters, has been wounded severely by colonialism and then undemocratic governance, such as that by the apartheid government. The review is a definite way, not only to evaluate our past and present, but our created sense of unity and responsibility to democracy on the continent and the preservation of human rights and dignity.
When we look at our political, economic and social development as of 1996, we are proud to acknowledge that we have been one of the fastest developing nations, noting the imbalance we had come from. We certainly do acknowledge that South Africa has many challenges and that poverty on the continent has placed its roots all over Africa.
What is crucial to our progress is that we need to instil in our people a loyalty to all of Africa and its people. We need to identify ourselves as part of the larger continent. It is African solidarity that will assist us in advancing our continent and utilising our local resources to strengthen ourselves as global competitors.
The review of South Africa needs to be commended and we are confident of the benefits this review will reap for South Africans. Not only, then, do we serve as a case study for other countries, but we also stand to receive from other member states. The MF applauds the APRM country review report. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr S E M PHEKO: Chair, with my limited time, let me simply say that the African Peer Review Mechanism report on our country is an accurate weather barometer. Some of the issues it is dealing with are: Unemployment; capacity constraints and poor service delivery; poverty and inequality; violence against women; the HIV and Aids pandemic; corruption; crime; racism and xenophobia; and of course land reform.
The PAC agrees with the APRM panel of eminent persons on the land question in South Africa. Among other things, the report says land is crucial to the pursuit of the development strategy in Africa. It can play a major role in addressing issues of unemployment and poverty. They also say that the single most important factors are social, political and economic empowerment – that is the land. Above all, it has a central role to play in wealth and income distribution. Insufficient land to live on and cultivate, as well as insecure access or rights over land, are well-recognised factors in sustaining poverty and destabilising democracy.
The PAC has made the land question its consistent platform, because the poverty of the majority in our country was created through land dispossession. There will never be eradication of poverty, economic liberation of the poor majority, until there is equitable distribution of land and its riches. This means that section 25 of the Constitution must be revisited in order that the foundation of economic dispossession of the majority of our people can be reversed when we look at the Native Land Act of 1913. “Izwelethu.” [Our country.] [Time expired.]
Mrs S V KALYAN: Chairperson, I was fortunate enough to be part of one of Parliament’s subcommittees on the African Peer Review Mechanism and I must say that I found the whole process very rewarding.
As the hon Hogan spoke, I identified wholeheartedly with everything she had to say. However, I wish to dwell on one aspect. The APRM report confirms that South Africa is experiencing a crisis in respect of HIV and Aids and that South Africa has the second highest number of people infected with HIV in the world after India. It also states that the statistics in respect of the mortality rate due to the pandemic are very confusing and further emphasise that treatment is a key issue in managing the pandemic.
The Deputy President assured the Country Reporting Mechanism, CRM, that drugs will constitute the centrepiece of government’s response to HIV and Aids and that government planned to put 382 000 people on Antiretrovirals, ARVs,, by 2005-06. Regrettably only half this number has had access to the medication.
The National Strategic Plan of the Department of Health told the CRM that it aims to reduce the rate of mother-to-child transmission to 5% by 2011, but the recent Unicef report states that South Africa is among the ten worst countries in achieving Millennium Development Goals 4, 5 and 6 and that South Africa is one of nine countries in the world where child mortality is increasing, rather than decreasing.
In view of this one cannot help but be cynical about government’s willpower in carrying out the much lauded time-based National Strategic Plan of the Department of Health. The reality is that, despite the commitments and the assurances by both the Deputy President and the Ministry of Health to the APRM, the gap between proven prevention strategies and the National Health Department’s implementation remains frighteningly large.
Government must stop playing games and accelerate the speed of dual therapy rollout, boost staff levels and strengthen the state health care infrastructure in general. In doing so, South Africa will show that it is taking the recommendations of the APRM report seriously and that the whole exercise was not merely a window-dressing exercise. Thank you. [Applause.] Mr V G SMITH: Chairperson, comrades and hon members, when we declared the 21st century to be an African century, we were underlining our determination to take our rightful place as full world citizens and worthy members within the family of nations. We were declaring our commitment to removing all challenges and hindrances in our path that defer maximum economic growth and we were pledging our promise to find African solutions to African problems.
The African Peer Review Mechanism, as envisaged by the architects of Nepad, was not an end in and of itself, but rather a means to achieving the set goals. The focus area of democracy and good political governance included nine subthemes, and we will reflect on some of these themes as well as the findings and recommendations needed to accelerate our journey as a country towards a better life for all South Africans and a better Africa.
From the outset let us acknowledge that the exercise could have been somewhat compromised as a result of tight timeframes, limited public participation and the fact that not all stakeholders could be reached in time to have their views considered for inclusion in the report. Country Review Report No 5 basically confirms that, with regard to international codes and standards, South Africa is generally compliant as we have signed or ratified most of the relevant international instruments.
However, we want to point out that we are of the view that the role played by Parliament in this regard can be improved. The tendency currently is for Parliament to get involved at the end, and it is then expected to ratify the international codes and standards without the benefit of fully understanding the contents. Parliament has a responsibility to correct this situation with the maximum urgency.
Moving on to the subject of good political governance and democracy, we can all agree that South Africa is indeed a constitutional democracy. Elections in this country are free and fair, and are supervised and managed by an independent body. Multiparty democracy is encouraged and is under no threat whatsoever. The doctrine of the separation of powers between the judiciary, the legislature and the executive is fully entrenched and protected by the Constitution.
South Africa can be proud of the initiative of establishing institutions geared towards protecting our democracy. Here we can make reference to Chapter 9 institutions and many, many more. None would dare challenge my assertion that this country is a constitutional democracy with a fairly developed culture of recognition of the rule of law.
The challenges that remain are for Parliament, the executive and South Africans generally to popularise the existence of these governance organs, as well as to educate as many of our people as possible on the role and importance of these institutions, including those charged with the protection of women, children and the vulnerable. Much needs to be done in this regard, including stepping up our efforts with regard to education on the protection of refugees and internally displaced persons.
In reviewing areas of accountability, efficiency and effective public office holders and civil servants, we can draw comfort from the fact that the necessary legislation has been passed. Examples of such are the Promotion of Access to Information Act, the Proceeds of Crime Act, the Public Finance Management Act, and many more.
Laws on the Statute Book that are not implemented are as useful as no laws at all. Let’s agree that the means of ensuring accountability are in place, but let’s also agree that the enforcement of these laws at times leaves a lot to be desired. Unless this worrying state of affairs is addressed, we will create a fertile environment for rampant corruption and mismanagement of resources, thereby threatening our democracy.
There can be no doubt that the level of corruption in the public and private sectors is just unacceptable. This state of affairs is unacceptable because corruption and maladministration are inconsistent with the rule of law and the fundamental values of the Constitution. Corruption and maladministration are the exact opposite of our values of open, accountable and democratic governance. If allowed to go unchecked and unpunished, they will pose a direct and serious threat to our democratic state.
White-collar crime costs the South African economy between R50 and R150 billion per annum. The tragedy is that funds squandered by maladministration and corruption are desperately needed to ensure that no African child has to attend school under a tree, that no patient is turned away from a hospital because of a shortage of beds or medication, and that no workers’ hard-earned savings, meant to assist them after retirement, are abused for self-enrichment by dodgy financial practitioners.
If there is any blot in this Country Review Report, it is the acknowledgement of the scourge of corruption and maladministration within our society. Elected representatives, as well as South Africans in general, must do much, much more to correct this practice.
With regard to the macroeconomic policy, it is important to start by saying that prior to 1994 the economy was characterised by negative growth. Apartheid systematically excluded black South Africans from meaningful participation in the economy. This government’s priorities of addressing poverty and reducing the levels of unemployment cannot be challenged. Asgisa, Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment and the Expanded Public Works Programme are examples of the commitment to redress the evils of the apartheid economic policy.
The debate on both the extent of the budget deficit as a percentage of GDP and the policy of inflation targeting will remain a talking point as far as the macroeconomic and monetary policy we concerned. Hard choices need to be made by all as to the future direction of economic policy. We must guard against making choices today that will haunt future generations. We must deepen this debate.
The issue of trade relations and trade liberation within SADC deserves to be mentioned. This year approximately 85% of SADC trade will be duty free. By 2012 the target is 100% free trade within the region. The importance of this matter, amongst others, is that South Africa cannot find itself as an island of prosperity within a sea of poverty. The consequence of such a state of affairs will be that the number of economic migrants to this country will grow at a rate faster than infrastructure can handle. It is in our interest to ensure a more equitable economic growth pattern throughout the SADC region.
The intention of reducing poverty in South Africa and Africa as a whole is there. The basic tools to succeed are available. What is required so as to realise the African century is for government, the private sector and every individual South African to make a contribution towards achieving a better country. South Africa is a land of opportunity. It cannot be business as usual if we are to take our place as worthy members of a prosperous and democratic world.
In closing, let us agree with the assessment of the chairperson of the African Peer Review Forum when he states:
It is noteworthy that Africa’s position today is quite different from that of the past decade. There is an encouraging economic turnaround, with progress in macroeconomic stabilisation in many countries. This reflects the implementation of sound economic policies, a move towards rules-based institutions and participatory forms of government that foster consensus between the state and civil society.
The African Peer Review Report showcases our successes and also highlights our failures and challenges. This exercise has assisted us in charting a programme aimed at pushing back the frontiers of poverty and we must welcome and accept this report. Aluta continua!
The MINISTER FOR THE PUBLIC SERVICE AND ADMINISTRATION: Chairperson and hon members of the House, I would like to start out by thanking everyone who participated in this debate and I again want to thank all the parliamentarians who have served in the various subcommittees to ensure that we could contribute to a rich country self-assessment report that has, in part, informed the review report. I would like, in responding to the points made, to remind us all of the words of Mahatma Gandhi:
It is unwise to be too sure of one’s wisdom and it is healthy to be reminded that the strongest may weaken and the wisest may err.
Having said that, I want to move forward and actually remind us all that this country review report is not a report for government only. It is a report for the South African society. It is a report that we should ensure is implemented as government, civil society, the private sector, organised labour and all stakeholders. So, there is no group that can actually say: Well, I am going to oversee you and watch how you are doing as government. I am a bit concerned that there was a little bit of a sense of that which came through and we need to guard against the fact that we take that approach, because the country’s self-assessment process was one that involved representatives from all sectors of society.
Yes, one would agree that the timeframes were tight, but that is stipulated in the base document and I do want to venture to say that, even if we had four years, we would still say, that the time lines are tight.
Deputy President of the ANC, I would want to argue, through you, Chairperson, that when we look at the period of the formulation of the Freedom Charter, if I am not mistaken, it was just over a period of about 12 months when the calls for volunteers were made and the ANC was able to mobilise 50 000 volunteers across the country to reach all corners, all sectors. What makes it different now? What makes us imagine that when we have much more resources, that we need more time rather than saying: Let’s optimise the kind of resource base that we have and utilise that appropriately.
Having concluded our review, we are, as I said earlier, at the stage where the focus is on the implementation of the National Programme of Action and this requires co-ordinated action from government, business and civil society. Already, we have made great strides in ensuring that the programme of action is implemented jointly between government and civil society.
Civil society has presented a strategy from their side to ensure the strengthening of their participation in the African Peer Review Mechanism, APRM, through the National Governing Council. I believe that provides a positive way forward for government and civil society to work together in realising some of the objectives in the programme of action.
I would further want to agree that there is a need for Parliament to look at its role. There may be a need for the South African Parliament, along with the Pan-African Parliament, to look at what this specific role should be in reviewing the various country review reports. I think there is a very necessary process there that could actually contribute to the enhancement of the process itself.
Earlier hon Baloyi took us through the context of the process itself and I want to agree that it has indeed been a first in South Africa to engage in the peer review process in such a manner through our country’s self- assessment. I am sure there is room for improvement. There is a lot that can be done because we have a benchmark. We have done it once, we are engaging in the programme of action. So anything that happens in the future will definitely improve on what is there and clearly we will have lessons to learn from it.
What was further raised as well was the fact that within the policies, the values, the principles of the ANC, there has also been a clear foundation that could and has contributed to the way in which we approach the democracy and political governance thematic area, but those principles and values have come through the country’s Constitution in any event. We have seen the way in which the Constitution of the country has been acknowledged and our own critique on how we should ensure the realisation of that Constitution, including the socioeconomic rights that are there.
There have also been various concerns raised that maybe we have not listened to the wise as we should have. I think hon Seremane and hon Hogan have pointed to the fact that we may not have adequately confronted the challenge and the warning of xenophobia. But I would want us to look at the response. I don’t want to be seen as being defensive in this regard, but I would want to call on us to look at page 360 and the paragraphs that deal with xenophobia and racism.
In paragraph 105 it is stated, and I quote:
South Africa shares the view that more needs to be done to fight xenophobia. The South African government is committed to fighting and educating society against all forms of discrimination and prejudice.
I think what we should note, however, is that this is not a matter that can only be dealt with by government. It is a matter that each and every one of us in society should engage ourselves with. We have heard in the debate and discussion earlier today on xenophobia and intra-communal violence that we need to bear in mind that there are various factors that result in the emergence of this violence. I want to make it very clear that none of us could have predicted that the pockets of violence would have taken the form that they did.
What we should do now is to look at what programmes we should engage in, not only as government, but as all players in society, as political parties and otherwise. What should we do in order to strengthen and deepen social cohesion? How do we share the principles and values of solidarity and ensure that we enforce principles in our Constitution that talk about the equality and human dignity of all?
We should bear in mind the points that have been raised by hon Seremane as well as the fact that this violence has not just been directed against others, as in foreigners, but also against South Africans in terms of taking on an ethnic aspect as well. What do we all do? Here we need to revisit and look at the Programme of Action again and ask what kinds of interventions we need to take this forward. We need to bear in mind the message that came from the President of the ANC, from this podium in this House, when he said: “Let us look carefully at how we evaluate this and see that we take it forward in an appropriate manner.”
Furthermore, we also want to say that regarding specifics such as those that have been raised around HIV/Aids by hon Kalyan there is a response on this from paragraphs 124 to 132, considering the importance of what has been raised and it has been stated in paragraph 127 that the provision of antiretroviral treatment is an important element of our response. It needs to be emphasised that the comprehensive response will only be sustainable if there is a decline in the rate of HIV infections.
South Africa needs to systemically address all the drivers of the pandemic. We know that through the South African Netherlands Chamber of Commerce, Sanec, there has been the adoption and implementation of a policy that involves all players in society, and other stakeholders as well, to take it forward. We need to look at how we ensure that we actually support the various programmes and processes that are there.
Again, I want to say that this report is not a report that points to government only, but it is a report that we should take on as a country in order to ensure our responsiveness. Parliament should ensure that it indeed oversees government and the executive to take forward those aspects of the implementation that it should. It should also oversee civil society to ensure that it plays its own role and that it implements what is required in the Programme of Action. It should also ensure that political parties do what is required in order to ensure the success of the outcome of this process.
I agree with the hon Hogan that Parliament also has the challenge to respond to the issues raised in the report that pertains to Parliament, because there is no part of society that has really been overlooked in this process. It has actually galvanised us all to respond to the call to action and to do it in a manner that, as we go towards reporting - and we will do so later this year on the Programme of Action - we should be able to reflect quite honestly on the role and inputs of all stakeholders in society in responding to this peer review report.
Once again, I would like to reflect my appreciation as the focal point to the participation of everyone in this process. I do want to say that, even where there have been differences, those differences have been instructive in ensuring that we have the kind of report that we could be proud of. I thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr G Q M Doidge): I am sure you will be pleased to know that Parliament is undertaking an assessment and the panel has been set up and they are well into their work. I am sure the report will be ready by the end of this year. The assessment on Parliament will add value to the points raised by yourself and the hon Hogan.
Debate concluded.
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE AFRICA INSTITUTE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND MANAGEMENT
OF HAZARDOUS AND OTHER WASTES IN TERMS OF SECTION 231(2) OF THE
CONSTITUTION
Mr D K MALULEKE: Chair, the Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism wishes to request Parliament to approve the ratification of the agreement establishing the Africa Institute for the Environmentally Sound Management of Hazardous and Other Wastes. The request is made in terms of section 231 of the Constitution, which reads as follows: An international agreement binds the Republic only after it has been approved by resolution in both the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces, unless it is an agreement referred to in subsection 3. An international agreement of a technical, administrative or executive nature, or an agreement which does not require either ratification or accession, entered into by the National Executive, binds the Republic without approval by the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces, but must be tabled in the Assembly and the Council within a reasonable time.
The request will give practical expression to and emphasise the political will to approve the Basel Convention on the transboundary movement of hazardous substances and their disposal, which is a global agreement to address the problems and challenges posed by the transportation of hazardous waste across boundaries. Some of the objectives of the convention are: To minimise the generation of hazardous waste in terms of quantity and the degree of hazardousness, to promote the disposal of hazardous waste as close to the source of generation as possible and to reduce the movement of hazardous waste, in particular, across internal boundaries.
Article 14 of the Basel Convention provides for the establishment of regional centres and the role of the centres is to assist developing companies, within their region, to fulfil the objectives of the convention through capacity-building, technology transfer and research and exchange of information.
South Africa has been identified as the host of the regional centres for the African English-speaking countries, hence the request for approval of the agreement to set up an Africa Institute for the Environmentally Sound Management of Hazardous and Other Wastes, which has already been ratified by eleven other countries. A hosting centre in our country will enable South Africa to play a significant role in engaging with international environmental management agreements. I thank you.
There was no debate.
Agreement establishing the Africa Institute for the Environmentally Sound Management of Hazardous and Other Wastes approved.
The House adjourned at 18:32. ____
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
National Assembly and National Council of Provinces
The Speaker and the Chairperson
- Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM)
(1) The JTM in terms of Joint Rule 160(6) classified the following
Bill as a section 75 Bill:
a) Repeal of the Black Administration Act and Amendment of
Certain Matters Amendment Bill [B 50 – 2008] (National
Assembly – sec 75). 2. Introduction of Bills
(1) The Minister of Public Works
a) Built Environment Professions Bill [B 53 – 2008] (National
Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
prior notice of its introduction published in Government
Gazette No 31093 of 30 May 2008.]
Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Public
Works 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 Bills may be submitted to the JTM within three
parliamentary working days.
(2) The Minister of Minerals and Energy
a) Mine Health and Safety Amendment Bill [B 54 – 2008] (National
Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
prior notice of its introduction published in Government
Gazette No 31063 of 16 May 2008.]
Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
Minerals and Energy 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 Bills may be submitted to the JTM within three
parliamentary working days.
- Bills passed by Houses – to be submitted to President for assent
(1) Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 19 June 2008:
a) Appropriation Bill [B 3 – 2008] (National Assembly – sec 77).
b) Social Assistance Amendment Bill [B 17 – 2008 (Reprint)]
(National Assembly – sec 76).
COMMITTEE REPORTS
National Assembly
CREDA INSERT REPORTS - T080619e–insert1 – PAGES 1291-1325.