TUESDAY, 17 JUNE 2008 __

          PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
                                ____

The Council met at 14:05.

The House Chairperson (Mrs M N Oliphant) 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 A WATSON: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the Council I shall move on behalf of the DA:

That the Council–

 1) notes with concern that the negative influence of the internal
    strife within the ANC is now manifesting itself at all levels of
    society on a daily basis or, as a prominent daily newspaper often
    quoted by the ANC puts it, “The North West congress of the ANC
    Women’s League was adjourned yesterday without even a credentials
    report being presented to delegates amid spiralling turf battles in
    the ruling party’s structures countrywide”;

 2) further notes that this comes shortly after the ANC’s provincial
    secretary was attacked and stabbed by angry members at a party
    meeting in Worcester, Western Cape;

 3) therefore, whilst understanding the frustration and anger of the ANC
    members and structures, in the face of so much instability within
    its ranks, calls for calm amongst ANC members and structures; and

 4) realises that nepotism, corruption, inability to govern, slander and
    backstabbing by and amongst its top leadership is no reason to
    destabilise the entire country.

[Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Order, please! Hon members, order!

Mr M A SULLIMAN: Chair, I would like to move an amendment on that motion. [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Order! No, hon member, it was a notice of motion.

                LEAVE OF ABSENCE GRANTED TO MS NYANDA

                         (Draft Resolution)

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

That the Council–

 1) notes that the hon Ms F Nyanda has been booked off sick;


 2) resolves to, notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 17(1) of the
    Rules of the National Council of Provinces, grant the hon Ms Nyanda
    leave of absence from proceedings of both the Council and
    committees of the Council in terms of Rule 17(2) until she has
    recovered to resume duty; and


 3) takes this opportunity to wish the hon Ms Nyanda a speedy recovery.

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

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT ON NCOP VISIT TO WESTERN CAPE IN TERMS OF PROGRAMME OF TAKING PARLIAMENT TO THE PEOPLE The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members of the NCOP and special delegates who are here today, I wish to thank you for giving me this opportunity to table the report before the Council. Before I do so, please allow me to join the Chief Whip of the Council in wishing Mrs Nyanda a speedy recovery. We say may God be with her so that she may recover very soon and return to the House and be with us again.

This afternoon we are placing before you the report on the Taking Parliament to the People Programme, which took place from 29 October to 2 November 2007. I am actually very disappointed to be debating this report so late when we could have done it much earlier. It’s been seven to eight months since we’ve been in that particular area in the Western Cape. Anyway, this is an example of some of the hiccups that we are faced with during our work.

I would like to thank the members of the NCOP, provincial legislatures and the Cape Winelands Municipality who participated during the visit to make it a success. It became clear, though, that the relationship between the public representatives of the different spheres of government needed to be enhanced in order for them to be able to work together to address the needs of the people.

I would like to emphasise, hon members, when we take Parliament to the people, it is very important to honour co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations, because we have to relate to one another as three spheres of government and also as legislatures. This becomes very important. Therefore, working together towards achieving the objectives of this programme becomes very important and very pertinent because this is a constitutional mandate that we are offered by the Constitution to engage with.

I hope that in the future, wherever we go, people will recognise the constitutional mandate as the fundamental role that we are playing as a Council and as an institution. Members will remember that when we were sitting at Pniel, quite a number of issues were raised, and we had to respond to those issues and had to take some of them and include them in the report. I am sure people have seen the report and that hon members will be touching on those issues that have been raised in the report. I will, perhaps, also dwell on the issues of committees to establish what it is that they need to do when they visit those areas.

Firstly, let me start by making my comment in terms of the ward committees. When we were in that area we observed that there appeared to be a disjuncture between the views expressed by the people and those expressed by the authorities with regard to the use or functioning of ward councillors, especially in the Stellenbosch local municipality and other affected municipalities.

For instance, in its Integrated Development Plans, the Stellenbosch Municipality highlights the steps that are taken with regard to community participation in the formulation of IDPs working through ward councillors. On the one hand, some members of the public claimed during the public hearing that the ward committees were not functioning or that ward councillors did not report back to ward committees, or at worst, issues raised by the committees were not being implemented. On the other hand, communities were blamed for not attending ward committee meetings.

I would like to make it very clear that the ward committees are established by law; they are not just there as structures which are merely elected by the people. They are elected by law to do specific work and to co-ordinate the communities’ work on the ground. One of the most important of these duties is that of participating in the IDPs, because the programme of the IDP should be developed from the bottom up and not from the top downwards.

Therefore it becomes very important that I request today that whenever they have a meeting, councillors should invite ward councillors to participate. And ward councillors, if they want to have a meeting, should also invite the councillors so that these two structures work together to identify exactly what the issues are that the communities want to place on them and what the issues are that have to do with the IDP.

I’m raising these issues because the issues that go into the IDP become part of a strategic plan when they get to the municipality, and once they form part of the strategic plan they dictate the budget of that particular municipality. In this way municipalities know what issues they are budgeting for in a particular financial year. They can then watch how they should budget for the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF, period in the coming years and look into the programme that that particular municipality is facing. Therefore a good working relationship between the two structures, the ward committees and municipality councils, becomes vitally important.

The proper functioning of ward committees is very critical to ensure community-driven development under our democratic dispensation. This area, therefore, warrants some attention and I would like the hon members, when they are doing their constituency work, to focus on that issue also because that’s where we notice these things and that’s where you can address them as an individual matter in your own constituency.

Go and find out what is the relationship between the ward committees and councillors. If there is no relationship, find out what is the problem and what can you do to broker that type of relationship to make sure that they work together. This is part of our job, not just when taking Parliament to the people, but also when we do constituency work.

It is very important that issues agreed to during ward committee meetings are actually implemented. That’s another point that I want to raise, because those are the issues which have been raised by the communities. At times you find the issues are being raised, but they are not found in the implementation plans of the municipalities. I know that there might be a shortfall in the budget; one cannot implement everything which is there, but at least let’s see those issues in the strategic plans of the municipalities so that as and when they budget, those issues can be implemented.

Commitments made during meetings with the people must actually be followed up. That’s another very important thing. If you make a commitment, Mr and Mrs Priscilla, Mr Themba and Mr Tolo, that you would do certain things with your communities, you can’t just leave those things lying and not follow up. Did you hear what I said? [Interjections.] Did you? Ok. [Laughter.]

One of the issues for Members of Parliament is precisely to make sure that the commitments that have been made by the councillors and ward councillors are followed up. Let’s check and assist the national government on those issues to see if they are working or not. Failure to do so will result in the demobilisation of our people and a delay in the efforts to create a better life for all our people.

When we were in Pniel we made a few visits and I would like to touch on the following issues that were raised, for example, under housing. We discovered that communities raised concerns around the provision of houses and the system used in the allocation of available houses. I guess this problem is not just found in the Western Cape; it’s a problem that is to be found almost everywhere in the country.

You will have noticed recently, during what we called xenophobic attacks, that the people of our communities have been complaining that the people on the housing lists seem to be jumping around so that people who have registered earlier on find new people are coming in and getting houses. Those are some of the things we have to monitor from time to time, also as Members of Parliament.

We need to try to find out about and get into some of the issues as to what is happening because we may find, as some community members allege, that there is corruption in terms of the allocation of the houses because some of the people take bribes and that is why there is jumping on the list. New people who have requested accommodation then get in before the people who registered earlier on. That’s a very critical issue on the ground that we need to open our eyes to and always check up on when we do our constituency work. In particular, the meeting on local government attended by the MEC of the province, hon Dyantyi, recommended that the MEC looks at the issue of housing development in general as far as it affects the community in the Cape Winelands District.

Allegations about abuse on farms and other issues relating to land and farms were also raised. During the public hearing, especially during the meeting with farmers and farmworkers, allegations of abuse of farmworkers were raised.

These include problems with regard to transport for farmworkers. Members will recall that accident last year involving vehicles ferrying farmworkers at Piketberg and De Doorns in the province in which a total of 13 people were killed. This is one issue that is still happening on our farms, particularly on the farms of farmers who don’t want to adhere to the labour laws of this country.

I must repeat that it’s not all the farmers who are doing this. Although there are a few of them who still don’t respect the labour laws of the country, there are good farmers who are really looking after their people. I think we need to congratulate those farmers who are looking after their employees, but we should condemn in stronger terms those farmers who still treat people as if they don’t exist as human beings in this world.

We also visited some prisons and there were issues relating to overcrowding in the prisons as well as rehabilitation programmes for offenders in the prisons. I think it’s not only in the Western Cape. You may share with us very broadly that it is also a general trend, particularly throughout the country. I think through your committee we can work on certain inputs or proposals for the Minister of Correctional Services as to what can be done to resolve these problems. I leave it entirely with your committee because I know you are dealing with these things and that you can be of assistance to us as a Council to deal with these matters.

In terms of Education, hon Tolo, with regard to schools, there were calls for funding to build more classrooms at some schools and acquire teaching resources and for other training needs, as well as questions about the suitability of the curriculum for special learners, among other things.

School feeding schemes was the second issue that was raised very sharply and we know that government’s commitment in this area is still relevant. During the public hearings, a number of people from different municipalities in the district raised the issue of challenges with regard to the provision of school transport.

These issues are not only in this province; other provinces are also unable to afford the necessary transport required for learners or to address the feeding scheme issues and the shortage of classrooms, resulting in learners still receiving education under a tree. We need to keep on emphasising these issues so that the budget can be biased in favour of those issues we think are vitally important. Remember, the issue of education, particularly this year, should be our focus when we do our work in the field.

Hon members, these are but a few things I’m raising with you. I’ve left out the issue of health which was raised there. I’ve left out the issue of social development which I think other people will raise. I raised the issues of unemployment which was raised there. There are quite a number of issues, such as social transformation and economic development, that other people will perhaps raise in the debate and which are captured in the report itself.

I hope that our committees will find time to follow up on these and other issues contained in the report. I’m not sure, as I haven’t received a report from the House Chairs on whether our committee was able to go and set up camp there. I promised the committees of the Winelands District, particularly in the Stellenbosch area, that they would go and follow up but I am told that the committee on Public Service was there. Is that correct? [Interjections.] You postponed it after you promised? That’s why I’m checking. [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Order! Hon Mahlangu, you should address the hon members through me, the Chair.

The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I will address them through the Chair, Madam Chair, thank you very much.

I want to ask the committees to really concentrate on that score. I am aware of the scheduled work that you have for this year. The programme is very tight and the schedule is very packed and you may not have the necessary time, but please prioritise some of the issues that you think you can follow up in that particular area.

Lastly, I present a comprehensive report on “Taking Parliament to the People” in the Western Cape, which considers the issues that were raised by the public last year when we were sitting in this province. I hereby table the report, and I thank you very much.

Ms D ROBINSON: Hon Chairperson and hon members, it is a pleasure for me to report on one of the activities that is most central to the work of Parliament, that is, connecting with the conditions faced by ordinary South Africans and then doing whatever we can within our power to impact on those conditions.

Even though this visit took place some months ago, back in November 2007, it is nonetheless critical that we reflect on the week that we spent taking Parliament to the people in Pniel. Let me at the outset congratulate those who compiled the report for a largely accurate and insightful account. The theme for last year’s visits around the country was “Deepening the debate” and this time it was “Deepening the debate on transformation for a better life for all”.

Matters such as co-operative government, poverty alleviation, the plight of children, youth, people with disabilities, gender and water provision were amongst those considered. Provision of water is vital for good health and also the dignity of life. A good initiative of the Expanded Public Works Programme was to encourage the clearing of alien vegetation both for conservation purposes and for preserving our scarce water supplies.

Although the report was a good one, I think we should have had a more accurate reflection of the negative feedback we received from the people of the Western Cape and the many challenges that they highlighted to us as their representatives. After all, it is these things that we need to take cognisance of if our efforts to deepen the debate are to show any fruit.

Without doubt, the message was resounding that we need to focus our efforts on fixing the education system, with particular emphasis on early childhood education as that is what forms the foundation, the basis, for any future education achievements of young people. We must ensure, through our committees, that the call for the review of the Slanghoek Primary School budgeting process is completed by the Department of Education.

Another resounding message was that our communities are heavily burdened by the vice-grip of crime. The communities of Khayamandi and Cloetesville requested that we help them to obtain two dedicated and fully staffed police stations. Sometimes, in other communities, we have mobile police stations, but the tragedy is that many of these are not operational around the clock and that is something we need to appeal for. Police stations are vital for protecting people and giving them security; and this is the first duty of government. We should consider this as a priority and something that we should all agitate for in our various capacities.

One measure that we can take pride in, and a measure for which all members deserve applause, is the success of the school feeding scheme in poor rural areas. We can only add our voices to the many who have called for the extension of this scheme.

Education is vital to progress and strengthening democracy. Hungry children cannot study and perform to the best of their ability so we need to extend these programmes. I would like to appeal to all the members - that includes me - to encourage people, whether they are in urban or rural areas, to plant vegetable gardens. We know that there is a scarcity of food today yet so many people just plant flowers. While we enjoy the flowers and they are beautiful to look at, we need to look at food. I think in our own personal capacities we should try to encourage this. This should be done to supplement our dwindling food supplies.

Chairperson, when we take Parliament to the people, they expect delivery from us as their representatives. We cannot allow a situation where our visits are merely seen as talk shops which have no effect on the conditions in which South Africans live. Let us hear the complaints of our constituents and respond effectively, bringing all that we have to bear on those problems and doing all that we can to improve them. Only then can we really claim to have taken Parliament to the people and shown them what Parliament can do for them. I thank you. [Applause.]

Mnu M A MZIZI: Angibonge, ngithokoze futhi ngibingelele uSihlalo wale Ndlu. Cha, Sihlalo, uma kuthiwa sixoxe ngombiko esasinawo laphaya eNtshona Koloni, kimina kusho ukuthi sasiyolalela ukuthi abantu bathini. Abantu bakhuluma. Amakhansela, oNgqongqoshe bezifundazwe noNgqongqoshe bakaZwelonke bathembisa ukuthi bazokwenza lokhu, nalokhu nalokhuya.

Ngokwami-ke ngithi asikaphindeli emuva. Ngivumelana noSihlalo. Uma sesiphindele emuva sesiyophawula ukuthi yikuphi okungakenziwa ngoba okwamanje kungase kube ukuthi sesisheshile uma sesiphawula ukuthi kuzoba yilokhu, nalokhu nalokhuya okungenziwanga ngoba abantu babebika.

Angize kulokhu-ke. Empeleni khona ekuqaleni abantu babengakuboni kuyisu elihle lokuthatha iPhalamende silise kubantu. Babethi ngumdlalo noma umbuthano noma ukukhankasela ukhetho.

Angisho-ke mina ukuthi ngifunde lukhulu uma sengifika lapha eMkhandlwini kaZwelonke weziFundazwe. Ngibe sengibona-ke ukuthi empeleni angilona ilunga lesishayamthetho kodwa ngiyisikhonzi sabantu, ngakho kufuneka ngibuye ngiphindele kubo ngiyokuzwa ukuthi abantu bathini. Sishaya imithetho bese kubakhona okufuneka bayenze isebenze le mithetho. Thina-ke kufuneka ukuthi sibuye siyobona ukuthi ngabe bayenza ngendlela yini.

Ngiyabonga-ke Sihlalo ukuthi ngisho kuwe ukuthi-ke, cha, ukuya kwethu kubantu kwenza bakwazi ukuthi bathintane nathi manje. Sengize ngaya kabili mina eKhayamnandi ngibizwa ngabantu bethi ake ngizobona nazi izinkinga abanazo. Asiyi kubantu noma uma sisa iPhalamende kubantu, siya ngepolitiki. Sisuke siyobheka izinkinga zabantu, hhayi ngoba siyokhankasa. Uma abantu sebekhulumile, bayakwazi-ke ukubuya kuwe bathi wozani-ke sebenibiza ngabanye ngabanye.

Ngiyacela-ke ukuthi uma sebesibiza asitholakala phela. Empeleni njengoba sikhuluma namhlanje ngalo mbiko, sikhuluma khona enjikampunzi impela. Seziyabuya manje emasisweni ngoba abazobe bekhuluma ngokuzayo kuyobe sekungabanye hhayi thina, ngoba sesifike khona impela enjikampunzi manje lapha ezibuya namajokwe sekufanele ziye ekhaya kubonakale ukuthi ngabe zisazophinde zibuye na.

Yingakho ngithi-ke kusemqoka ukuthi sikusho lokhu ukuthi kubaluleke kangakanani ukuthi asingahlali lapha ePhalamende sishaye imithetho kodwa singaphumeli ngaphandle. Ngiyalivuma elikaMongameli wezwe elokuthi asichithe ama-30% lapha kodwa ama-70% sibe ngaphandle. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)

[Mr M A MZIZI: It is my pleasure to greet the Chairperson of this House. Chairperson, if we are asked to report on our visit to the Western Cape, I take that to mean that we had gone there to listen to the people. People spoke. Councillors, provincial Ministers and Ministers promised that they will do this and that and many other different things.

I personally feel that we have not gone back to the people. I fully agree with the Chairperson on that after having gone back to speak to the people, we would have been able to clearly know and indicate what it is that has been done and what has not. Right now it would be premature to say these are the things that were not done as people have reported.

Let me say this. Initially, certain people were against the idea of taking Parliament to the people. They believed this to be a fruitless waste of time, a rally or an election campaign.

Let me say that I personally have learnt a lot since I arrived here in the National Council of Provinces. I have since realised that I am not a Member of Parliament but I am a people’s representative, therefore I should go back to them to listen to what they have to say. We pass laws here and there are people out there who have to implement these laws. We should go back and see if they are implementing them in the right way.

Chairperson, it is my pleasure to tell you that the Taking Parliament to the People programme has given our people a new way to communicate with us. I have since gone to Khayamandi twice after having been called by the people to come and see for myself the problems that they have. Taking Parliament to the People is not a political ploy, but we only go there to observe the people’s problems and we do not go there to canvass political support. And when the people have spoken, they are later on able to come back to you and call you to come back to them, one by one.

Can we please, therefore, if called, avail ourselves to the people. In fact, as we are presenting this report today, we are indeed at a turning point. The time has come for us all to go back home and reflect, because the people who would be speaking on this podium next time would be other people. The time has come for us to see if we make the grade to come back to this House again.

And it is against this background that I say it is important for us not just to rest on our laurels and just relax here in Parliament and pass laws without going out to the people. I support President Thabo Mbeki’s call when he says we must spend 30 per cent of our time here in Parliament and 70 per cent outside of Parliament.]

To me, Parliament is more about oversight and taking Parliament to the people. It is only then that we are doing the work; not when you sit here and debate and tell us how well your party can do this, that and the other. Go to the people and listen to the people.

Uyabona lapha kuye kuthiwe uboyibheka intuthwane. Intuthwane isebenza kusakhanya, yenze konke kuyothi uma kufika loluya suku olungaziwa yingakho- ke bethi … [You know, there is a verse that says you should take a lesson from the ant. An ant stores its provisions in summer and gathers its food at harvest so that when that day comes, it is safe and sound, that is why they say …]

Thou sluggard, go to the ants and see their ways and consider their ways.

Siyabonga. [Thank you.] [Applause.]

Mr N J MACK: Chairperson of the NCOP, hon members, special delegates, there is one important thing that I need to raise. It is something that happened to one of our members while we were on the visit. I think we need to look at security because the hon Kgoshi Mokoena’s cellphone was stolen from his room while he was asleep. There was a little window at the back that was open and someone put his or her hand through and took the cellphone. This incident alerted us to the whole thing about security and made us aware of it, so we have to pay more attention to it. I thought I needed to mention that.

Voorsitter, as ons nou kyk na die terugvoering, wil ek nie saamstem nie, maar wil ek ook saamstem met die agb Robinson met van die negatiewe terugvoering. [Chairperson, when we look at the feedback I want to disagree, but I want to agree with the hon Robinson with regard to the negative feedback.]

… negative feedback from our people, but if our people give feedback …

As ons mense terugvoering gee of as ons mense by ons kla, is dit negatief of is dit omdat hulle voel ons moet sekere goed vir hulle doen? Ek kan nie sê dat dit negatief is nie. Vir my is dit ’n goeie ding. Dit kán negatief wees en ek kán dit negatief vertolk. As ek nou vir die agb Robinson moet sê dat Stellenbosch onder die DA was en dat dit deur die DA beheer is, so as daar negatiewe “feedback” kom dan is dit as gevolg van die DA. Verstaan u? Dit kan ook anders vertolk word. So ek wil dit nie in daardie lig sien nie. Ek wil liewer sê wanneer ons mense vir ons terugvoering gee, moet ons dit as positief beskou. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[When our people are giving feedback or when our people are complaining to us, is that negative or is it because they feel we must do certain things for them? I can’t say that it is negative. For me it is a good thing. It could be negative and I could interpret it in a negative way. What if I have to tell the hon Robinson that Stellenbosch was under the DA and it was controlled by the DA, so if there is negative feedback then it is because of the DA. Do you understand what I am saying? It can also be interpreted in another way. However, I don’t want to see it in that light. I rather want to say that when our people are giving us feedback, we should see it as positive.]

It is indeed an honour and a privilege to present to this august House today a statement on the NCOP’s “Taking Parliament to the People” visit to the Western Cape from 29 October to 2 November. Let me state from the outset that this visit, and future visits, derives from the constitutional prescripts which compel us as public representatives to exercise our oversight and intervention in national, provincial and local government spheres.

The visit was structured to include public hearings, site visits and a plenary session. And we adopted the main theme of “Deepening the debate to get participatory democracy”. That is what we want in this country. Other things that we focused on were co-operative governance; poverty alleviation; agriculture as a tool to alleviate poverty; structures to address the challenges faced by children, youth and people with disability; and also the impact of the Extended Public Works Programme.

With regard to providing ordinary citizens with a platform to share in debates with its government, it is indeed the ANC that was the first political party in our country to create such platforms. The DA has proved to be a party that does not want the concept of participatory democracy, hence their lack of giving proper and meaningful alternatives to issues that we debate at government level.

Weer eens wil ek vir u verwys na wykskomitees. Die agb Voorsitter het daarna verwys. Ek het dit ook in die plaaslike regeringsdebat genoem en dit het opgekom toe ons die Parlement na die mense toe geneem het. Die wykskomitees werk nie; hulle fungeer nie. As ons plaaslike mense dan nie daar ’n inset kan lewer nie, hoe weet enige raadslid of enige regering wat om te doen? Die verskil is, en ons moet oop wees oor die ding, dat wanneer dit by DA-wyke kom, dan wil hulle nie wykskomitees hê nie. Dit is ‘n saak van wyksforums; hulle wil ’n wyksforum hê en dit is ’n heel ander tipe konsep of samestelling.

Die einste wyk waarin ek bly, word deur die DA beheer en ek weet waarvan ek praat. Ek is die ANC-voorsitter van daardie wyk. Hulle wil nie ’n wykskomitee daar hê nie, maar ’n wyksforum waar jy sommer ’n breë klomp mense nooi. Jy nooi nie organisasies nie, so dis ’n “free for all”. Dan moet ons ook sê dat hulle hier in die Wes-Kaap op ’n slag uit Salga wou onttrek het en toe het hulle maar weer agterna teruggeskerm. [Tussenwerpsels.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Once again I want to refer you to the ward committees. The hon Chairperson referred to it. I also raised it in the debate on local government and it came up when we took the Parliament to the people. The ward committees are not working; they are not functioning. If our local people cannot even make an input there, how will any councillor or government know what to do? The difference is that, and we must be open about this kind of thing, when it comes to DA wards the DA does not want ward committees. It is a matter of ward forums; they want a ward forum which is a totally different concept or composition.

The very ward in which I live is controlled by the DA, and I know what I am talking about. I am the ANC chairperson of that ward. They don’t want a ward committee there, but a ward forum where you just invite various people across the board. You don’t invite organisations, so this is a “free for all”. Then we also have to say that, here in the Western Cape, they once wanted to withdraw from Salga and afterwards they sneaked back. [Interjections.]]

During our visits major concerns were raised by the communities and it was clear that most of these concerns related to municipal service delivery. Let me mention some of these concerns: the nondelivery of houses promised to the community; the lack of playground facilities; and poor employment opportunities at municipal level. And I want to thank you, Deputy Chairperson, for taking us to Pniel, as it is one of the poorest areas in the Western Cape and it is a rural area.

Die beplanning is nog steeds nie reg nie. Ons beplan nog altyd soos in die ou dae waar ons elkeen in sy hoekie wou beplan. Ons hou jou maar net daar en ons verbeter min sodat jy daar vasgevang bly. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[There is still no proper planning. We are still planning like in the olden days where we planned in such a way to get everyone in their own little corner. We just keep you there and make few improvements so that you stay trapped in your corner.]

During our visit to Cloetesville Police Station, we learned that important locally based structures or forums such as the Community Police Forums, CPF, are a major vehicle in addressing crime. We learned, for example, that most of the drug dealers have been chased out with the help of the neighbourhood watches and the CPFs.

As die mense bereid is om met die GPF’s saam te werk, hoe meer is hulle dan nie bereid om in wykskomitees te dien nie. Nou iets is nie reg nie. Hoekom wil hulle dan in ’n GPF werk? Dan kan jy nie vir my sê hulle wil nie in die wykskomitees wees nie. Daar is iets, maar dit word net nie gestruktureer nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)

[If people are willing to co-operate with the CPFs, they will be even more willing to serve on the ward committees. Now, something is not right. Why would they want to work in a CPF? Hence you cannot tell me that they are not prepared to be part of the ward committees. There is something, but it is not being structured.]

They are not organising. With regard to the public hearing on women, a particular concern was raised by a member of the public. The concern was that women working on farms have their own projects, but some of the white farmers do not give them opportunities to market their products. This is indeed sad and needs to be addressed.

Whilst we notice that our Western Cape provincial government moves in the direction of understanding and taking on challenges facing them, unfortunately it appears as if these challenges are not eagerly being addressed at municipal level. This is indeed a great concern and challenge for us. It also appears that in some instances we lack the capacity within some of our departments. I am confident that those challenges are being monitored for redress.

The President of South Africa stated in his address at the plenary that the main theme, deepening the debate -

… seeks to galvanise all of us South Africans … into an ongoing and vigorous process of engagement so as to enhance the quality of the national debate in the process …

The DA’s politics and racial handling of important concerns, matters or issues can again be seen in Cape Town currently, where they do not want to make available municipal halls. They have made them available, but they do not want to make available those that are in predominantly white areas to our brothers and sisters who were left homeless during the current attacks on foreigners.

HON MEMBERS: Dis ‘n skande! [This is a shame!]

Mr N J MACK: The whole issue of “Taking Parliament to the People” in the Western Cape was a success in the sense that it demonstrated again the importance of taking the community on board regarding issues. Thank you.

Ms M VENTURA (Western Cape): Chairperson, it is pleasure and honour for me to speak on behalf of the Western Cape Provincial Parliament.

I was a delegate to the NCOP week at the end of October, beginning of November, and I spent the whole week in Pniel. It was wonderful, spending the week there with the Chairperson.

Chairperson, in nine days’ time we will be celebrating the 53rd anniversary of the gathering of the people of South Africa at Kliptown, where we declared bravely that “The people shall govern!”.

During those times, it was the idea and ideal that all the people will have an equal say in the management of the country, its affairs and resources. The intention was to involve those who installed the government and for those who maintained it to be at the forefront of its development as a responsible government that owes its existence to the voters and the conscience of the wishes of the voters.

In the Preamble of our Constitution that was adopted in 1996, we again declared that this august document lay the foundation for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people. So when we take Parliament to the people, we are not only demonstrating our commitment to the first Congress of the People held in 1955, neither are we only giving credence to what we said in our 12-year-old Constitution, but we are, indeed, assuring our communities that they are an important element in the law-making processes and also a cornerstone in our pursuit to deliver services that are relevant, necessary and of the highest quality.

While this is an annual event, we illustrate in no uncertain terms that we are committed to establishing a government that is in sync with the demands and aspirations of the people it serves. Vicente Fox, the former Mexican President, once said that:

One of the fundamental ingredients of the new governance is good government. A government close to society, always ready to listen to it; a government fully respectful of legality, honest, transparent and efficient; but above all, a government conscious of its mission of promoting human and social development as the basis for attaining a more just and prosperous society. During the visit to the communities of the Western Cape at the end of October and the beginning of November, last year, we again experienced this government which is close to society, always listening to it. Again, we could engage with our communities on matters close to their hearts. We could also look at ways to deepen the debate and to promote human and social development as the basis for attaining a more just and prosperous society. We could again experience good government.

What we do in South Africa, Chairperson, goes beyond the norm. We are, indeed, going so much further in involving our communities; listening to them; meeting with them; living with them; and suffering with them. But most of all, Chairperson, we go beyond the norm as we always look for workable and practical solutions with them.

Unlike other governments, during the event in Pniel, we again confronted various social issues that are of major concern to our people. Again, we could talk about issues affecting the youth, women, poor communities and the provision of services. Those communities give us another opportunity to reach out to people who would, in any other circumstances, not have had access to their directly elected representatives.

This reminds me of so many women who attended the gathering at Pniel and told us about their struggles and battles as women and farm labourers. We are reminded of the aged who told about the abuse and the different problems they encounter as they grow old. We are forced to give some thought to the disabled who told us about the restrictions they continue to face.

The lives of our people are changing for the better because of this government. People have faith in their government because of this Parliament. The despondent have hope because of the Council of Provinces but we dare not let them down or betray their trust.

As the responsible government, leaders of our people and representatives of our communities, we have a responsibility to the people who rely on us for guidance and leadership. We dare not let them down.

Lastly, I would just like to ask, because I was part of the delegation that went to the Khayelitsha Health Care Centre, did we make a follow-up on the Community Health Care Centre in Khayelitsha that we visited? Is the building completed; are there enough staff and medicine; is the fence fixed; and are people still illegally taking electricity and water from the hospital? If not, then we need to do these things post-haste. This is but one of the many things that does not need rocket science; it just needs us to roll up our sleeves and to respond to the call that the people gave us at Pniel. Thank you.

Mnr F ADAMS: Agb Voorsitter, Voorsitter van die NRVP, Adjunkvoorsitter van die NRVP, agb lede, iemand het my eendag gevra: [Hon Chairperson, Chairperson of the NCOP, Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, hon members, someone once asked me:]

Why do you always go to the back of beyond in taking Parliament to the people?

I think in less than a decade of taking Parliament to the people, the National Council of Provinces has made great strides.

Laat ek my huistaal, Afrikaans, praat. Albei van u verstaan dit tog maar. Die NRVP het goeie vordering gemaak om hierdie program verder te vat. In minder as ’n eeu het ons na die agtergeblewenes toe gegaan.

Die gedagte het by my opgekom dat die probleme wegkruip waar die agtergeblewenes hulself bevind. Dis waar die armoede is. Dis waar die armstes van die armes bly. Dis waar dié wat honger ly, bly. Baie regerings en politieke partye konsentreer op die voorkant. Soos die ou mense gesê het: “Bo blink en onder stink.” [Gelag.] Ek het amper iets anders gesê wat onparlementêr is! Dankie, agb Sulliman.

Die NRVP en hierdie ANC-beheerde regering het gewys dat ons nie net na “bo blink” gaan nie, maar ons kom af tot onder. Ons maak oop tot op die been. Niemand by hul volle verstand het gedink dat ons ooit Pniel toe sou gaan nie, want wanneer jy daar verby ry, sien jy oral net die mooi wingerde, die mooi plase en die mooi landskap.

Die DA was so geskok dat die vorige burgemeester van Stellenbosch op die openingsdag gesê het dat die LUR en die provinsiale regering nooit met hulle praat nie. Terwyl die LUR, die provinsiale regering, die nasionale regering en die Nasionale Raad van Provinsies daar was, het die burgemeester nie kans gesien om daar te wees nie. Selfs die DA-raadslede van al die munisipaliteite in daardie omgewing was die hele week nie eers daar nie. [Tussenwerpsels.]

Maar hulle het daardie platform gebruik om politiek te kom speel. Die agb Watson het die Vrydag daar kom politiek speel.

Met die inwerkingstelling van hierdie program was die DA die eerste mense wat gesê het dat die ANC die program wil gebruik vir politieke gewin. Die ANC het nog nooit op enige van daardie platforms gestaan en gesê “Stem nou ANC; ons is hier” nie. Dit het nog nooit gebeur nie. Ons het liewers vir die mense gevra wat hulle kwel, en wat hul probleme is.

Onder u leiding, Voorsitter, asook onder dié van die Adjunkvoorsitter van die Raad, het u vir die mense gesê: “Hier is die parlementslede; hier is die Ministers. Kom sê wat julle pla!” Die DA sê dit is negatief. Maar hoe moet ons dan weet as die mense nie vir ons herinner nie? Selfs in die Bybel sê God vir ons dat ons Hom aan Sy beloftes moet herinner. Hy sê: “Toets My of Ek nie die vensters van die hemel vir julle sal oopmaak … nie.” Nou dit is wat die mense doen. Hulle het vir ons gestem; hulle wil vir ons sê: “Hoor hier, boetas, hoor hier, anties, skrik ’n bietjie wakker, ons het dít nodig.”

Die ANC-beheerde regering het nog nooit politiek gespeel op hierdie platforms nie. Ons was daar om na die mense om te sien. Dis waarom ons so bly is dat hierdie program “goes to the back of beyond” sodat ons werklik kan sien wat daar aangaan. Ek dink baie van die DA-lede vergeet waarvandaan hulle kom. Baie van hulle het vergeet dat ons ook uit provinsies en townships kom waar daar hongerte is.

Iemand het eendag vir my gesê dat hy nie verstaan hoe Suid-Afrikaners werk nie. Hy wou weet hoekom praat hulle van “extended families”. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Let me use my home language, Afrikaans. After all, both of you understand it. The NCOP had made great strides to advance this programme. In under a century, we had gone to the marginalised groups.

The thought that came to my mind is that where the marginalised groups are, that is where the problems are hidden. That is where the poverty is. That is where the poorest of the poor live. That is where those who are starving find themselves. Many governments and political parties concentrate on the bright side. As the old people used to say: ”Bo blink en onder stink.” [Laughter.] I almost said something else that is unparliamentary! Thank you, hon Sulliman.

The NCOP and this ANC-controlled government have shown that we do not only look at the bright side, but we get right to the bottom of it. We cut to the chase. No one in their right mind would have thought that we would ever go to Pniel, because when you drive through there you just see beautiful vineyards, the beautiful farms and the beautiful landscape everywhere.

The DA was so shocked when the former mayor of Stellenbosch said on the opening day that the MEC and the provincial government never speak to them. When the MEC, the provincial government, the national government and the National Council of Provinces were there, the mayor did not deem it fit to be there. The very DA councillors from all the surrounding municipalities were not even there for the entire week. [Interjections.]

But they have used that platform to come and play political games. The hon Watson came there the Friday to play political games.

When this programme was implemented the DA were the first people to say that the ANC wants to use the programme for political gain. The ANC has never stood on any of those platforms saying “Vote ANC now; we are here.” This has never happened. We rather asked people about their concerns, and what their problems are.

Under your guidance, Chairperson, as well as that of the Deputy Chairperson of the Council, you told the people: “Here are the Members of Parliament; here are the Ministers. Come and tell them what is troubling you.” The DA is saying that this is negative. But how are we supposed to know if people do not remind us?

Even in the Bible God says to us that we should remind Him of His promises. He says: “… and test Me now in this … If I will not open for you the windows of heaven …” Now this is what the people are doing. They voted us in; they want to say to us: “Listen here, boetas, listen here, aunties, wake up; this is what we need.”

The ANC-controlled government has never played political games on these platforms. We were there to take care of the people. That is why we are so happy that this programme goes to the back of beyond so that we can really see what is happening there. I think many of the DA members have forgotten where they come from. Many of them have forgotten that we are also come from provinces and townships where there is hunger.

Someone once said to me that he does not understand how South Africans are functioning. He wanted to know why they speak of “extended families”.] Why do they talk about extended families? It is because we care. We are a government that cares and I think our Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson are leaders who care. That is why they say let us go to the back of beyond.

Maar ek wil net nog iets sê, Voorsitter. U moet asseblief tog toelaat dat ons weer eendag so ’n program het waar ons by die mense gaan oorbly, sodat ons tussen die mense kan wees. Dit is so dat by baie van die programme hulle eenkant gaan eet het. By baie van hierdie programme gaan eet hulle eenkant, dan sê hulle hulle wil nie in so ’n lang tou gaan staan nie. [Tussenwerpsels.]

As ek vir die agb Watson moet antwoord, in KwaZulu …

Mnr A WATSON: [Onhoorbaar.]

Mnr F ADAMS: Voorsitter, daar erken hy dit! [Tussenwerpsels.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[However, I just want to mention something else, Chairperson. You should please allow us once more to have the kind of programme where we stay over at the people’s homes, so that we can be amongst the people. It is so that at many of these programmes people went to one side to eat. With many of these programmes they go to one side to eat, then they say that they don’t want to stand in such a long queue. [Interjections.] If I have to reply to the hon Watson, in Kwazulu …

Mr A WATSON: [Inaudible.]

Mr F ADAMS: Chairperson, there he admits it! [Interjections.]]

Mr R J TAU: Chairperson, I just wanted to find out whether it is parliamentary, under the circumstances that we find this country in, that we still find a member of the DA, in the form of Miss Robinson, asking, “What about the ‘makwerekweres?’[Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Order, please! I did not hear that, but if you said that, hon Robinson, can you please respect this House and withdraw that name?

Ms D ROBINSON: Hon Chair, what I said was, “What about the extended families?” We need to look after everybody. [Interjections.] Yes, that should not be used. But if it caused offence I will withdraw it, but that was not the intention. I simply wanted to point out that if we talk about extended families we should look after all our brethren.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Hon member, I’m saying that if you have said the words that were said by hon Tau, can you please withdraw them. But if you did not say that then you are not bound to withdraw. Ms D ROBINSON: I withdraw, but there was no intention to cause any offence, I was pointing out the disjuncture in what is being said, but I do apologise if that was offensive.

Mnr F ADAMS: Dis hoekom die burgemeester van Kaapstad gesê het dat hierdie program nie in Kaapstad is nie. Nou wonder ek waar Pniel is. Waar is Stellenbosch? Is dit dan nie deel van Kaapstad nie? Sy sê dat die program nie in die metro is nie. Maar dit is wel ’n parlementêre program en ons verwag, in terme van “intergovernmental relations”, dat almal daar moet wees. Dit is nie uitsluitlik nie.

Dit kom weer terug na die punt. Dis hoekom die burgemeester en haar komitee van die Stad Kaapstad nie die sale wil oopmaak vir hierdie uitgewekenes nie. Dis hoekom hulle sê hulle kan dit nie in sekere gebiede, soos Milnerton, oopmaak nie. Dan praat ons van herintegrasie. Dan praat die agb Robinson van “extended families”. Agb Robinson, daar is van ons wat families het wat dit nie so breed het soos ek en u nie. Ons moet na hulle omsien – dit is ons plig.

Die Here vra vir een van sy seuns in die Bybel: “Waar is jou broer Abel?” Hy antwoord toe: “ Ek weet nie. Is ek my broer se wagter?” Toe sê die Here aan hom dat Hy hom aangestel het om oor sy broer wag te hou.

‘n AGB LID: Is jy ’n parlementslid of ’n dominee?

Mnr F ADAMS: Ons is albei. Met betrekking tot die wykskomitees, hoekom wil die DA nie wykskomitees instel nie? Hoekom verkies hulle wyksforums? Want in wyksforums kies die raadslid self wie die in wyksforum moet dien. Die raadslid is die voorsitter van die wyksforum en hy kies wie hy in die forum wil hê. So word baie van ons organisasies uitgesluit. Hulle word totaal en al uitgesluit, want die raadslid kies self wie hy daar wil hê.

Die ANC is die enigste party wat tot op grondvlak gaan. Ons, as lede van die ANC, word aanspreeklik gehou, in terme van ons kiesafdelingverslae.

Adjunkvoorsitter en Voorsitter van die NRVP, ons wil vir u baie dankie sê. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr F ADAMS: That is why the mayor of Cape Town said that this programme is not being implemented in Cape Town. Now I wonder where Pniel is. Where is Stellenbosch? Is it not part of Cape Town? She said that the programme is not being implemented in the Metro. But it is indeed a parliamentary programme, and we expect, in terms of intergovernmental relations, that everyone should be there. It is not exclusive.

This comes back to the point. That is why the mayor and her committee in the City of Cape Town do not want to open the halls for these refugees. That is why they say they cannot open it in certain areas, like Milnerton. Then we speak about reintegration. Then the hon Robinson speaks about extended families. Hon Robinson, some of us have families who are not as well off as you and I. And we have to take care of them - that is our duty.

In the Bible the Lord asks one of His sons: “Where is your brother Abel?” Then he says: “I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?” Then the Lord tells him that He appointed him to watch over his brother.

An HON MEMBER: Are you a Member of Parliament or a clergyman?

Mr F ADAMS: We are both. With regard to the ward committees, why does the DA not want to establish ward committees? Why do they prefer ward forums? The reason is that on ward forums the councillor himself chooses who should serve on the ward forum. The councillor is the chairperson of the ward forum and he chooses whom he wants to serve on the forum. In this way many of our organisations are excluded. They are excluded altogether, because the councillor himself chooses whom he wants there.

The ANC is the only party that goes down to grassroots level. We, as members of the ANC, are held accountable, in terms of our constituency reports.

Deputy Chairperson and Chairperson of the NCOP, we want to thank you.] Thank you that you see it fit that we can go to the back of beyond and do not only show everything that is hunky-dory …

… of alles wat reg is. Nee, alles is nie reg nie. Ons het ’n klomp werk wat gedoen moet word. Ons kan dit net saam doen as ons almal saamwerk.

Gedurende die provinsiale week was ons op plase waar ons mense in haglike omstandighede gesien het. Mense was van hul plase afgesit om langs ashope te gaan bly, en die ANC sê dat ons dit moet regmaak.

Wat ons hier het, in “Taking Parliament to the People”, dink ek, het geen ander land of parlement nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[… or everything that is perfect. No, everything is not perfect. We have a lot of work that must be done. We can only do this together if we all collaborate.

During the provincial week we were on farms where we saw people in appalling conditions. People have been evicted from their farms to live next to rubbish dumps, and the ANC is saying that we should rectify this.

What we have here, with “Taking Parliament to the People”, no other country or parliament has, I think.] There is room for improvement, but I think from now on we can only do better. To get to the best, we must strive for better. I thank you.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr T S SETONA): Thank you, Chairperson, distinguished special delegates from the Western Cape, the hon Premier and Speaker of the Western Cape in absentia, fellow friends, colleagues and comrades. The debate on this report this afternoon is a moment of celebration for the NCOP. As an evolving institution of our democracy, we have cause to celebrate because this debate coincides with the coming of age of the NCOP, as it celebrated its 10th anniversary last year.

The debate marks the last leg of the round of the NCOP “Taking Parliament to the People” programme since its inception. It is certainly the last debate of its kind in our third democratic Parliament as our country braces itself for the fourth national elections next year.

It is indeed a moment of celebration, a celebration of the accumulated experience of 14 years of our legislatures, and 11 years of the NCOP as a critical component of our national legislature. I’m sure those who were here before us in 1997, when the NCOP was established, probably didn’t know where to start. They’ve been grappling with what the systems, procedures, vision and mission of the NCOP should be. Now we are proud to be debating this report after we have accumulated 11 years of experience as the NCOP; an experience that should make us modest and not shy away from even criticising ourselves as a House. As the hon Freddie Adams has said, despite all the good we have done, there is still room for improvement. And this is the celebration that I’m talking about.

The debate of the NCOP’s “Taking Parliament to the People” programme in the Western Cape should accordingly afford us an opportunity to reflect critically on the fundamental question of whether this august Council, the NCOP, deserves a special place in the consolidation of democracy for a better life for all.

The only meaningful way to debate this particular report in a celebratory way is to reflect critically on this fundamental question: In our last 11 years of this experience that we are talking about, have the things we have done and the manner in which we have done them been able to make us proud in the eyes and in the minds of our people in the rural communities and our people in the dusty streets of South Africa? Are they able to associate with this august Council with pride and say in the NCOP that they are actually inspired and confident of a better future and a better life for all?

I think that is the fundamental question that should actually occupy our minds when we enter into this kind of debate. I am raising this question quite clearly because the NCOP is not the National Assembly, neither is it the stepchild of the National Assembly.

I’m raising these questions because the NCOP is not a provincial legislature, neither a stepchild of the provincial legislatures. It is a distinct House within our constitutional democracy, with a specific mandate. That mandate is about ensuring that provincial interests are taken into account in the national sphere of government. That mandate is about ensuring that our system of multi-sphere governance - we have three spheres of government: the national, provincial and local spheres – is in harmony.

Nowhere in our Constitution is any entity or body, not even the President of the country, given the powers in terms of the Constitution to ensure that there is harmony between the three spheres of government. So this House is about ensuring that harmony and coherence, and we are doing so in pursuance of nothing else but a better life for all our people.

I think, as we celebrate, we must ask ourselves these hard questions and we must not only talk about the things that are easy for us. But we must also attempt to do better, as hon Adams has said, and so we need to find answers to some of these burning questions.

Let me stop to respond to some of the issues that have been raised in the context of what I’ve said. We need to report; and I say this on behalf of my colleague hon Oliphant. Not all committees were able to go to Pniel to do the follow-up as you instructed. Not all the committees were able to go to Free State to do a follow-up as they were expected to do. Not all the committees were able to go to KwaZulu-Natal or Limpopo to do the follow-up as expected. This wasn’t because nobody else is interested in this particular programme, or because nobody else is inspired to go back to make the follow-up with the masses of our people in terms of this programme.

I’m quite confident that the Chairperson will agree with me that a House of 52 people, if we exclude the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, has been able to do things in volume and size exceeding the things done by a House of 400 people. And this is humanly and practically impossible!

Then what is to be done? As V I Lenin said, if we are not able to do all that we desire, what good are our mistakes? How do we explain to our nation that we have not been able to go to Pniel, as we had been instructed? We have not been able to go to the Free State. I think the fault does not lie anywhere else but with us all as a collective. Hon Tolo will agree with me.

We prioritise and when Parliament, jointly, has more than a thousand responsibilities to undertake, we as the NCOP have to do those responsibilities with 52 people, and we want to do it with the same vigour, the same speed, and the same quality of excellence as our counterpart, which has 500 people to do the same thing. That is practically impossible.

Hon members will agree that at the time that we were planning to go back and undertake this follow-up visit, there was legislation that was coming from the executive, which occupied all our committees. I always argue in the committee I serve on - hon Tolo will know – that I don’t think we need to pay attention in the same way to section 75 legislation as we are supposed to do with section 76 legislation, as I believe that is our key function. We are not a senate!

Maybe the problem in this country is that the history of the senate, as established by the Constitution of 1993, has not been documented and even we, as the class of this NCOP, haven’t even begun the process. I would like to say thank you to the Chairperson for the project that he has launched, because it is actually beginning to document our history, because the manner in which we want to conduct ourselves in relation to this task before us is to do it as a normal senate like the former Senate of South Africa or the House of Lords in Britain or the senate of Australia.

Those, however, are separate entities. There is a particular mission that has actually inspired the drafters of our Constitution to come up with the notion of the NCOP. As we are debating this particular situation I am challenging my colleagues, collectively and individually: Are we not going to cause this august House to lose it’s relevance in the hearts and minds of our people out there if we continue to operate and function in this manner?

Hon Mkhaliphi and hon Watson will agree with me that a man who is farming with five tractors will actually be more productive and produce more goods and surpass the outputs of the man who is farming with one tractor. But normally, in simple mathematical terms, there has been an urge on our part

• it’s a voluntary urge and nobody has imposed it on us - to do everything without looking at our size, strength or strategic focus.

I don’t want to use big words. The former chairperson of the NCOP, hon Naledi Pandor, used to call for what she defines as niche excellence for the NCOP in order for it to remain relevant. Because if we go and chase somebody in a province and do the same thing that the National Assembly portfolio committee and the legislatures are doing, we are going to confuse our people at the end of the day. Our people will be saying: “What does this guy want? Those ones who are doing these things are also from Parliament.”

Let me conclude, Has the time not come for us to reflect frankly, honestly and critically on this question, because I think our failure to do that will actually create more problems for the next class that will join this Parliament. Thank you very much.

Debate concluded.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted. As the decision is dealt with in terms of section 65 of the Constitution, I shall first ascertain whether all delegation heads are present in the Chamber. Are all the delegation heads present? All are present.

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration? There is none. We shall now proceed to the voting on the question in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate whether they vote in favour of, against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: We support.

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

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: We support.

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

Ms N M MADLALA-MAGUBANE: Gauteng supports.

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

Mr D D GAMEDE: KwaZulu-Natal elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]

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

Ms H F MATLANYANE: Limpopo supports.

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

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Mpumalanga supports.

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

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Supports.

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

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

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

Mr N J MACK: Die Wes-Kaap gee sy positiewe ondersteuning. [The Western Cape positively supports.]

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

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

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF JOINT MONITORING COMMITTEE ON IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY OF LIFE AND STATUS OF WOMEN – IMPACT OF EQUALITY ACT ON LIVES OF WOMEN AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES – GENDER SECTOR

Ms M P THEMBA: Hon Chairperson, hon members, South Africa’s definition of goals towards achieving equality are guided by the principles of human right, which incorporates the acceptance of all peoples’ inalienable rights to equality. This principle is a fundamental tenet under the Bill of Rights of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.

Section 9 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa provides for the enactment of national legislation to prevent and prohibit unfair discrimination and to promote the achievement of equality. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Act 4 of 2000, which is also known as the Equality Act, was passed to give effect to this constitutional requirement. This Act prohibits practices that perpetuate inequality by promoting equality in all spheres of life in South Africa. As we marked the 10th anniversary of the passing of the Constitution in 1996, we embarked on a process to review the impact of the Equality Act on the lives of women and people with disabilities. The main findings emanating from the review process revealed that discrimination and inequity remain common in South African society. Most of the contributors to the study argue that women’s continued inequalities are attested to by the very high levels of gender-based violence in our country. Some of them highlighted the fact that women still constitute a major share of the vulnerable group in our country because they make up the majority of the poor, the homeless, the jobless and the dispossessed.

Initiatives to achieve both the prevention and elimination of unfair discrimination and the promotion of equality have not sufficed in eliminating the scourge of inequity from South African society. It was further argued that this problem is particularly exacerbated in rural areas due to a lack of resources and infrastructure. The review also highlighted areas of major concern about persisting income inequalities between men and women. It showed that 10 years after the demise of the apartheid regime in 1994, there is still a high concentration of women in lower-paid temporary or casual employment or employment in the informal sector.

What is even more worrying is the fact that the mechanisms for monitoring progress in protecting women against discrimination are not being adequately implemented. In some instances, companies are not complying with equity targets and the subsequent reporting requirements.

The review further found that while there is a formal commitment in South Africa to gender equity in land reform, the implementation of land reform programmes remains a problem. The pace of land delivery to the previously disadvantaged South Africans is relatively low when one considers the fact that approximately 4% of land has been delivered to black people since 1995.

The fact that many women are unable to own land and housing also emerged as a key impediment to enhancing the quality of their lives and negatively impacts on their economic status and on equality in general. Violence against women and gender-based violence, that is, including rape, domestic violence, female genital mutilation, murder, and sexual abuse are common phenomena in South Africa; and according to many observers this is indicative of women’s unequal status in society. A study published by the Medical Research Council in 2004 indicated that every six hours a South African woman is killed by her intimate partner.

The most important legislative measure aimed at combating gender-based violence is the Domestic Violence Act, Act 116 of 1998, but the implementation of this Act has proven to be challenging. There is a lack of dedicated resources for combating gender-based violence and for the protection of survivors of such violence. Furthermore, the review suggested that problematic attitudes on the side of police officials and court personnel present a major challenge for persons reporting gender-based violence, as these officials often see gender-based violence not as a criminal matter, but as a domestic issue.

All the facets of the review examined the manner in which institutional mechanisms established to promote equality have contributed to greater equality. What has emerged is that the establishment of gender focal points, in line with provisions of the National Gender Policy Framework for Women’s Empowerment and Gender Equality, continues to generate cause for concern.

The level at which gender focal points are appointed impact negatively on the skills these positions are able to attract and on the effectiveness of this work at provincial and local level. While structures are in place in many provinces and local government, the national gender machinery is not functioning as effectively as it had been envisaged. It also became clear that the monitoring process has been hampered by insufficient and inappropriate information being provided by the officials.

South Africa has made significant strides in increasing the number of women in decision-making, particularly in government and in Parliament. In terms of ranking determined by the Inter-Parliamentary Union, South Africa ranked 13th in the world in relation to the number of women members in Parliament. There are currently 131 women members in the National Assembly and 19 women members in the NCOP. In addition, various forums have been established within Parliament to deal with gender issues.

In relation to government departments, the review indicated that a number of departments are doing relatively well in terms of their ratio of women to men, both in positions of leadership and in departments generally. However, the organisational profiles of most state structures and private sector organisations are skewed in favour of men, particularly in decision- making positions.

Sexual harassment also remains a critical issue, as does the development of a gender-sensitive organisational ethos, culture and practice.

In the light of the insight emanating from the review process, the Joint Monitoring Committee on the Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Women makes a number of recommendations, including the following: that in light of the fact that Parliament is sometimes provided with misdirected and meaningless information with regard to the functioning of national gender machinery the relevant committees of Parliament must be explicit and specific with regard to the information requested from government departments; that the relevant committees of Parliament engage with the departments of provincial and local government on the manner in which the national gender machinery has been put into operation; and that the relevant committees of Parliament avail themselves of additional information from stakeholders in order to facilitate a comprehensive, more accurate assessment of the national and provincial situation as it pertains to gender. [Interjections.]

As I conclude, it is of great concern that, 12 years into democracy, South Africa still faces a number of challenges in ensuring the prevention of unfair discrimination and promoting equality, thereby achieving the consolidation of democracy in our country.

There is still a need for robust engagement to ensure that we reaffirm our commitment to ensure that the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act remains a key tool for our goal towards the realisation of the vision of equality which should result in the consolidation of our democracy. I therefore would like to call upon this House to support the report and its findings, and I’d also like to call upon on all hon members to take part in combating gender-based inequality, violence and any other discrimination in their communities. I thank you.

Debate concluded.

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

In accordance with Rule 71, I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of vote if they so wish. Is there any province that wants to make a declaration? There is none. We shall now proceed to the voting on the question in alphabetical order per province. Delegation heads must please indicate to the Chair whether they vote in favour of, against or abstain from voting. Eastern Cape?

Mr A T MANYOSI: We support.

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

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: We support.

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

Ms N M MADLALA-MAGUBANE: In favour.

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

Mr D D GAMEDE: KwaZulu-Natal elethu. [KwaZulu-Natal supports.]

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

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

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

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Mpumalanga supports.

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

Mr C M GOEIEMAN: Supports.

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

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

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

Mr N J MACK: Ons ondersteun. [We support.]

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

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution. CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF JOINT MONITORING COMMITTEE ON IMPROVEMENT OF QUALITY OF LIFE AND STATUS OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND DISABLED PERSONS – IMPACT OF EQUALITY ACT ON LIVES OF WOMEN AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES – DISABILITY SECTOR

Mr D D GAMEDE: Chairperson, the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act provides that neither the state nor any person may unfairly discriminate against any person on the ground of disability. It has emerged from the review process that, not withstanding the political will to eradicate inequality, the appropriation of adequate resources for related initiatives continues to be a significant problem.

There were also arguments indicating that the mainstreaming of disability issues has not been successful, and that those issues affecting people with disabilities may be dealt with more effectively if each department had a dedicated section that deals with disability issues.

To this end, accessibility or the lack thereof for persons with disabilities to engage fully in opportunities within society require attention in order to ensure the participation of persons with disabilities as set out in the social model of disability which South Africa has committed itself to adopting within policy initiatives.

Furthermore, given South Africa’s recent ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD, it is imperative that the recommendations arising from the review be taken seriously and implemented. Clearly, Parliament has a decisive role to play in this regard.

In the light of the insights emanating from the review process, the Joint Monitoring Committee, JMC, makes a number of recommendations. Firstly, that the committee of Parliament responsible for education issues should engage with the Department of Education on the implementation of the policy on inclusive education.

Secondly, when the relevant committees of Parliament engage with the Department of Transport on the implementation of an integrated public transport system, attention must be paid to the needs of persons with disabilities.

Thirdly, attention must be paid to the manner in which language and the lack of access to information remain barriers to substantive equality of persons with disabilities.

Fourthly, the JMC on the Improvement of Quality of Life and Status of Children, Youth and Disabled Persons must engage the Department of Housing on producing relevant statistics, including targets and indicators, and information relating to people with disabilities.

Fifthly, the JMC must engage the Department of Labour on issues of promoting the employment rate of people with disabilities as the statistics indicate that the rate of employment for them has deteriorated, that is, we have not gone above the 2%.

The report has been tabled and it is in the ATCs. I therefore move that this House adopt this report. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

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

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

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

Mr A T Manyosi: Eastern Cape is in favour. The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): Free State?

Mr C J VAN ROOYEN: Free State votes in favour.

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

Ms N M MADLALA-MAGUBANE: In favour.

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

Mr D D GAMEDE: Ke ya rona. [We support.]

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

Ms H F MATLANYANE: In favour.

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

Mr B J MKHALIPHI: Bekunene bayavuma. [We support.]

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

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

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

Mr Z S KOLWENI: North West supports.

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

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

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mrs M N Oliphant): All nine provinces voted in favour. I therefore declare the report adopted in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.

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

The Council adjourned at 15:33 ____

            ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

                        FRIDAY, 13 JUNE 2008 ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development


      a) Criminal Procedure Amendment Bill [B 42 – 2008] (National
         Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
         prior notice of its introduction published in Government
         Gazette No 31115 of 2 June 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Justice and Constitutional Development 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 Transport


      a) Legal Succession to the South African Transport Services
         Amendment  Bill [B 43 – 2008] (National Assembly – proposed
         sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice of its
         introduction published in Government Gazette No 31059 of 15
         May 2008.]


        Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Transport 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.

 (3)    The Minister of Health


      a) Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Bill [B 44 – 2008]
         (National Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of
         Bill and prior notice of its introduction published in
         Government Gazette No 31114 of 2 June 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Health
         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.

 (4)    The Minister of Defence


      a) National Conventional Arms Control Amendment Bill [B 45 –
         2008] (National Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory
         summary of Bill and prior notice of its introduction published
         in Government Gazette No 31078 of 23 May 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Defence of the National Assembly, as well as referral to the
         Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) for classification in terms of
         Joint Rule 160.


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

 (5)    The Minister of Science and Technology


      a) Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research
         and Development Bill [B 46 – 2008] (National Assembly –
         proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice
         of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 31130
         of 13 June 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Science and Technology 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.


 (6)    The Minister for the Public Service and Administration


      a) Public Administration Management Bill [B 47 – 2008] (National
         Assembly – proposed sec 76) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
         prior notice of its introduction published in Government
         Gazette No 31113 of  2 June 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Public
         Service and Administration 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.

1. Draft Bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

(1)    National Conventional Arms Control Amendment Bill, 2008,
     submitted by the Minister of Defence.  Referred to the Portfolio
     Committee on Defence and the Select Committee on Security and
     Constitutional Affairs.


(2)    Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Bill, 2008, submitted by
     the Minister of Foreign Affairs.  Referred to the Portfolio
     Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Select Committee on Economic
     and Foreign Affairs.


                        TUESDAY, 17 JUNE 2008

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1. 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) Competition Amendment Bill [B 31 – 2008] (National Assembly –
         sec 75).


(2)    The JTM in terms of Joint Rule 160(6) classified the following
     Bill as a section 76 Bill:

      a) National Railway Safety Regulator Amendment Bill [B 32 – 2008]
         (National Assembly – sec 76).

1. Introduction of Bills

 (1)    The Minister for Justice and Constitutional Development


       a) Judicial Matters Amendment Bill [B 48 – 2008] (National
          Assembly – proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and
          prior notice of its introduction published in Government
          Gazette No 31117 of 2 June 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on
         Justice and Constitutional Development 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 Labour


      a) Skills Development Bill [B 49 – 2008] (National Assembly –
         proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice
         of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 31103
         of 29 May 2008.]


         Introduction and referral to the Portfolio Committee on Labour
         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.


 (3)    The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional
     Development
      a) Repeal of the Black Administration Act and Amendment of
         Certain Laws Amendment Bill [B 50 – 2008] (National Assembly –
         proposed sec 75) [Explanatory summary of Bill and prior notice
         of its introduction published in Government Gazette No 31088
         of 23 May 2008.]
         Bill initiated by the Portfolio Committee on Justice and
         Constitutional Development of the National Assembly, and
         referred 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.

1. Calling of Joint Sitting of Parliament

The Speaker of the National Assembly, Ms B Mbete, and the Chairperson
of the National Council of Provinces, Mr M J Mahlangu, in terms of
Joint Rule 7(2), have called a joint sitting of the Houses of
Parliament for Thursday 19 June 2008 at 14:00 to debate the report of
the Task Team of members of Parliament probing violence and attacks on
foreign nationals.


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

National Council of Provinces

The Chairperson

1. Message from National Assembly to National Council of Provinces in respect of Bills passed and transmitted (1) Bills passed by National Assembly on 13 June 2008 and transmitted for concurrence:

   (a) Refugees Amendment Bill [B 11B – 2008] (National Assembly – sec 75)

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

   (b) Agricultural Debt Management Repeal Bill [B 24 – 2008] (National Assembly – sec 75)

   The Bill has been referred to the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs of the National Council of Provinces.

(2)     Bill passed by National Assembly on 17 June 2007 and
     transmitted for concurrence:


     (a)     Appropriation Bill [B 3 – 2008] (National Assembly – sec
          77)


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

1. Change to heading of tabling

(1)    The headings to the „Report of the Task Team of Members of
     Parliament Probing Violence and Attacks on Foreign Nationals“ which
     appeared in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports of 12
     June 2008 (p 1137), should also have referred to „The National
     Council of Provinces“ and to „The Chairperson“.

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

CREDA INSERT REPORT - T080617E – Insert 1 – PAGES 1201-1248