Transport Laws Repeal Bill [B19-2010]: Finalisation

Meeting report

Department of Transport Presentation
The Chairperson invited the Department of Transport (DoT) to briefly highlight the key points of the Bill in order for Members to be given a chance to make further input and establish clarity.

Adv Adam Masombuka, Acting Chief Director, DoT, said that his presentation would be brief as it would be similar to the one of the previous week. The South African Law Reform Commission was mandated to identify and recommend any laws for repeal. The Commission had identified a number of laws administered by the Department that needed to be repealed. The Bill therefore sought to repeal those laws. Schedule 1 of the Bill listed Acts that needed to be repealed in their entirety whilst Schedule 2 sought to list laws where only certain provisions needed to be repealed. He felt that he would stop at that point because Members could simply refer to the presentation handed out the previous week should they desire to raise further issues.

Discussion
The Chairperson then asked Members if they had any further questions or contributions.

Mr H Groenewald (DA, North West) expressed his satisfaction with the content of the Bill and stated that both Schedules were quite clear in outlining the laws to be affected. He added that the Bill was in the hands of very knowledgeable professionals and that he therefore had no further questions.

Ms M Themba (ANC, Mpumalanga) said that the Department had previously explained the Bill very thoroughly and that she too had no further comments.

The Chairperson stated that what remained was for the Committee to formalise the proceedings in accordance with prescribed procedures. It was important that Members had ample opportunities to discuss the Bill before arriving at a decision. For the sake of absolute clarity and to prevent unhappiness afterwards, he would therefore pay attention to the key point for the last time. He did so to place on record that justice was done to the Bill, as witnessed by those present that day. He proceeded to invite other Members to state whether they supported the motion to approve the Bill.

Ms L Mabija (ANC, Limpopo) asked about the wording for the motion.

The Chairperson formulated the motion as follows: The Select Committee, having considered the Transport Laws Repeal Bill [B 19B -2010] reported the Bill without amendments.

Mr R Tau (ANC, Northern Cape) needed clarity on the procedure that was followed. He asked whether the Chairperson was reading the Report of the Committee or the motion of desirability.

The Chairperson confirmed that he was reading the motion of desirability.

Mr Tau asked the Chairperson for the names of those who proposed and seconded the motion.

The Chairperson said that Mr Groenewald and Mr Themba had expressed support for the motion. He assumed that their expression of support for the Bill could be interpreted as a motion.

Mr Tau acknowledged that they had done so but, procedurally, merely wished for the names of a proposer and seconder to be formally recorded.

After brief interaction Mr Tau stated that the procedure should be properly captured. He therefore moved for the adoption of the motion of desirability. Ms Mabija seconded the motion. The Committee unanimously supported the motion.
 
The Chairperson said that the next step would be to read the Committee’s Report on the Bill. The report follows:

Report from the Select Committee, Public Services, on the Transport Laws Repeal Bill [B 19B – 2010] (National Assembly) dated 19 October 2010:

“The Select Committee on Public Services, having considered the Transport Laws Repeal Bill [B 19B -2010] (National Assembly) referred to it, supported the Bill without amendments.”

Mr Tau moved for the adoption of the report. Mr Groenewald seconded the motion. The motion was adopted unanimously.

The meeting was adjourned.