Lee proposal: Repeal of South African Boxing Act; Greyling Proposal: Regulate private funding of political parties; Pretorius proposal: Amend Land and Agricultural Development Bank Act

Meeting report

The Chairperson announced that the Adjusted Rules on the Functioning of the Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions (as agreed by the Rules Committee on 17 September 2010) were reported in the ATC. Rules 211 and 235 were applicable to the Committee.

The Memorandum on the proposed Petitions Bill had been resubmitted, and was still being dealt with by the relevant officials.

Lee proposal: Repeal of South African Boxing Act, No 11 of 2001
The Chairperson said on the matter discussed last week in that the consultation report received from the Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation had mentioned Minister Stofile (who was no longer the Minister of Sport and Recreation), the Committee was interested to know whether that submission was in his personal capacity; information had been received from the Ministry, Sports and Recreation South Africa.

The Chairperson referred the Committee to the guidelines that had to be considered; the only one that applied in this case was: (d), whether it pre-empted similar legislation soon to be introduced by the National Executive.

Ms M Kubayi (ANC) noted that information had been received from the Ministry of Sports and Recreation that there was a process in place to repeal the Act, which should happen this year, so if the Committee were to proceed it would be pre-empting in terms of the rules. She proposed that the matter be taken off the agenda.

Ms A van Wyk (ANC) seconded the proposal.

Mr P Pretorius (DA) was in agreement, but he pointed out that the Committee was not sure what the outcome of that process would be. Something would be replacing the current Boxing Act but Hon Lee had asked for the total abolition of the Act. However, as his proposal was pre-empting similar legislation soon to be introduced, the Committee had no option but to stop the proposal.

The Chairperson said a Committee Report would be prepared to state that the National Assembly should not allow Hon Lee to continue with the proposal.

Mr Pretorius added that specific time frames should be mentioned.

The Chairperson replied that that would be taken on board. The Committee would take an interest in developments and monitor whether the Amendment Bill achieved what Hon Lee was recommending.

Greyling Proposal to regulate private funding of political parties
It was proposed that legislation should regulate disclosure of private donations to political parties; disclosure of election expenditure and the possibility of spending caps; political parties holding business interests; and donations from foreign entities.

The Committee was still awaiting a submission from the Office of the Presidency, and also from the Ministry of Finance because of the financial implications. The nature of the proposal did not fall into a specific department but straddled many sectors, including Home Affairs and the Independent Electoral Commission.

The area of concern related to the Constitution on area (a) of the guidelines – whether the proposal went against the spirit and purport of the Constitution. The Legal Office advised that section 1(d) of the Constitution emphasised that the Constitution aimed to protect a multi-party system. Publicising private funding may jeopardise smaller parties. This could see South Africa remaining with the ruling party and maybe the official opposition. The ruling party would remain because to fund ruling parties was simpler. To fund smaller parties that may never make their business viable, would need private funding.

Juristic persons such as political parties were also entitled to the rights in the Bill of Rights. Those that found relevance in this case were: Section 8(4) Juristic Person Entitled to Rights in Bill of Rights, Section 14 Right to Privacy, Section 16 Freedom of Expression; Section 18 Freedom of Association; and Section 19 Political Rights. Full promotion and protection of rights with due justification in terms of Section 36 Limitation Clause. The proposal could not be regarded as in line with the Constitution. There was an element of conflict with the Constitution.

Ms van Wyk said the rationale for not carrying on with the legislation was that it impacted on the rights of political parties as contained in the Constitution, where political parties were defined as public companies (juristic persons). Based on that, the Committee could not continue with the proposed legislation.

Mr Pretorius felt the Committee was making a decision already; it should wait for input from the Office of the Presidency.

Ms van Wyk said no matter what the Presidency’s answer was, based on the criteria, the Presidency’s submission would not influence the Committee’s decision, it would merely give more clarity.

Ms Kubayi asked how much time would the Presidency be given?

The Chairperson responded that the Presidency would be given another week. She said that the Committee would conclude deliberations the following week, after the submission from the Presidency.

Pretorius Proposal to amend the Land and Agricultural Development Bank Act, No 15 of 2002
A recommendation report was tabled. The wording was amended; the amended recommendation would be submitted to Parliament to appear in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports (ATC) parliamentary papers.

Adoption of minutes
Minutes of Committee meeting held on 2 March 2011 were approved and adopted with amendments.

The meeting was adjourned.