Moloto Corridor Development Initiative; International Conventions: Cape Town Agreement 2012 on Torremolinos Protocol 1993 Implementation of Convention for Safety of Fishing Vessels, 1977 African Maritime Transport Charter

Meeting report

Ratification of the African Maritime Transport Charter
Advocate Nosipho Sobekwa, Acting Deputy Director: DOT, informed Members that the Charter is aimed at strengthening cooperation among Member States of the African Union in maritime transport, inland waterways navigation, ports and related activities. The Charter is an instrument of cooperation amongst African Nations and embraces virtually every major issue that Africa is confronted with.

The strategic focus of the African Maritime Transport Charter is on strengthening cooperation among African countries in the maritime transport sector. The 15th session of the AU Assembly resolved that Member States should accelerate the ratification of the Charter so that it comes into force. The Charter is a deliverable of objective 18 of Operation Phakisa Initiative aimed at unlocking the potential of the oceans of South Africa.

South Africa has recognised a need for the generation of the comprehensive maritime transport policies and strategies for Africa, and a collective continental and regional ownership and support of all issues pertaining to maritime governance as prescribed in the Charter. There is a need to enhance cooperation amongst State Parties in the areas of maritime safety, marine environment protection management and search and rescue. South Africa is interested in the promotion of national and regional Cabotage to encourage intra-Africa trade to facilitate economic and socio-economic integration in the continent.

Legal opinion has been obtained from the Chief State Law Advisers from the Departments of Justice and Constitutional Development and International Relations and Cooperation. The opinion indicated that the Charter is not in conflict with domestic and international laws. The Charter was widely circulated to other government departments and maritime industry stakeholders, and the Department did not receive any adverse comment. The Cabinet approved the Charter on 5 May 2015 for submission and ratification by Parliament.

The Department would continue to work together with all relevant stakeholders to ensure appropriate implementation of the Charter that balances maritime interests of SA. Article 37 of the Charter encourages State Parties to adopt policies that create opportunities for the advancement of women in the maritime sector. At this stage there would be no financial and security implications for the Charter. Advocate Sobekwa recommended that the Committee support the ratification of the AU African Maritime Transport Charter and that it be tabled to Parliament in terms of Section 231 (2) of the Constitution of the country.

Ratification of the Cape Town Agreement of 2012
Advocate Sobekwa also briefed the Committee on the ratification of the Cape Town Agreement of 2012 on the implementation of the provisions of the Torremolinos Protocol of 1993 relating to the International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels of 1977.

The Torremolinos Convention and its Protocol of 1993 lay down safety standards such as life-saving appliances, radio communication, fire protection, machinery and electrical installations as well as specific requirements for sea-going fishing vessels of 24 metres in length and over. The Torremolinos Convention was hindered by a number of challenges, hence the adoption of the Cape Town Agreement of 2012.

The Cape Town Agreement is aimed at amending certain provisions of the Torremolinos Protocol that have given rise to difficulties in their implementation by a number of States having substantial fishing fleets. Fishing at sea remains a hazardous occupation and the sector experiences a large number of fatalities every year, and bringing into force a binding international safety regime is expected to play a part in helping to improve safety standards and reduce the loss of life.

South Africa is a member of the IMO Council and continues to actively participate in its work and Committees. By virtue of its position as a member of the Council SA should support its work by ratifying its Conventions.

The provisions of the Cape Town Agreement are in line with the objectives of Operation Phakisa that are about developing an institutional framework for the management of the ocean space of SA, improving the protection of oceans of SA, particularly around critically endangered ecosystems, and addressing the skills gap.

The fishing vessels of SA would be subjected to the provisions of the protocol when they are in the waters of a State Party according to the Torremolinos Protocol of 1993.  The South African Maritime Safety Authority (SAMSA) has developed policies and procedures for the survey of fishing vessels in line with the draft regulations. The fishing industry has been consulted widely and it was also involved in the drafting and adoption of the regulations.

The Agreement was submitted to the State Law Advisers of the Departments of Justice and Constitutional Development and International Relations and Cooperation, and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. These departments support the ratification of the Agreement. Industry stakeholders, through road shows, indabas, and individual and community interaction, have been made aware of the implications of the proposed legislation.

South Africa hosted the Diplomatic Conference in 2012 where the Cape Town Agreement was adopted. SAMSA, Transnet National Ports Authority, and the Department of Defence (Navy) attended it.

The department of International Relations and Cooperation shall facilitate the process of depositing the instrument of ratification with the Secretary-General of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) upon approval of ratification by Parliament. The Cape Town Agreement would not impose any additional financial burden to the State and there would be no security implications.

Moloto Road Safety Investigation
Mr Randall Cable, Engineering Manager: SANRAL, briefed members about the Moloto Road safety investigation. The Moloto Road is reportedly linking 28 informal settlements and townships. It has a lack of basic road maintenance such as road signs and street lighting, and there is little regard for road safety.

SANRAL has compiled data and information on the Moloto Road environment where it has identified key conflict points, operational data, visual assessments, and remedial measures. It has been established that there are between 10 000 and 12 000 vehicles that use this road per day. During peak hours the number of vehicles reach 1 200. There are approximately 500 pedestrians per day travelling along the road at these sections. Many travelled and crossed in the dark. The route serves as a mobility function and there are big differences in speeds. A lot of trading is happening in the road reserve and on many intersections.

The Mpumalanga and Limpopo sections of the Moloto Road have been transferred to SANRAL. There have been no formal requests from the Gauteng Premier regarding the Gauteng sections of the Moloto Road. SANRAL has already commenced with road maintenance on the sections transferred. The focus is on the most critical section, that is, the first 25 kilometres where there is a highest number of crashes, highest pedestrian volumes, and high density of schools.

Major intersections have been upgraded in both urban and rural sections. Most hazardous illegal accesses have been closed and existing streetlights have been repaired. Informal trading has been relocated. Upgrades on cross sections are on the cards in order to improve mobility and accessibility functions.

(Graphs were shown to illustrate crash data analysis in both Mpumalanga and Limpopo)

PRASA: Moloto Rail Development Corridor
Mr Zwelakhe Mayaba Group Executive for Strategic Projects: PRASA, informed the Committee the project has been identified as a component of the Strategic Integrated Projects (SIP) 01. It is believed it would unlock the northern mineral belt of South Africa under the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission (PICC).

This project has taken into consideration the long travel times that people take from Mpumalanga and Limpopo to Pretoria; road accidents with loss of life, injuries and damage to property which cost both the government and commuters; unacceptable bus service quality; insufficient and poor road network; and increasing traffic congestion in urban areas.

According to the operational plan, it is estimated that 15 000 passenger would be transported per hour. There would be 46 train sets; 2-hour peak high; 54 million operational km (base year); 3 new staging yards in the corridor; 22.5 million passenger trips per year; and 12 car train sets.

The rail infrastructure is going to consists of:

• 125 km of double track
• 3KV DC OHTE
• 38 Road over rail bridges
• 23 Rail over road bridges
• 9 pedestrian bridges
• 44 river crossings
• 14 new stations
• 1 major multi modal interchange
• 120km/h operational design speed
• Signalling Systems

The project is not going to have environmental fatal flaws. A full Environmental Impact Assessment is required. A variety of environmental issues would also be taken into consideration. An extensive public participation process is also required.

Funding is requested for the preliminary design, the Environmental Impact Assessment  (EIA) process and the funding of the PIMO in PRASA. A sum of R261 266 724 has been applied for. A Treasury Approval 1 application was submitted in October 2014. The National Treasury Review Committee considered the application on 26 June 2015. PRASA and DOT are awaiting formal feedback from National Treasury.

National Treasury raised a concern that the rail demand forecast indicates an increase in passengers that would entrench the spatial distortions of apartheid. The rail proposal is an improved level of service vs current contracting arrangements, and would promote Transit Oriented Developments (TOD), act as a driver for local economic development, and promote job creation and improve social cohesion through feeder services that would link social and economic infrastructure. An immediate approval for 2016/17 funding is required.
 

Preliminary Design Processes that are to commence are required in the following work streams:

• Technical (Prelim Design, route determination)
• Optimised Financial Solution
• Environmental Studies
• PIMO fully operational

Economic development and spatial development plans are to be coordinated via the Municipal IDPs and guidance of the PICC relevant SIPs.

PRASA has established the Project Implementation and Management Office (PIMO), located at the PRASA House in Hatfield. PRASA is to further manage the processes for TA 2 & 3 Approvals and see the project to completion. The DOT would continue working with PRASA and do the monitoring.

Discussion

Ratification of the African Maritime Transport Charter Presentation
Mr P Sibande (ANC) asked why it took so long for the matter to reach the Committee yet it was adopted in 2009. Would these laws be binding to the lakes because there are lakes in the continent, and what did the Department want to achieve by approaching the Committee.

Adv. Sobekwa, on why the Convention took so long, explained that it took long at the AU itself. They were too slow to ratify. Even SA discovered the slow movement and decided that the Convention should be revisited in order to correct the gaps that were there. Regarding the issue of lakes, she indicated that the laws would be binding on condition they ratify. The Convention would connect inland waterways and would be persuaded to be part of the Convention. Pertaining to what the Department wants to achieve, the whole thing is about economic growth. Operation Phakisa states that the Department should start linking regionally and continentally. The Department wants to achieve an economy that would be growing continentally and protect the existing regional and continental environmental resources.

The Chairperson asked if there had been consultation with the Departments of Environmental Affairs and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, and Economic Cluster and other committees to ensure there is synergy in what the Department is doing, and also taking into account of the International Conventions.

Adv. Sobekwa stated that extensive consultation was done. An opinion was received from the State Law Advisor, Department of International Relations and Cooperation, Maritime Industry, National Treasury, DG Cluster and some government departments. No negative comments were received. Synergy is already there.  Once the charter comes into force and is ratified, SA has been advised by the UN Maritime Desk to take a leading role.

Mr G Radebe (ANC) remarked that the Department of Higher Education and Training was supposed to be consulted because there is a question of capacity and skills that needs to be addressed.

Mr Sibande wanted to know what the attitude of the Francophone speaking countries is in the continent because they usually objected to issues.

Adv. Sobekwa pointed out there is coldness from the side of these countries and they are not keen to support the southern region. They do not expose this coldness in meetings, but there is an IMO agreement that binds the Anglophone and Francophone countries. They are always quiet in meetings on issues raised by the south. African Francophone countries started getting reticent after seeing that SA was taking a centre stage in Maritime matters and has joined the rest of the world.

Ratification of the Cape Town Agreement Presentation
Mr Sibande asked if the country had capacity to deal with sea incidents if the ratification of the Cape Town Agreement is going to have no security implications. He also commented that there is a concern that some ships are not registered. Piracy is a big problem, and South Africa is seen as a dumping ground for wrecks.

Adv. Sobekwa said there is capacity to deal with sea related incidents. The MRCC is working 24 hours and 7 days a week for any incidents and vessels sinking at sea or vessels in distress. That gets reported. SAMSA does not allow vessels to pass if they are not repaired. This applies also to the fishing vessels. SAMSA has employed more than 60 surveyors to look into this matter. There are radio communication equipments.

Mr Radebe suggested that the Committee should be briefed about the Torremolinos Protocol so that it understood it thoroughly before passing or signing the Convention. He further asked for clarity on the assertion that there would be no financial implications for the Cape Town Agreement.

Adv. Sobekwa explained that SAMSA is doing the work. The SA navy is looking at invasions on our territory at the borders. South Africa has long-range identification systems to look at hazards that encroach on our territories. Security is being taken care of.

The Chairperson suggested that the Department should re-write the sentences that say there would be no financial and security implications because the way they are phrased may be misleading.

Adv. Sobekwa agreed with the idea, noting that because SAMSA is doing the work, it is clear that everything has been budgeted for and there would be work that is going to be done by other departments. There would be financial implications. That is why she indicated that regulations are still being drafted and work on small vessels is continuing.

SANRAL Progress Report on Moloto Road Presentation
Mr Radebe suggested that visibility signs on the traffic circles on the Moloto Road should be seen from afar before reaching the circles. At present there is a lack of signs. The Moloto Road should use the signs that are similar to those that are on N17 to Ermelo. He asked how SANRAL planned to address the problem of people not observing traffic signs because there is a lot of economic activity on major intersections.

Mr Cable reported that SANRAL has adopted a safe system approach. It’s a new different way of thinking about road safety and not the conventional way. Many countries have adopted this new approach. On the Moloto Road there are no signs or reserved areas for pedestrians. It is not a problem to provide infrastructure, the main problem lay with road users. They need to change their behaviour. You can provide infrastructure, but if road users are not changing their behaviour, nothing is going to change.

Mr Sibande asked for clarification on why SANRAL is busy working with the Gauteng Province while the initial work is supposed to be with Mpumalanga and Limpopo, the most affected provinces. He enquired about the population of the people in the affected area. He remarked that the presentation said nothing about pedestrian bridges. He asked out how far SANRAL had gone regarding consultation and interaction with stakeholders.

Mr Cable, on the issue of working with Gauteng, indicated that the Gauteng provincial government wants the road to be declared a national road. Over the next three years, a sum of R4,1 billion has to be secured for planning and a further R4 billion would be needed for both integration and infrastructure. The population up to Siyabuswa area stood at 714 000 and was growing at a rate of 1000 per annum. Pertaining to pedestrian bridges, the design of the project was not yet completed. The issue was noted and already being incorporated in the plans. On the issue of consultations, he pointed out that SANRAL has reached over 70 000 learners across the country on road safety. Schools have taken ownership of the programme. SANRAL trains the trainers. The project has already been taken to the Moloto Road.

The Chairperson asked how the encroachment of the road by traders is going to be addressed, and enquired why Gauteng was delaying to hand over the road to SANRAL and the Department.

Mr Cable responded that sufficient space is reserved for informal traders. With regard to the Gauteng delay, the Minister has intervened with the premiers and discussions on the matter are still continuing.

Mr Radebe remarked that Gauteng is delaying the project although the Department has been given a go-ahead by Limpopo and Mpumalanga to start the work. A sum of R1 billion has been allocated already. Work should start from the affected areas and the Gauteng area could be done later. Accidents should be minimised.

Mr Sibande commented that the Department had a research document, a newly appointed director-general, and an allocation of R1 billion. Excuses were no longer acceptable. SANRAL and the Department should start engaging with the people and educate them about the project.

Mr Whitey Maphakela, Acting Deputy Director-General: DOT, commenting on why work has not started, informed members that the road has been transferred to SANRAL by Mpumalanga and Limpopo. Construction of the road is a process. A service provider would be appointed to look at the design of the road and implementation of the work. The Department has also to look at the beneficiation because there would be a lot of sub-contracted work on the project.

Mr Sibande asked the Department if it had a mechanism for monitoring the buses being used to transport people from Mpumalanga to Pretoria, buses that the government is subsidising.

Mr Maphakela said there is a mechanism and monitoring is done on a daily basis. The main problem is poor service. The buses are old and the introduction of new buses would come with costs. The problem of old buses is a problem in the whole country. For the past 18 years, services have not been redesigned. That is why now every five years the contract has to be renewed because things change on the ground every day and services have to be based on the demand.

Mr Radebe commented that Autopax bought more than 200 buses to service Mamelodi and 120 were not used. PUTCO threatened to pull out. He asked if the Department would be able to take over the services.

Mr Maphakela explained that Autopax is providing the service on a contract basis. For the first three months the Gauteng Transport Department is going to review its current rate. Everything is going to depend on the contract that is going to be signed with them.

Mr Radebe asked if it would not be better to appoint a service provider that can deliver services rather than negotiating a contract with an existing service provider.

Mr Maphakela indicated that negotiation is another way of contracting and you have an option of putting up services for tender. It is better to negotiate. When you negotiate, you get the stipulated budget and you bring in some other elements like empowerment and BEE. It is a confined process. Opening up a tender costs a lot of money and time, and there are specifications that have to be followed. The Department is trying to adopt the tender process and is negotiating with the National Treasury.

PRASA Presentation
Mr Sibande remarked that the presentation did not give a breakdown on the number of women and youth who are going to be employed on the envisaged project.

Mr Zwelakhe Mayaba said they could not at this stage have numbers on the number of jobs to be created. They were just reporting on the feasibility of the project.

Mr Radebe wanted to know if in terms of the MTEF framework the Moloto Road project is a Public Private Partnership project.

Mr Mayaba indicated that the MTEF framework could not be used for now because you first need Treasury Approval 1. Thereafter, you need the PPP Approval 1, and then the National Treasury would be able to establish the MTEF required for the project.

The meeting was adjourned.