Petroleum Products Amendment Bill: adoption

This premium content has been made freely available

Mineral Resources and Energy

28 August 2003
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

28 August 2003
Petroleum Products Amendment Bill: ADOPTION

Mr M Goniwe (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Petroleum Products Amendment Bill, Version of 28 August 2003
Petroleum Products Amendment Bill - Final version as voted on (this document should be available once the Sate Law Advisors have released it.)

Dr Crompton described the changes made to the Bill since the Version of 26 August 2003. The Committee adopted the Bill with amendments. The Democratic Alliance abstained from voting as a mandate had not yet been obtained from the party caucus.

Amendments to the Petroleum Products Amendment Bill
Dr Crompton described the changes made to the Bill since the previous day's meeting.
There had been discussion about the appropriateness of the word promote in the Long Title of the Bill. According to the State Law Advisors, it is indeed the correct word to use. Thus, the phrase in question continues to read: "to promote the transformation of the South African petroleum and liquid fuels industry."

In Clause 1(a), the word definition has been changed to its plural form, 'definitions'.
The definition for the word hold has been changed. It now reads: "when in relation to land means the owning of land for the purpose of establishing a site." The phrase, "when in relation to land" and "for the" has been added.

In Clause 1(d), new definitions for the words paraffin and prescribe have been added.

In Clause 3, in Section 2A(5) the words 'the principal' has been removed.

In Clause 3, in Section 2E(2), the word consider has changed to considering.

In Clause 3, there had been uncertainty in the previous meeting if 'intend' should be used in Section 2E(3)(a) and (b). The State Law Advisors had said that it is the right word to use.

In Clause 3, Section 2E(3)(f) had been replaced by a new paragraph (f).

In Clause 3, Section 2E(3)(g), 'licence' has been replaced with its plural form.

In Clause 3, Section 2E(5) has been changed to accommodate the new definition of 'hold'.

In Clause 3, Section 2F, the numbering has been corrected.

In Clause 13, Section 12B(4)(a) Arbitration has had the phrase 'unfair or unreasonable contractual' deleted and in 4(b) the phrase 'frivolous or capricious' has been deleted.

In Clause 13, Section 12C(a)(v)(cc) Regulations has had the word 'possessed' replaced by 'held'.

In Clause 13, Section 12C(a)(vii) 'thereof' is replaced by 'of the licenced property'.

The Chair proposed that the Committee should adopt the Bill in its current form and present it to Parliament. The Committee agreed.

Informal consideration of the Bill
The Chair mentioned each clause of the Bill in order for members to show approval or dissent.

Regarding Clause two, Mr I Davidson (DA), asked if manufacturers should not be included in the definition of wholesaler.

Dr Crompton replied that this matter would be looked at later.

Mr Davidson asked if the Regulations of 12C apply to people currently holding licences.

Dr Crompton replied that it does not apply. The Constitution states that anything held by a person cannot be taken away.

The ACDP objected to Clause 2B(5). The Chairperson noted their objection.

Mr Davidson questioned the merits of Clause 2C and asked if it would apply only to new licence applications.

In reply, an ANC member commented that such a view is going against transformation, and that it would preserve the status quo.

Mr Davidson said that one has to look at the logic of the Bill. According to Clause 2D any person owning a site is a licence holder, and 2C would be imposing on them.

Dr Crompton said that one could not say only new licences apply, and that anything imposing is unconstitutional. One has to read the Act in the context of the Constitution.

The remaining clauses were agreed to by the Committee.

The Chairperson asked for a clear definition of wholesalers.

Mr Crompton replied that "or from a licenced manufacturer" should be added to the definition.

Motion from the Democratic Alliance
The Chairperson noted a motion introduced by the DA that it would not be able to vote.

Mr Davidson said that he did not have a mandate from his party. The DA caucus would have to confer on the Bill since there had been changes to the Bill. The soonest they could meet is 4 September.

An ANC member said that the issues had been before the committee for some time and that the DA caucus meeting would be a waste of time.

Mr Davidson replied that it is preposterous that the ANC wants to tell the DA how to do their business. He repeated that their caucus meeting would take place on 4 September.

The Chairperson said that every party's views must be respected.

Voting on Bill
The Chairperson allowed the formal consideration of the Bill. All sections were agreed to, except for Clause 2B(5). The ACDP voiced their objection to Clause 2B(5) and the Chairperson noted it. The whole Bill was agreed to. The Democratic Alliance abstained from voting. The Chairperson gave his report on the Bill and thanked the members of the committee for their hard work on the Bill. He also thanked Dr Crompton for his hard work in drafting the Bill.

The meeting was adjourned.


No related


No related documents


  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: