The Committee met to consider its Report on the Adjustment Budget Vote of the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure and its entities. The Report was adopted. The EFF did not support the Report while the DA abstained.
The DA said it would be much happy if the conclusion of the Report read: “noted the reprioritisation of funds’ and take out the word ‘welcomed’ because it does not welcome the entire reprioritisation. There is a difference of opinion on how the funds could have reprioritised. That change would be a much more accurate reflection of the meeting. If the word cannot be changed then the DA will reserve its opinion and abstain from the vote.
Report of the Select Committee on Transport Public Service and Administration, Public Works And Infrastructure on Budget Vote 13: Public Works and Infrastructure, and Strategic Plans and Annual Performance Plans 2020-21 of the Department of Transport and Entities Reporting To The Minister of Transport
The Chairperson welcomed the Members and outlined that the purpose of the meeting is the consideration and adoption of the Report on the Adjustment Budget of Vote 13: Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) and its entities
The Secretary explained the process that is going to be followed in the meeting when processing the Report. The Report would be processed in terms in terms of section 155 (3) of the NCOP Rules which states that when a question is to be decided in terms of section 75 of the Constitution, the question may be decided only if the majority of permanent Members of the Committee are present. In the present meeting there are six permanent Members of the Committee present; the question is to be decided by the majority of votes, this is clear (c) if there is an equal number of votes on each side of the question, the Chairperson is to must cast the deciding vote in the meeting as an ordinary Member.
The Secretary took Members through the Report
This is the recommendation by the Committee to the Council.
The Chairperson asked for any reflection on the Report.
Mr T Brauteseth (DA, KZN) said he had read through the Report the previous night in detail. He said he is happy with the Report as a record of the work that was done. He said he only has one problem with the Report and that is on the last paragraph in the conclusion where it says that the Committee ‘noted and welcomed’ the report of the Department because he recollected there were various critiques of the reprioritisation of the funds - the Committee felt they could have gone to other direction. The Democratic Alliance would be much happy if the conclusion read: “noted the reprioritisation of funds’ and take out the word ‘welcomed’ because it does not welcome the entire reprioritisation. There is a difference of opinion on how the funds could have reprioritised. That change would be a much more accurate reflection of the meeting. If the word cannot be changed then the DA will reserve its opinion and abstain from the vote.
The Chairperson asked Members if they agree with the sentiments shared by Mr Brauteseth.
Mr M Rayi (ANC, Eastern Cape) agreed, at least procedurally. He said if it is to continue the way it is, then it should outline that the DA or any other Member reserved their vote.
In seeking clarity, the Chairperson asked if Mr Rayi is saying the Report should stay the way it is.
Mr Rayi replied and said that question should be asked to the whole Committee, that is, all the Members present, by a vote of a majority whether they think the wording highlighted by Mr Brauteseth should remain the same or whether it should be changed as per Mr Brauteseth’s request. If the Committee decides to stay with the original wording, then the Report will be adopted as it is but with a reflection of the reservation of the DA that has been noted by Mr Brauteseth. So what needs to happen is that the Committee needs to decide whether is accepts the Report as is or if it wants to change it. He then went to say he does not have a problem with how the Report is structured as such he moves for its adoption.
Mr M Dangor (ANC, Gauteng) said he seconds the motion to adopt the Report as is.
Mr E Landsman (ANC, North West) also said he supports the motion to adopt the Report as it is.
Mr J Londt (DA, Western Cape) abstained from voting.
Mr T Apleni (EFF, Eastern Cape) voted against the adoption.
Mr Brauteseth retained his position and abstained from voting.
Ms M Moshodi (ANC, Free State) voted to adopt the Report as is.
Ms M Mamaregane (ANC, Limpopo) voted to adopt the Report as is.
The Chairperson also adopted the Report as is.
The Report was duly adopted.
The Chairperson thanked the Members of the Committee for their commitment.
The meeting was adjourned.
No related documents
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.