National Environmental Management Bio Diversity Bill: voting mandates
NCOP Agriculture, Land Reform and Mineral Resources
04 February 2004
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
LAND AND ENVIRONMENT SELECT COMMITTEE
4 February 2004
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT: BIODIVERSITY BILL: FINAL MANDATES
Chairperson:
Documents handed out:
National Environmental Management Bio Diversity Bill [B30D-2003]
Voting Mandates (see Appendix)
Committee draft programme
Portfolio Committee amendments to the Bill [B30C-2003]
Summary
The Committee approved the Portfolio Committee amendments to the National Environmental Management: Bio Diversity Bill without further changes.
The inversion of the usual tabling procedure caused confusion amongst members. This resulted in the Western Cape abstaining from the vote because its new proposed amendments were not accepted. This Bill had been tabled in the NCOP first and then the National Assembly, who in turn referred its amendments back to the NCOP.
Minutes
The Chair welcomed everyone and said he hoped 2004 would be a productive year for all. He noted that the Environmental Affairs and Tourism Portfolio Committee had amended the National Environmental Management: Bio Diversity Bill and had submitted it to the NCOP for consideration.
A Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism official said the department was happy with the Portfolio Committee amendments and saw these as refinements to the Bill. She highlighted the alterations made to Chapter 6 in the Bill, which mainly entailed more elegant wording as well as the amendments made to the definition of "indigenous biological resource" to include indigenous knowledge.
Mr Windvoel (Mpumalanga ANC) said that the NCOP had made amendments to this Bill when it considered it late in 2003. He said that this should be reflected on the Bill.
Ms P Yako, Deputy Director-General Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, replied that all the NCOP amendments had been incorporated into the Bill.
Mr Windvoel said that if the NCOP amendments were included in the Bill, perhaps it should be noted on the front of the Bill that amendments from both Committees were included.
The Chair pointed out that usually Bills were submitted to the National Assembly first and then to the NCOP, however in this instance the process had been inverted and the NCOP had dealt with this Bill before the National Assembly.
Mr Windvoel said he appreciated the Chair's point, but asked only if the wording on the Bill should indicate that both Committees had amended it.
The Chair asked the Department or the State Law Advisor for guidance.
Ms Yako replied that she was perhaps not the best qualified person to explain the numbering process of legislation. After the NCOP had made amendments and forwarded those to the National Assembly, the Bill had indicated 'As amended by the Select Committee' on the front page.
Mr MA Suliman (Northern Cape ANC) said the situation appeared to be a unique one but he saw no harm in adding to the wording on the Bill to indicate both houses had contributed.
Mr Windvoel said he had not anticipated so much discussion on this point. He only wondered whether including such wording was possible.
A Committee member explained that the correct procedure had been followed and the National Assembly had amended [B30D-2003] what the NCOP had tabled [B30B-2003].
Final Mandates
All provinces presented their final mandates. The Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Limpopo and Free State legislatures indicated complete support for the Bill.
Kwazulu-Natal and the North West Province supported the Bill but urged the committee to consider the issues listed in their Final Mandates.
The Western Cape proposed the inclusion of the word 'potential' in Part 3 of Chapter 5 of the Bill which read 'Other Threats" dealing with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs).
Ms A Versfeld (Western Cape) said the province felt the wording implied all GMOs threatened human health and should therefor indicate 'potential' to distinguish between threatening and non-threatening GMOs.
The Chair pointed out to the Western Cape, Kwazulu-Natal and the North West Province that due to the inversion of the usual tabling procedure, according to parliamentary process, if the Committee proposed further amendments at this stage, the matter would have to go for mediation.
Mr Suliman said he saw no need to amend the heading and advised it be left as is.
Mr Windvoel said Clause 78(1) indicated the discretionary authority of the relevant minister to consider threatening and non-threatening GMOs.
Voting on the Bill
Ms Versfeld said she was uncertain of the way forward as she had been given a mandate to have the amendment of "Other potential threats" included and could not support the Bill without its inclusion.
The committee members acknowledged her position and suggested the Western Cape abstain.
The Committee voted on the Bill and all provinces approved it, with the exception of the Western Cape, which abstained.
The meeting was adjourned.
Appendix:
Final mandates:
The Eastern Cape, Northern Cape, Gauteng, Mpumalanga, Limpopo and Free State legislatures conferred a final mandate to their NCOP Permanent Delegates to vote in favour of the National Environmental Management Bio Diversity Bill [B30D-2003].
Western Cape Provincial Parliament
The Standing Committee on Local Government, Environmental Affairs and Development planning on the National Environmental Management Bio diversity Bill (B30D-2003) (NCOP), referred to the Provincial Parliament in terms of the rules of the National Council Of Provinces, begs to report that it conferson the Western Cape's delegation in the NCOP the authority to support the Bill with the following recommendation.
That on page 30, in line 2 after "Other" to insert "potential"
Kwazulu-Natal Provincial Parliament
The Committee noted the editorial omissions and/ or errors listed below in the final amended version of the Bill [B3OD- 2003), which incorporates the amendments agreed to by the National Assembly Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism, as reflected in the "C" version of the Bill {3OC -2003] The Committee would therefore recommend that recognition and/or errors be addressed:
{A} Clause I
Oil page 7, after line 4, to insert a definition of "biosafety".
The term 'biosafety' appears on page 36 in line 26~ yet it is not defined The meaning of the term is unclear
(B) Clause 45(a)
On page 21, in line 26, to omit 'and", in accordance with the amendment sought in the "C" version of the Bill (B30C -2OO3), thus
(a) be aimed at ensuring the long-term survival in nature of the species or
ecosystem to which the plan relates; (and]"
The failure to omit 'and' where indicated appears to be an oversight only, as this is an amendment sought in the "C'-version of the Bill {3OC-2OO3}
Considering the amendments sought to Clause 45 of the Bill currently under consideration {B 30D-2OO3] 'and' ought to be omitted
{C} Clause 66(1)
On page 27, in line 10, to omit the reference to '64-" and to insert '65-', thus;
(1) The Minister may, by notice in the Gazette exempt from the provisions of section [64}65'
The reference to section "64' appears to be an oversight and is clearly incorrect, given the context. The reference to '64" was seemingly carried Over from an earlier version of the Bill (B3OB-2003], where the text of section 64 corresponds with the text of section 65 in the current version of the Bill [B3OD-2003] Due to the insertion of new clauses in the current version of the Bill [D3OD-2003], the numbering of the clauses has changed thus necessitating the amendment listed above.
(D) Clause 73(2)
On page 28, in line 24, to omit paragraph (a)~ in accordance with the amendrnent sought in the 'C'-version of the Bill (30C-2003} and to change the numbering of the remaining paragraphs as a consequence of the deletion, thus:
a)Notify any relevant competent authority, in writing, of the listed invasive species occurring on that land;]
b) (a)take steps to control and eradicate the listed invasive species and to
prevent it from spreading; and
(C)](b) take all the required steps to prevent or rninimise harm to biodiversity"
The failure to omit paragraph (a) where indicated appears to be an oversight only, as this is an amendment sought In the "C"-version of the Bill [B30C-2003].
The provincial delegation is further mandated to consider any additional amendments, providing that:
Proviso
1) such amendment/s does/do not alter the essential elements of the bill; and
2) consensus is reached on such proposed amendment/s by the Kwazulu-Natal delegates attending the Select Committee finalizing the Bill and/or the plenary session of the NCOP voting on the Bill
North West Province Provincial Parliament
Concerns
In p.2 of the amendment clause 4(a) states ……." bioIogical resource as defined section 80…. " Clause 8O of the Bill under review deals with 'Benefit sharing agreements' Nowhere does it define the aforesaid terminology, The said definition is, rather found in p29 clause 78(3) of the Bill under review,
In p.4 of the amendment under NEW CLAUSE the subtitle siIently amends the one in the Bill under review by omitting the word "national"".
Elsewhere in the amendment when the same word is to be deleted in the Bill under review it is clearly so stated.
In p8 of the amendment clause 80 seems to be amending clause 78 of the Bill under review without so stating.
Resolution
The Portfolio Committee having considered the input on the rninutes of the Select Committee resoIved that the permanent deIegate should discuss in line with other provinces and support the essence and the principle of the bill.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Present
- 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.