Division of Revenue Bill: Final Mandate; Committee Quarterly Reports

Meeting report

Western Cape Final Mandate on Division of Revenue Bill [B6-2022]

The Chairperson asked the Committee procedural staff whether anything in the [Division of Revenue] Bill had been changed by the National Council of Provinces (NCOP).

The Procedural Officer replied that no changes had been made to the Bill, and the other eight provinces supported the Bill.

The Chairperson then called for Members’ input on the Bill.

Mr L Mvimbi (ANC) expressed the Official Opposition’s support of the Bill.

Mr R Mackenzie (DA) said that his initial view (to not support) the Bill, stood.

Mr D America (DA) said that he supported the mandate of the Western Cape delegation to the NCOP [to not support the Bill].

MR G Brinkhuis (Al Jama-ah) said that his views remained unchanged and confirmed support of the Bill.

The Chairperson confirmed that the Western Cape delegation did not support the Division of Revenue Bill.

The Chairperson then requested the procedural staff flight the Committee Report on the Bill and ensure the minority views of the Official Opposition (ANC) and Al Jama-ah also be reflected.

Members agreed the report was an accurate account and adopted it.  

All Members agreed in the affirmative and the Report was adopted by the Standing Committee.

Committee minutes
Committee minutes dated 22 April 2022

The minutes were adopted.

Committee Quarterly Reports
The Committee considered and adopted its quarterly reports on activities for October-December 2021and
January-March 2022.

The Chairperson noted that the Committee had extended an invitation to the Children’s Commissioner to attend the budget workshop. She could not attend as she had fallen ill.

The Chairperson said R220 000 was spent on the workshop. This total also included the additional amount that had been allocated by the WCPP.

Extra costs included marketing, catering and extra allocations for accommodation and travel.

Resolutions taken at the budget workshop had been implemented.

Annual Committee Report of the Budget Committee for the 2021/22 financial year

The report was considered and adopted.

The Chairperson noted she met with Mr Andre Le Roux, parliamentary legal adviser, on how the Procedural Hub could assist with drafting the Bill.

Mr Le Roux’s view was that the process would not be a short one.

The Chairperson had disagreed with this assessment. She had been able to set out timeframes for the Bill. The drafting of the Bill would be completed by the end of 2022.

The processing of the Bill would then take an additional eight months. This timeframe would also include public hearings. This will take the process to at least the end of August 2023.

The Committee had also resolved that clauses be inserted into the Bill that would allow for the gradual introduction of the Bill.

The Chairperson said the Committee remained committed to complete the Bill within this parliamentary term.

 She also informed that the Committee would convene a panel of experts that would work in close operation with the parliamentary unit of the Western Cape Provincial Parliament to guide and assist the Committee with policy guidelines and budgeting.

The Chairperson also informed Members that discussions centred on the procurement of experts for capacity development programmes for Members. Regarding this, the legal representatives had advised that in the absence of a memorandum of agreement, the Committee had the option of procuring external experts.

On the other hand, the Financial and Fiscal Commission had been tasked with the mandate to assist provinces on exactly the same subject matter.

The Chairperson expressed reservations about the capacity of the institution to assist the province since national government funded the latter.

The option of a retired Justice also remained on the cards, as they are compelled to serve without remuneration.

The Chairperson also explained that the Committee’s recommendation would also include that the Budget Committee would draft the Bill, whereas the Finance Standing Committee would process it.

She said that the Amendment Procedural Bill remained different to that of a Money Bill, and proposed that a follow-up meeting be held by June/July with experts where the Bill could be discussed with Members.

This would allow Members the opportunity to be apprised on matters and be able to present them to their various political constituencies.

She also noted that during that interaction, the Committee should also be able to provide the panel of experts and parliamentary legal representative with the values, norms and guidelines of  what the Committee expected from them, and how the Bill should be crafted etc. She then promised to send a summary of her conversation with Mr Le Roux to Members.

She thanked Members for their participation and adjourned the meeting.