National Land Transport Amendment Bill: consideration of President’s reservations 20 September 2022

Meeting report

Opening remarks
Mr L McDonald (ANC) said there should be a moment of silence for the 21 children who lost their lives in a tragic accident in Pongola.

The Chairperson said condolences for all the victims of the accidents that have recently happened. A statement will be issued on the 21 children who have lost their lives.

He explained that the purpose of the meeting was to update the Select Committee on the Portfolio Committee’s handling of the President’s reservations about the National Land Transport Amendment Bill.

President’s reservations on National Land Transport Amendment Bill
Ms Noluthando Mpikashe, Parliamentary Legal Advisor, summarised the President’s reservations on the National Land Transport Amendment Bill. Clause 7(a) appears to conflict with the principle that national and provincial governments are not generally permitted, via legislation, to assume the local government functions for themselves. Clause 7(b) appears to allow provinces themselves to conclude the relevant public transport contracts with operators, which also appears to be in conflict with the principle that national and provincial governments are not generally permitted, via legislation, to assume the local government functions for themselves. The President was concerned about the constitutionality of section 11(6) as amended by clause 7(m), which would delete the provision that would allow for a public transport function to be assigned by the Minister and instead vests the contracting authority automatically in the province. This is inconsistent with the Constitution and the principle that national and provincial governments are not generally permitted, via legislation, to assume the local government functions for themselves. Clause 7(i) is part of the package of amendments that the Bill makes to the division of responsibilities between the national, provincial and local government. Clauses 7(j), (k) and (l) are not clear on whether the intent and effect of clauses 7(j)-(l) of the Bill is to preclude the assignment powers contemplated in section 156(4) of the Constitution. If that were to be the effect, it would be unconstitutional. Based on these reservations, these paragraphs should be omitted and there should be a renumbering of the paragraphs.

Discussion
Mr K Mmoiemang (ANC, Northern Cape), Chairperson: Select Committee, appreciated the presentation and said he understood the President’s reservations about the constitutionality of the clauses.

Mr T Brauteseth (DA, Kwazulu-Natal) asked what the way forward would be.

The Chairperson explained that the clause-by-clause deliberations pertaining to the President’s reservations on the Bill would be done next. The Portfolio Committee would then adopt a report. The Bill would be processed by Parliament and then sent to the Select Committee before it was taken to the President for assent.

Ms Valerie Carelse, Secretary, Portfolio Committee on Transport, said that the Bill would go straight to the President after the Portfolio Committee had adopted its report.

The Chairperson thanked the Members of the Select Committee for attending.

Clause-by-clause deliberations on the National Land Transport Amendment Bill on matters pertaining to the President’s reservations
Clause 1 as amended.
Accepted by the Committee.

Clause 7 as amended.
Accepted by the Committee.

Long title as amended.
Accepted by the Committee.

Mr McDonald moved for the adoption of the amended clauses.

Ms M Ramadwa (ANC) seconded the motion. She moved for adoption of the F-list of changes.

Mr McDonald seconded the motion.

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Transport on the President’s reservations on the National Land Transport Amendment Bill [B 7D – 2016] (National Assembly – sec 76)
Mr McDonald moved for the adoption of the report.

Ms Ramadwa second the motion.

Mr L Mangcu (ANC) asked whether it should be mentioned that this was the second time this Bill has been reported on.

Ms Carelse replied that the report specifically stated that it pertained to the President’s reservations on the constitutionality of the Bill, whereas other reports were based on the Committee’s observations.

Mr C Hunsinger (DA) added that it was appropriate that the report under consideration did not refer to the report adopted when the Bill was first processed. The current report should be seen as a parallel report expressing the process of the procedure for getting the Bill enacted.

The meeting was adjourned.