South African Development Community protocol ratification on fisheries: Briefing; Business plan 2003-2006: Discussion

Meeting report

LAND AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
4 June 2003
SOUTH AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY PROTOCOL RATIFICATION ON FISHERIES: BRIEFING; BUSINESS PLAN 2003-2006: DISCUSSION

Documents handed out:
SADC protocol on Fisheries
Draft Business Plan for the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs (Appendix - final version to be completed later)

SUMMARY
Marine and Coastal Management briefed the Committee on the Southern African Development Community protocol on fisheries. It was accepted for ratification by the Committee. Some details of the trip to Mozambique and Namibia were discussed. The Business plan for the committee was tentatively accepted, with the understanding that there would be room for discussion at a later stage.

MINUTES
Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Fisheries
Mr Buthelezi, Chief Director, Resource Management of Marine Coastal Management presented the proposed protocol to the Committee. He went through the process of formulation, starting at a workshop in Windhoek in 1997.

The objective of the protocol is to promote responsible and sustainable use of the living aquatic resources and ecosystems of the SADC region. Mr Buthelezi summarized the provisions of the protocol, which incorporated a broad range of law enforcement and resource development issues.

Mr Buthelezi summarized the advantages of ratification:
The harmonization of policies and legislation around fisheries management
The enhancement of management of unsustainable resources
Opportunities for common policies between member states
The demonstration of South Africa's commitment to regional co-operation and economic integration
Joint negotiations about foreign fishing access
Access to financial resources
Opportunities for exchange of scientific information

He mentioned that there had been some concerns regarding a conflict with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), but stated that this has been clarified: member states had to go to the SADC tribunal before they could utilize UNCLOS.

Mr Buthelezi summarized who had agreed to ratification so far, and requested approval for ratification from the Committee.

Discussion
Mr Windvoel (Mpumalanga) asked what the financial implications of the protocol were. He was concerned that some of the member states had little capacity.

Mr Buthelezi stated that each country would be financially responsible for itself. There would be no drain on the financial resources of South Africa.

Mr Windvoel also asked how the protocol would contribute towards poverty alleviation.

Mr Buthelezi replied that subsistence fisheries were recognized as an important component in the protocol. Access of disadvantaged communities to resources was specifically addressed in the protocol. The compliance vessels that South Africa was acquiring could result in financial remuneration for South Africa if they are utilised other countries.

The Chair and Ms Thomson (ANC) asked for more information on the compliance vessels.

Mr Buthelezi stated that these vessels would be received in three years time. This was a South African initiative to safeguard SA's resources. There would be both inshore and offshore vessels. Offshore vessels might be utilised by other countries to identify and report on poaching/fishing irregularities in their waters and that it was possible that South Africa would get financial remuneration for this.

Ms Vilakazi (IFP) asked whether all SADC states, including non-coastal states, were involved in the protocol.

Mr Buthelezi stated that all 14 member states were involved, as all states had either fresh, or salt-water fishing interests.

Ms Thomson asked for more information on the benefits to disadvantaged communities. She stated that she had understood that communities were not satisfied with the regulations.

Mr Buthelezi replied that the Marine Living Resources act emphasized the importance of subsistence fisheries, but that, in order to protect the resources from any form of over-utilization, even subsistence fishers needed to have a permit. He said that there was no conflict of interest.

Ms Versfeld (DA) asked for some specific details on the subsistence permits, to which Mr Buthelezi replied that the information was available, but, as it did not directly relate to the proposed protocol, he did not have the answers to hand.

Ms Thompson proposed that the protocol be accepted. This was seconded.

Ms Versfeld stated that before the DA would accept the protocol they would first like to see a report on the state of the fisheries in all the countries, so see what sort of inequalities existed. The chair and Mr Buthelezi replied that this issue was exactly what the protocol was trying to resolve, and therefore that it should be accepted.

The committee agreed to recommend that the protocol be ratified in terms of section 2312. Ms Versfeld re-iterated that the DA was against this decision unless there was information on the stance of other countries.

Trip to Mozambique and Namibia
The committee agreed to visit both countries in one trip. There was some discussion about who would take part in the trip.

Draft Business plan for Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs
The chair stated that the business plan had been reformulated at a workshop. He asked whether the committee accepted the revised plan. Although various members stated that they would like clarification on various issues, it was agreed to support the Business Plan, with the understanding that it could be revisited as the draft version needed to be amended and formally adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.

Appendix
Business Plan for the Select Committee on Land and Environmental Affairs