Measurement Units & Measurement Standards Bill & Accreditation for Conformity Assessment, Calibration & Good Laboratory Practice
NCOP Economic and Business Development
01 November 2006
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AFFAIRS
1 November 2006
MEASUREMENT UNITS AND MEASUREMENT STANDARDS BILL, & ACCREDITATION FOR
CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT, CALIBRATION AND GOOD LABORATORY PRACTICE BILL, &
SACU/EFTA FREE TRADE AGREEMENT: BRIEFINGS
Acting Chairperson: Ms M Temba (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Department
Accreditation presentation
Department Measurement
Units presentation
Measurement units and
Measurement Standards Bill [B21B-2006]
Accreditation for
Conformity Assessment, Calibration and Good Laboratory Practice Bill
[B29B-2006]
SACU-EFTA Free
Trade Agreement Department of Agriculture presentation
SACU-EFTA Free Trade
Agreement Department of Trade and Industry presentation
SACU-EFTA Agreement
Summary
SUMMARY
The Committee met with the Department of Trade and Industry to receive
briefings on the Measurement Units and Measurement Standards Bill and the
Accreditation for Conformity Assessment, Calibration and Good Laboratory
Practice Bills, as well as a briefing on the Southern African Customs Union and
European Free Trade Association’s Free Trade Agreement.
The Measurement Units Bill would seek to provide a legal framework for the
measurement units and standards in South Africa. The National Metrology
Institute would be established as a public entity. A consultative forum would
be set up to advise the Institute on metrology-related
matters. Assets and staff would be transferred from the Council for Scientific
and Industrial Research. The Department
would provide R43 million to the new Institute to facilitate the restructuring
process. Questions were asked on the unbundling and transfer of assets and
staff, the legal implications for the Institute. The State Law Advisors
summarised and explained each of the clauses in the Bill. The portions dealing
with sub-delegation were explained. The Bill was approved by the Committee.
The Department reported that the Accreditation for Conformity Assessment,
Calibration and Good Laboratory Practice Bill sought to provide an
internationally recognised accreditation and Good Laboratory Practice
monitoring system and to establish the South African National Accreditation
System as a public entity. The legislative process was explained. Various key
stakeholders had been consulted. The Cabinet Committee on Governance and
Administration had approved the Bill on 1 August 2006. The assets and
liabilities of the section 21 company would be transferred to the new body. The
current annual budget allocations would be increased. The Bill would manage an
independent assessment of the technical abilities of South African
laboratories, and would address technical barriers to trade would be addressed.
The quality of water would also be included in the scope of the legislation.
The legal advisers briefly outlined each clause of the Bill. Questions were
raised on the market responses to the controls imposed by international trade,
and the penalties for misuse of accreditation. The Bill was adopted by the
Committee.
The Department then reported on the South African Customs Union and European
Free Trade Association’s Free Trade Agreement. Common policy issues would be
developed for a range of traded goods. The agreement would cover fish and
marine products, processed agricultural products and industrial products. It
excluded services, government procurement and intellectual property. The
agreement between nine parties would be ratified before the end of November 2006,
and would be phased in from 1 January 2007 over a period of eight years.
Bilateral agreements were already in existence with a number of other European
countries and the agreement would enhance a common approach to agriculture and
address the issue of subsidies. Questions by members addressed the Nordic
countries involved, whether there would be progress in America. The Department
stated that negotiations were also under way with Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay
and Paraguay. The Committee supported the Free Trade Agreement.
MINUTES
Department of Trade and Industry briefing on Measurement Units and Measurement
Standards Bill
Dr Tshenge Demana, Chief Director:Technical Infrastructure,
Department of Trade and Industry (dti) stated that
technical infrastructure was needed to meet various standards and measurement
challenges. Institutions had to be maintained and improved to remain relevant.
South Africa’s technical infrastructure was outlined. International metrology
was based on an intergovernmental agreement first signed in 1875. The Bill was
required to provide a legal framework for the measurement units and measurement
standards in South Africa. The Bill would also establish the National Metrology
Institute (NMI) as a public entity. An independent Institute was necessary to
ensure greater accessibility for all stakeholders in the Technical
Infrastructure domain. The profile of metrology had to be raised to serve as a
foundation for the entire South African measurement system. A consultative
forum would be established to advise the Institute on metrology-related
matters. The NMI would be tasked with designating national measurement
standards and maintaining national measurement standards and units.
Dr Demana added that the Cabinet Committee on
Governance and Administration had approved the Bill on1 August 2006.
Consultations had taken place with key stakeholders including relevant
government departments, the South African Bureau of Standards and the South
African National Accreditation System. Assets and staff would be transferred
from the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR). A Chief
Executive Officer and a Board would be appointed. The Department would provide
R43 million to the NMI in terms of the annual budget allocation to facilitate
the restructuring process.
Discussion
Mr N Hendricks (UIF-Western Cape) asked whether the proposed unbundling from
the CSIR was necessary as the present metrology system worked well and had
received numerous international compliments. More information was required on
the envisaged staff complement. He asked whether the reconfiguration of the
Institute would not result in increased financial obligations in addition to
the R43 million.
The Chairperson referred to the workshops held with government departments and
asked whether provincial departments had been involved. Such information would
assist the Committee in its oversight function.
Mr D Gamede (ANC-Kwazulu-Natal)
sought further detail on the current level of capacity within the National
Metrology Laboratory (NML) and whether sufficient capacity and skills existed
to establish the new Institute as an effective regulatory body. He asked
whether the financial allocation would be transferred in the next financial
year or over the medium term. Clarity was sought on the number of staff to be
transferred to the newly created Institute and whether the entire staff complement would be accommodated.
Mr Demana responded to all these questions by giving
further background and comments. The international practice was to have
stand-alone independent metrology entities. An Institute was important for the
South African economy so that norms and standards could be developed and
maintained. A single foundation for measurement was needed. The Institute would
liaise with similar institutions on the international level. The present
National Metrology Laboratory had to obtain permission from the CSIR as a
sub-division to engage in any international arrangements or contracts. The NML
currently had a separate budget line and an increase to the base line was
required to fund the reconfiguration. The Institute as an independent entity
would receive a Value Added Tax (VAT) payment correction that would provide
further financial resources. The CSIR had spun off other divisions before and
therefore a historical knowledge regarding the creation of new entities was in
place. New skills had to be acquired on a regular basis to accommodate
technological advances. All the present NML employees would be accommodated in
the Institute. However, the Chief Executive Officer would be a newly created
position. No direct workshops had been held with the provinces. The
Department’s Regional Offices had communicated with the respective provincial
departments.
Mr D Mkono (ANC-Eastern Cape) asked for a legal
definition of a “juristic person” and the possible legal implications for the
Institute.
Ms Regina Musiane (State Law Advisor) stated that the
creation of the Institute as a “juristic person” would convey legal status to
the entity thus enabling it to engage in litigation if need be or enter into
contracts with international organisations. The Institute would be governed by
a statute and would therefore be accountable to Parliament in terms of the
Public Finance Management Act (PFMA).
Mr Johan Strydom (DTI-Senior Legal Advisor) added
that Clause 8 established the Institute as a juristic person and declared that
the establishment would not affect the validity of any action taken by the NML
prior to the commencement of the Act. Clause 28 outlined the transitional
provisions and stated that all rights, obligations, assets and liabilities
acquired or incurred by the NML would vest in the Institute.
Mr Hendricks asked whether any financial obligations and other liabilities
would be transferred to the Institute.
Mr Strydom reiterated that any liabilities and
obligations of the NML would vest in the Institute.
Dr Wynand Louw Manager,
National Metrology Laboratory (currently CSIR), declared that no unsavoury liabilities
would be transferred to the Institute from the NML. The NML had enjoyed a happy
relationship with the CSIR, who now reported to the Department of Social
Development. Previously, the CSIR had reported to the Department of Trade and
Industry. The R43 million should not be perceived as an extra cost for the
Institute. The only additional cost would be for the CEO. A levy was currently
being paid to the CSIR. A financial manager would have to be appointed.
Currently 70% of the budget was received from the dti
plus a certain portion from work for accreditation laboratories. R8 million was
also received from the CSIR research grant.
Mr Mkono proposed that the Committee should adopt the
Bill during the present meeting.
The Chairperson suggested that the Committee should go through the Bill in some
detail prior to adoption.
Ms J Terblanche (DA-North-West) asserted that Members
should rather receive the briefing and then spend the next week considering the
implications of the Bill.
Mr Gamede declared that a reading on the Bill had
occurred in the NCOP and all parties had supported the Bill in principle.
Mr Hendricks added that the Bill was not a contentious piece of legislation.
Mr Mkono stated that the Committee had time
constraints that would necessitate adoption as soon as possible.
Ms Terblanche stated that the reading had not
occurred in the NCOP but rather in the National Assembly. The Bill had not been
placed before the Select Committee before.
Mr Strydom stated that clause 1 dealt with all
relevant definitions. Clause 2 empowered the Minister to publish measurement
units applicable in the Republic in the Government Gazette Clause 3 empowered
the Minister to prohibit the expression of magnitude of quantities and
designation of units.
Dr Louw stated that the equivalent of a unit was the
same as appeared in the Measurement Act of 1973. Equivalent measurement units
would be identified in the Gazette. Clause 5 and 6 dealt with National
Measurement Standards and National Reference Measurements such as the national
kilogram. The national standard was gazetted every second year. The South
African National Accreditation System (SANAS) would be involved in determining
measurement standards. A metrology in chemical section had been added to the
reference measurement procedure to enhance accuracy. Clause 7 stipulated that
the Institute could issue certificates stating the outcome of a measurement or
analysis. Certificates could be used in a court of law as evidence. Drug
standards would be provided to the SAPS to test against.
Mr Mike Pitt , CEO, -SANAS, stated that the
certificates would remove any uncertainty regarding the value of evidence
admissible in court cases.
Mr Strydom briefly outlined the remaining clauses in
the Bill.
Mr Gamede asked why the rule preventing
sub-delegation appeared to be overlooked in the Bill.
Mr Strydom referred to a legal maxim that prevented
further delegation of a delegated task. Parliament however, could create
legislation that, although seemingly contradicting this maxim, could still
adhere to the Constitutional principles. Therefore, legislation could be
formulated that allowed for sub-delegation, if deemed fit and necessary. The
ultimate responsibility for the completion of the delegated function rested
with the first person thus delegated.
Mr Mkono declared that the clause on delegation might
require further clarity. He asked how the use of delegated powers and functions
would be monitored to prevent abuse. A prescription period for dishonesty, as a
criterion to prevent appointment as an Institute Board member, should be
introduced.
Mr Strydom responded that only the functions of the
Board could be delegated and not functions of the Institute. The Board could
delegate certain functions to the CEO, who could in turn delegate to any person
under his or her control. No further delegation could occur after this point.
The reference to dishonesty was open–ended. Therefore convictions prior to 1994
for a particular offence other than dishonesty would not be applicable. Such
persons could become members of the Board. The reference to mentally ill
persons was based upon a court order as opposed to a medical diagnosis.
Briefing by Department on Accreditation for Conformity Assessment,
Calibration and Good Laboratory Practice Bill
Mr Demana outlined the international practice with
regard to accreditation. Conformity assessment services were recognised at the
international level, thereby circumventing the need for retesting in other
countries. Internationally agreed standards were used to accredit laboratories
and inspection and certification bodies. For example, the Department of Labour
used SANAS accreditation to monitor the activity of its approved inspection
service providers. The National Accreditation System had been established in
1994. SANAS had achieved a high level of international recognition. The Bill
sought to provide an internationally recognised accreditation and Good
Laboratory Practice (GLP) monitoring system and to establish SANAS as a public
entity. An independent body was needed to maintain international recognition.
National Treasury had instructed that section 21 companies be phased out.
Private sector bodies would be empowered to operate in the regulatory
environment. The legislative process was explained. Various key stakeholders
had been consulted. The Cabinet Committee on Governance and Administration had
approved the Bill on 1 August 2006. The assets and liabilities of the section
21 company would be transferred to the new body. The current annual budget
allocations would be increased.
Mr Mike Pitt stated that the Bill sought to manage an independent assessment of
the technical abilities of South African laboratories. Certification bodies
would assess the ability of private sector companies to comply with
international management standards such as Good Laboratory Practice. Technical
barriers to trade would be addressed. The quality of water would also be
included in the scope of the legislation. International teams of experts would
visit South Africa every four years to assess the ability of laboratory
results. South Africa had a sound technical infrastructure. Government support
for SANAS was needed to maintain international recognition.
Mr Strydom briefly outlined each clause of the Bill.
Mr Pitt stated that the essence of an internationally recognised accreditation
system revolved around the need to only issue such certificates to
organisations that deserved it and had proved a certain level of competence. A
certificate of accreditation was issued in accordance with specific criteria.
Consistency across processes would be ensured. The Bill would give legal
standing to certificates. All accredited bodies would have to maintain the
required level of accreditation. Remedial action would be taken against misuse
of accreditation.
DIscussion
Mr Hendricks referred to the use of pesticides by farmers and asked how this
practice could be monitored to ensure that the stipulated procedures were
followed.
Mr Mkono sought clarity on the market responses to
the stringent controls imposed on international trade.
Mr Pitt stated that a quality assessment system existed to govern the use of
pesticides by farmers. SANAS had to ensure that the South African Bureau of
Standards maintained international standards. Certain private sector food retailers
were starting to set up their own voluntary standards that tended to ignore
state regulatory proposals. Adequate testing standards were needed in South
Africa to ensure that local products were accepted in international markets.
1000 accredited facilities were now in place to meet market demand.
Mr Gamede proposed that more information on the
offence referred to with regard to misuse of accreditation be provided.
Mr Strydom responded that clause 27 outlined the
penalty for misuse of accreditation. A person guilty of an offence would be
liable to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 24 months.
The Chairperson read out the motion of desirability and reports for both Bills.
The two Bills were duly adopted by the Committee.
Department of Trade and Industry and Department of Agriculture briefing on
the Southern African Customs Union & European Free Trade
Association’s Free Trade Agreement
Mr Wilhelm Smalberger, Trade Negotiator, dti, declared that the European Free Trade Association
(EFTA) sought to assist their European traders in achieving optimal trading
relations. The proposed Free Trade Agreement would support South Africa’s
overall objective to create one single trading regime between Southern Africa
and Europe. The EFTA assisted the South African Customs Union (SACU) in
building common policies for a range of trade policy issues. The agreement
would enhance South Africa’s ability to market itself as an investment
destination. Full and legally bound access to European markets would be
facilitated. The scope and content of the agreement was explained. The main
agreement covered trade in fish and marine products, processed agricultural
products and industrial products. Limited concessions in basic agricultural
goods were exchanged. The agreement covered trade in goods but excluded
services, government procurement and intellectual property. In terms of customs
administration, one set of rules existed with the European Union and another
with EFTA countries. The agreement would be ratified before the end of November
2006. The agreement would be phased in over a period of 8 years.
Mr Ralph Otto, Deputy-Director, Department of Agriculture, stated that
bilateral agreements currently existed between SACU and certain European
countries such as Norway, Switzerland and Lichtenstein. These agreements formed
part of the overall agreement that established the Free Trade Association. EFTA countries had no common agricultural
policies and followed different approaches to trade liberalisation. Therefore,
EFTA states found it difficult to negotiate with SACU as a unit. A common
approach to agriculture could not be developed and separate bilateral
agreements remained. The bilateral agreements covered all agricultural products
but excluded processed products. All agreements addressed the crucial issue of
subsidies.
Mr Smalberger declared that nine parties would be
involved in the agreement. The agreement would come into force on 1 January
2007. The European Union was a more integrated economic and political entity
than EFTA. EFTA did not possess an adequate platform to provide financial
resources for reconstruction programmes in the SACU region.
Discussion
Mr Hendricks sought clarity on the agricultural and general safeguard clause.
He asked which Nordic countries were involved in the agreement and whether any
progress could be expected in the Americas.
Mr Smalberger stated that the Nordic countries of
Denmark, Sweden and Finland were part of the EU agreement. Norway and Iceland
would now be included in the new agreement. Negotiations with the United States
stalled in 2004 due to a wide difference in points of departure. The presence
of subsidies in the US contributed to the dilemma. The US had a Trade Promotion
Authority that would expire next year before an agreement with SACU would be
finalised. Discussions would resume with the USA in the near future to explore the promotion of exports. Certain trade
arrangements did currently exist with the USA.
Mr Otto stated that it was hoped that the DOHA round of negotiations would
resume. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) had greatly assisted to
open up agricultural products into the USA. Safeguard clauses helped to address
surges in imports due to the sudden removal of import duties. A link had to be
established between the surge of imports and the particular industry involved
to determine whether material injury prevailed. Agreements tended to contain a
general safeguard clause. For example, a tariff quota could be introduced to
counteract the problems encountered.
Mr Smalberger stated that no major agreements were
being pursued with Canada at the moment. A preferential trade agreement would
be finalised with Latin America in the short term. Such an arrangement was
allowed between developing countries. An arrangement would be established with
Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay.
The Committee supported the principles behind the Free Trade Agreement.
The meeting was adjourned.
Audio
No related
Documents
No related documents
Bills
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.