Hansard: NA: Consideration of Fiscal Framework and Revenue Proposals and of Report of SC on Finance thereon

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 10 Mar 2015


No summary available.




10 MARCH 2015








The House met at 14:00.


The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.












The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Owing to the passing away of Mr H F Nkoana and the resignation of Mr L W Greyling, their positions have been filled by the nomination of Ms T D Chiloane and Mr P van Dalen with effect from 24 February 2015 and 1 March 2015 respectively. The members have made and subscribed the oath in the Speaker’s office.










Ms S V KALYAN: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the reckless and discriminatory comments made by the acting head of the Hawks regarding Indian members of the anticorruption task team in KwaZulu-Natal.








Mr K P SITHOLE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:


That the House debates the partisan nature of the Expanded Public Works Programme and the Community Works Programme, especially in that only ruling party-aligned members benefit, particularly in areas around Tshwane, which include Dark City, Sokhulumi, Zithobeni, Soshanguve and Mamelodi.







Mr Z M D MANDELA: Hon Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the national press ombudsman and its role in ensuring that we create an enabling environment for free speech, diversity in the media and promotion of access to freedom of expression.










Rev K R J MESHOE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ACDP:


That the House debates the findings of the development organisation WaterAid, which analysed data from the Seattle-based Institute for Health Metrics research centre and concluded that diseases spread through dirty water and poor sanitation are the fifth biggest killer of women worldwide, causing more deaths than Aids, diabetes and even breast cancer.







Mr S LUZIPO: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the extent to which local beneficiation could be effected in our mineral resource sector without undermining the unity of our people and their overall participation in economic activity, without being prejudiced by their geographical location.







Ms E N LOUW: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates the abuse of street hawkers by the SA Police, in a country where the informal sector contributes a huge amount of the gross domestic product and to employment.









Ms N W A MAZZONE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the payment structure and bonus payment requirements of executive management in state-owned entities and the financial sustainability thereof.









Mr J J MCGLUWA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the 640 cases of public servants who have misrepresented their qualifications and the effect this has on departments, as well as on the citizens of South Africa.









Mr E K SIWELA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the country’s skills shortage, as identified in the National Development Plan Diagnostic Report, and deliberate on what additional measures should be implemented to overcome this challenge.









Mr I A PIKININI: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the payment of ex-mine workers, which is long overdue, while 31% of ex-mine workers in the Eastern Cape are in a situation of dire need, living a hazardous life around villages.









Mr M A MNCWANGO: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the IFP:


That the House debates the backlog of cases at the Special Investigating Unit and how the lack of accountability in the finalising of cases undermines its credibility.









Mr M S MABIKA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the NFP:


That the House-


Deliberates the recent media report that the Department of Water Affairs and Sanitation has employed 34 Cuban engineers at an estimated cost of approximately R50 million, noting that:


  1. the Cuban engineers are employed on a project to refurbish crumbling water infrastructure;
  2. the SA Institute of Civil Engineers has confirmed that there are many suitably qualified unemployed engineers in South Africa who could have been considered for the project; and


  1. Cuban engineering skills are not recognised by the Engineering Council of SA because Cuba is not part of the Washington Accord, which governs international engineering qualifications.











Ms N R MASHABELA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates causes and possible solutions to the high level of the dropout rate in primary and secondary school education in South Africa.










Me V VAN DYK: Agb Speaker, ek gee hiermee namens die DA kennis dat ek in die volgende sitting sal voorstel:


Dat die Huis die hoë kostes van en die onverskoonbare sleurwerk aan die Kimberley Hospitaal vir Geestesversteurings debateer, want na 10 jaar is nog net 52% van die projek voltooi en sedert 2013 is reeds meer as R1,8 miljoen bestee en die projek is nog ver van voltooi af.


(Translation of English notice of motion follows:


That the House debates the escalating costs and unjustifiable delay in the construction of the Kimberley Psychiatric Hospital in view of the fact that only 52% of the project has been completed in the past 10 years, and R1,8 million has already been spent on the project since 2013.







Mr N CAPA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House –


(1)        debates the means to assist in the intensification of the commendable and mutually complementary programmes that are implemented by the Departments of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and those of Rural Development and Land Reform in their endeavours to improve the effectiveness of the role of the farmers and peasants in the economy of South Africa.


  1. notes that, in line with celebrating 60 years of the Freedom Charter, this will give meaningful effect to that document’s assertions that the land must be in the hands of those who work it and live on it.









Mr M J CARDO: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates South Africa’s disproportionately high youth unemployment rate and the need to address it through the expansion of the youth wage subsidy, among other incentives to the private sector.











Mr K Z MORAPELA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates abolishing all incentives that pay white companies for complying with affirmative action requirements.









Mr Z N MBHELE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the erosion of the independence of South Africa’s prosecutorial and anticorruption institutions by unwarranted political interference.








Mr L J BASSON: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the water quality at West Rand Goldfields, where the latest results in Wonderfonteinspruit revealed that manganese levels are 2 140 times higher than the standard; aluminium levels 682 times higher than the standard; uranium levels 206 times higher than the standard, and iron levels 106 times higher than the standard.









Ms H S BOSHOFF: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the reason why the Mpumalanga provincial department of health returned over R470 million in conditional grants to the Treasury, while the province’s hospitals and clinics are crumbling.










Mr M S MBHATHA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates legislating that a minimum of 75% of all radio and television station content played in South Africa must be locally produced.









Mr D J MAYNIER: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House, in light of recent scandals, including “Signalgate”, “Spycablegate” and “African Intelligence Leakgate”, debates the state of the State Security Agency.









Rev K R J MESHOE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the ACDP:


That the House debates the shortsightedness and serious implications of Eskom’s decision to reduce the number of white engineers by 1 081 and white artisans by 2 179 in order to comply with strict new government requirements at a time when our country is experiencing constant loadshedding, which is impacting negatively on our economy.








Ms S P KOPANE: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the increased number of unemployed and impoverished South Africans who do not qualify for the social grant.









Mr S J F MARAIS: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House–

(1)        debates the reasons for government not achieving the 2% employment goal for persons with disabilities in our economy; and


(2)        comes up with solutions on how to rectify this unfair discriminatory practice.









Mr C H H HUNSINGER: Deputy Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House, in light of the 48% increase in the fuel levy allocated to the fund, debates how the Road Accident Fund can speed up its processes so that road crash victims are compensated faster than what they are at present.











(Draft Resolution)


Ms F S LOLIWE: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move:


          That the House-


  1. welcomes the recent appointment of Dr Albert van Jaarsveld as the new vice-chancellor and principal of the University of KwaZulu-Natal;


  1. further notes that Dr Van Jaarsveld, who is the former chief executive officer of the National Research Foundation, assumed duty on 2 February 2015;


  1. recalls that his career in research, teaching and leadership includes academic and management positions at the Universities of Pretoria and Stellenbosch, and as Dean of Science and Adjunct Professor for the Environmental Studies Programme at Dartmouth College in the United States of America;


  1. further recalls that he obtained his PhD in Zoology from the University of Pretoria, pursued post-doctoral studies and research in conservation biology and global security in Australia and the United Kingdom respectively, and completed executive management training at Harvard University;


  1. acknowledges that he has published in excess of 100 primary research papers, including highly cited works on science and nature;


  1. remembers that during his tenure as CEO of the NRF, the budget of the NRF increased from R2 billion to R4 billion, while the organisation contributed to driving excellence and transformation across the national research landscape; and


  1. congratulates Dr van Jaarsveld on his recent appointment and wishes him well in his new portfolio.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr M S MABIKA: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice on behalf of the NFP:


That the House-


  1. notes that on Friday, 6 March 2015, the SA International Boxing Federation junior super flyweight world champion boxer Zolani Tete defended his title against Paul Butler at the Super Echo Arena in Liverpool, UK;


  1. further notes that Butler was considered the pre-fight favourite to reclaim his title from Tete;


  1. acknowledges that Tete secured an emphatic victory over Butler through a technical knockout in the eighth round after dominating the fight from the start; and


  1. extends its congratulations to Zolani Tete for successfully defending and retaining his title as IBF junior super flyweight world champion.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Mr M S MALATSI: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the DA, I hereby move without notice:


That the House—


  1. notes that South African rapper Nkululeko “Flabba” Hadebi was murdered yesterday;


  1. further notes that Flabba was a founding member of the successful local hip-hop group Skwatta Kamp;


  1. recognises that Flabba and Skwatta Kamp were pioneers of hip-hop music in South Africa;


  1. further recognises that Skwatta Kamp released several award-winning albums, with Flabba providing some of the most inspirational lyrics for hip-hop fans;


  1. acknowledges that Flabba’s debut album, Nkuli vs Flabba, won the Best Hip-Hop Album at the 2007 South African Music Awards;


  1. further acknowledges that Flabba was a proud advocate of rapping in the vernacular; and


  1. extends its condolences to his family, friends and fans.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Ms C N MAJEKE: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the UDM, I move


That the House—


  1. notes that 8 March was International Women’s Day;


  1. further notes that former Deputy President, Mrs Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, was a keynote speaker at a march held in New York that addressed gender equality and the empowerment of women;


  1. acknowledges that Mlambo-Ngcuka has been a long-time women’s rights advocate and that she currently serves as the executive director of UN Women; and


  1. congratulates Mlambo-Ngcuka for her tireless efforts in advocating rights for women all over the globe.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Prof N M KHUBISA: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the NFP, I move without notice:


That the House—


  1. notes that Toyota SA Motors received the highly coveted “Energy Company of the Year” award at a recent award ceremony held by the SA Association for Energy Efficiency;


  1. further notes that the award was made for its outstanding holistic energy-saving approach, centred on aggressive environmental targets for its manufacturing and retail divisions, including the reduction of energy usage, vehicle emissions and waste, the reuse of packaging and other materials and the recycling of waste and end-of-life vehicle components;


  1. acknowledges that this is the second consecutive year that Toyota SA Motors has been honoured with this award;


  1. congratulates Toyota SA Motors for being an energy-saver leader in the motor industry for the second year running; and


  1. encourages all other manufacturers in the motor industry to follow the example of Toyota SA Motors, in developing proactive programmes to increase energy efficiency in South Africa in light of the energy crisis we are currently experiencing.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! If there are no objections, I put the motion.


Ms F S LOLIWE: There is an objection, Deputy Speaker. We are sympathetic to our counterparts but, unfortunately, the first motion, including this one, was not circulated. We are objecting on that basis. Thank you.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, you know the Rules. [Interjections.] Sorry? Yes, hon member, proceed.


Prof N M KHUBISA: Hon Deputy Speaker ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Just wait, hon member. Hon members, there is evidence that the motion was circulated before. If the reason for ... [Interjections.] Order! Order! If the reason for objecting is circulation, then I inform you that it was circulated on 24 February 2014. However, if there are any other reasons, then the objection will be upheld. [Interjections.] Please indicate which it is, hon member.


Ms F S LOLIWE: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. We accept that it was circulated, but state that we did not receive it.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Okay, hon members, we will go ahead. [Interjections.] Hon Deputy Minister, what are you rising on?


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM (Mr M Skwatsha): I am rising on a point of order, Deputy Speaker.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: What is your point of order, sir?


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM (Mr M Skwatsha): My point of order relates to the NFP motion before this one. It is incorrect. [Interjections.] It is also misleading. [Interjections.] May I proceed?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, can we come back to you, sir, if you object to it?




The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You don’t have to explain anything. We will look at it. Which one is it? Which party?


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND LAND REFORM (Mr M Skwatsha): The one on boxing. The two boxers were not fighting each other.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: All right. We move on to the next motion.










Ms H O MAXON: Deputy Speaker, the EFF moves without notice:


That the House—


  1. notes that the Pretoria High Court dismissed with costs Khulubuse Zuma’s urgent application to absolve him from paying a R1,5 billion claim to suffering mineworkers;


  1. notes that the High Court ruled that Zuma, a veritable mountain of flesh – uBhuti madlisa [someone who flashes their wealth around]– must pay back the money owed to the mineworkers who are now caught between the Pamodzi and Aurora Empowerment Systems in the liquidation debacle, but that he is, like his uncle, the President, in defiance of the court’s ruling. Like father, like son;


  1. notes that thousands of mineworkers are still unpaid, living in poverty without food, while Zuma donated millions to the ANC;



Hayi, ayikho indaba enhle lapha.




  1. notes that thousands of mineworkers remain overworked and underpaid, even after 34 lives were lost during a dispute for a living wage of R12 500 per month;


  1. condemns Zuma’s arrogance, conspicuous consumption and total disregard for the law at the expense of the poor; and


  1. calls on the state to discharge its role and arrest Zuma for defying a lawful court order.



UKhulubuse akangabusi ngezithukuthuku zabasebenzi, akaluse izinkomo zikamalume wakhe eNkandla.



The DEPUTY SPEAKER: If there are no objections, I put the motion. [Interjections.] Yes, hon member?


Mr M P SIBANDE: Deputy Speaker, the ANC objects.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: In the light of the objection, the motion falls away.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr P G ATKINSON: Deputy Speaker, I hereby move without notice:


That the House–


  1. notes the violent service delivery protests that took place in Thembelihle in Johannesburg’s ward 8 between 25 and 27 February 2015;


  1. further notes that the violent protests degenerated into an outbreak of seemingly xenophobic looting of foreign-owned shops;


  1. acknowledges that these attacks followed the same pattern of alleged xenophobic looting that had taken place in neighbouring Soweto in recent weeks;


  1. further acknowledges that, according to Amnesty International, not a single person has been charged since the start of the alleged xenophobic attacks in Gauteng;


  1. calls on government to launch urgently a full-scale investigation into these attacks to ensure that they never happen again; and


  1. encourages this House to have an open discussion and debate about the underlying causes of the xenophobic attacks in Gauteng.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Mr M A MNCWANGO: Deputy Speaker, I hereby move without notice:


That the House–


  1. notes that, after the successful launch of an IFP branch on Saturday, 8 March 2015, while supporters were leaving the Jacobs area in Durban, shots were fired by an unknown person;


  1. further notes that one person was tragically killed in the shooting, while another one was wounded and taken to hospital;


  1. acknowledges that this is a tragic and unfortunate incident that speaks of political intolerance and it should be condemned in the strongest possible manner;


  1. extends its deepest condolences to the family and friends of the member who lost his life in the incident;


  1. wishes a full and speedy recovery to the injured member who was wounded during the shooting;


  1. implores the authorities to leave no stone unturned in apprehending the perpetrator involved in this incident.


Agreed to.









(Draft Resolution)


Mr S C MNCWABE: Speaker, I hereby move without notice:


That the House–


  1. notes that on Sunday, 8 March 2015, 27-year-old Lerato Oliphant of the Northern Cape was brutally murdered by her ex-boyfriend, who stabbed her with an assegai while she was desperately trying to flee from him;


  1. further notes that International Women’s Day was celebrated globally on Sunday; and


  1. also notes that this House debated the high level of gender-based violence last week, in which all members were vocal in their condemnation of such violence;


  1. extends its deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Ms Oliphant; and


  1. condemns, in the strongest possible terms,,the senseless scourge of gender-based violence in South Africa.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Mr K Z MORAPELA: Deputy Speaker, I hereby move without notice:


That the House-


  1. notes that on Thursday, 5 March 2015, Wits University electrical workers who had been outsourced to MJL Electrical occupied and held the owner hostage for failing to pay them since January this year;


  1. also notes that the workers went on a go-slow in protest at not being paid, but the company intimidated them with warning letters;


  1. further notes that workers who have worked for the company have not been registered, despite working for the company for so many years;


  1. notes that the workers accuse the bankrupt company of using their Unemployment Insurance Fund, UIF, and their provident funds for its own benefit;


  1. further notes that Wits University outsourced thousands of black workers in 2 000 to save costs; that many were retrenched and those who continued to work did so with limited access to public facilities of the university, worsened working conditions and reduced salaries;


  1. notes that Wits University is aware of the exploitation of black workers, but argues that cleaning, catering and electrical are not core functions of the university;


  1. condemns Wits management for turning a blind eye to the white companies that exploit black workers and takes advantage of the structural unemployment in this country;


  1. calls on Wits management to ensure that Wits enters into contractual agreements that respect the basic conditions of employment;


  1. calls on Wits to ensure that all companies with contractual agreements with the university employ workers permanently after three months;


  1. demands the immediate ban of labour brokers in all public universities and in the country and the introduction of a living wage for all electricians;


  1. condemns MJL Electrical for not paying workers their salaries and demands immediate intervention by the university to end its relations with labour brokers and pay workers their salaries.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr M L SHELEMBE: Speaker, I hereby move without notice:


That the House-

  1. notes that on Sunday, 8 March 2015, a SANParks helicopter crashed at Olifantsbos, Cape Point, while on duty to fight a blaze that started in the reserve last Wednesday;


  1. further notes that the pilot, Mr Hendrik “Bees” Marais, was fatally injured in the crash and died;


  1. acknowledges that Mr Marais was a highly experienced helicopter pilot who had previously served in the SA Police Service and the SA Defence Force and who also worked for Air Mercy Service, a nonprofit organisation that provides emergency air ambulance and rural health outreach programmes across South Africa;


  1. calls on this House to convey its condolences to the family and loved ones of Mr Marais, who died in the crash; and


  1. salutes all the firefighters who have been, and still are, selflessly putting their lives at risk to fight and contain the fires that have been raging in Cape Town during the past week.


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Deputy Speaker, I fully support the motion, but I just have a correction. It was not a SANParks helicopter, but a helicopter of Working on Fire, which falls under the Department of Environmental Affairs.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The motion stands, with the correction included.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Deputy Chairperson, I hereby move without notice:


That the House-


  1. notes that today marks 112 years since the passing on of Harriet Tubman, a revolutionary woman and an African American slave abolitionist, who escaped slavery in 1849 and travelled to the north of the USA, using the Underground Railroad;


  1. further notes that this revolutionary woman was born Araminta Ross in 1822 in Dorchester County in Maryland, on the plantation where her parents were enslaved. She took the name Harriet when she married John Tubman, a free black man, around 1844. Harriet Tubman lived and worked enslaved in this area from her childhood until she escaped to freedom at the age of 27 in 1849;


  1. also notes that, after her escape, she went back to the plantation 19 times to free families, friends and other enslaved African Americans, becoming one of the most prominent “conductors” of what is known as the Underground Railroad, which rightfully earned her the title “Moses” by her people. In 1859, she purchased a farm in New York and established a home for her family and others, which anchored the remaining years of her life;


  1. acknowledges that in celebrating the life of Harriet Tubman, we remember her commitment to freedom and rededicate ourselves to the timeless principles she struggled to uphold. Hers is an extraordinary story of courage and effectiveness in the movement to abolish slavery and racism, not only in America but as an inspiration to all oppressed people worldwide.


  1. further acknowledges that the story of Harriet Tubman is a constant reminder of the indestructibility of the spirit of our people and of the weakness of the philosophy of racism and oppression in America, here in South Africa and the rest of the world;


  1. recognises that the freedoms we enjoy and take for granted are as a result of the sweat, blood and tears of so many, like Harriet Tubman, who gave their lives for the liberation of black people around the world.


Ms S LOLIWE: Deputy Speaker, we object to the motion. [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVAMBU Hon Deputy Speaker, can we please get an explanation of what the basis for the objection is? Is it because she did not understand the motion, or what? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, hon member, unfortunately, we do not do that. Hon member at the back, please proceed.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr A M SHAIK-EMAM: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the NFP I move without notice:


That the House—


  1. notes that on Thursday, 5 March 2015, Mr Mohamed Saleem Ahmed Suleman of Overport, Durban, the owner of a chain of Macks Supermarkets, was shot and killed during an armed robbery;


  1. further notes that Mr Suleman was a business owner who was well known for extending charity and humanitarian assistance to poor communities and people from all walks of life;


  1. acknowledges that two of Mr Suleman’s sons were wounded during the robbery;


  1. extends its deepest condolences to the family and loved ones of Mr Suleman;


  1. wishes the sons of Mr Suleman a speedy recovery; and


  1. calls on the MEC for Safety and Security of KwaZulu-Natal to leave no stone unturned in finding the perpetrators of this callous and cold-blooded murder and ensure that justice is done.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr M P SIBANDE: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move without notice:


          That the House—

  1. notes with sadness the death of two rugby players and a spectator on the Franschhoek Pass, Western Cape, following a tragic bus crash on Saturday, 7 March 2015;


  1. further notes that 26 passengers and two cyclists were injured in the crash and that they were rushed to various hospitals in Paarl, Stellenbosch and Cape Town;


  1. recalls that the bus accident occurred after the driver swerved to avoid hitting a cyclist on the road and that the bus then went off a cliff;


  1. acknowledges that two of those killed were rugby players travelling as part of the team, with supporters, from Groendal on their way to a match in Grabouw; and


  1. conveys its condolences to the families of all the people involved in this fateful accident.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr M L W FILTANE: Deputy Speaker, I move without notice on behalf of the UDM:


          That the House—

  1. notes that a young fire fighter, Nazeem Davies, 25, born in Worcester, and from the West Coast District Municipality, died on Thursday, 5 March 2015, on his way back to the Vredenburg station from the Winterhoek Mountains, near Porterville, where he and Niklaas Nel had been helping to put out a fire;


  1. acknowledges that their fire truck left the road and lurched down the side of the road, where Nel, the passenger, managing to escape, but Davies, the driver, could not escape because he was trapped inside the fire truck;


  1. further acknowledges that Davies died on duty, proof that he was dedicated to what he was doing; and


  1. conveys its condolences to the Davies family.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr A M SHAIK-EMAM: Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the NFP I move without notice:


          That the House—


  1. notes that on Friday, 6 March 2015, three of President Zuma’s children and their cousin were involved in a car accident in Pietermaritzburg;


  1. further notes that the children were admitted to St Anne’s Hospital in Pietermaritzburg, where they are being treated for their injuries;


  1. wishes His Excellency, the President, and his family strength during these trying times; and


  1. further wishes the injured children a speedy recovery.


Agreed to.









(Draft Resolution)


Ms F S LOLIWE: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move without notice:


That the House—


  1. notes that Brand SA has received Media Tenor’s Africa Country Image Award in Vienna, Austria on Friday, 20 February 2015;


  1. further notes that Brand SA is the official marketing agency of South Africa, with a mandate to build the country’s brand reputation in order to improve its global competitiveness;


  1. appreciates that South Africa was chosen as a recipient of this prestigious award as it clearly indicates that the image and reputation of our country is on an upward trajectory;


  1. believes that this award will assist Brand SA’s aim of building pride and patriotism among South Africans in order to contribute to social cohesion and nation brand ambassadorship;


  1. calls on all South African citizens to play their part in ensuring that we portray positive images, positive stories and proudly market our country as a viable choice for business and tourism; and


  1. congratulates Brand SA for showcasing the positivity of South Africa and helping to ensure that it is well represented globally.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: If there are no objections, I put the motion. Yes, hon member?


Mr M S MBATHA: Deputy Speaker, I would like to object.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Due to the objection the motion falls away.











(Draft Resolution)


Ms C N MAJEKE: Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the UDM I move without notice:


          That the House—


  1. notes that on 7 March 2015, four robbers descended on Armand and Doulina Slabbert’s farm in Pongola, KwaZulu-Natal;


  1. further notes that Armand runs a nursery together with Doulina, and that the robbers tied up Doulina, set plastic on fire and let it drip onto her stomach in order to force them to reveal where their valuables were kept;


  1. condemns the ongoing violence on farms, which is increasing; and


  1. calls on the SA Police Service to investigate this treacherous act and bring the perpetrators to justice.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


Mr M L W FILTANE: Hon Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:


That the House-

  1. notes that Zolani Tete, the beloved son of Mdantsane in East London, defended his IBF Junior Bantamweight title in Liverpool when he defeated Paul Butler on 6 March 2015;


  1. further notes that Tete’s performance on Friday is regarded as one of the best in his career in a fight away from home as he led by a score of six-nil and that, after just one minute and thirty four seconds in the last round, the Englishman, Butler, succumbed;


  1. acknowledges Tete’s ability to win abroad when he travelled to Mexico in November 2013 and defeated the former IBF Junior Bantamweight Champion, Carlos Sanchez, in a title bout elimination; and


  1. congratulates Zolani Tete.


Agreed to.










(Draft Resolution)


Mr M P SIBANDE: Hon Deputy Speaker, I move without notice:


That the House-

  1. notes with sadness the rise in cases of cholera and the subsequent deaths of more than 41 Mozambicans in the aftermath of widespread floods that engulfed northern and western Mozambique in December 2014;


  1. further notes that the number of confirmed cases has more than doubled and the number of fatalities has risen by almost 50% over the past two weeks;


  1. recalls that Mozambique regularly suffers outbreaks of cholera and diarrhoea during summer, between October and March, when the country faces heavy rains and floods;


  1. further recalls that the situation in the city of Tete, in northern Mozambique, is worse and it is reported that cases are at an average of 70 admissions per day; and


  1. appeals to Southern African Development Community countries to assist where they can to contain this outbreak in Mozambique.


Agreed to.











(Draft Resolution)


The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Deputy Speaker, in the name of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party, I move the draft resolution printed in his name on the Order Paper, as follows:


That the House, notwithstanding Rule 29, which provides for the sequence of proceedings, limits the business for the sitting on 11 March 2015 to Questions to the President.


Question put: That the motion as moved by the Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party be agreed to.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chair, we call for a division on that one. [Interjections.] We call for the division of the House. We want a full day to debate and have motions without notice and notices of motion, irrespective of whether the President is here or not. He must listen to what we have to say. We therefore call for a division, unless you rescind that.


Division demanded.


The House divided.





The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon members, settle down.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Deputy Speaker, when can we have the opportunity to make a declaration? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, there is no ... [Interjections.] Hon members, please hold on. Hon Ndlozi, there is no opportunity to make declarations now.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: The EFF would like to make a declaration ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, we already invited you and agreed with you by calling for a division. We accepted that request and it was done. You had the opportunity to vote. [Interjections.]


Ms M T KUBAYI: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I am not sure what the name of the member is who is sitting behind the hon Ndlozi. She pressed both gadgets that are in front of her. I am requesting verification.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: All right, hon member, that will be done. [Interjections.] Order, hon members!


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Deputy Speaker, we welcome the verification with both hands. Let it be done.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, please take your seat. [Interjections.] Is it finished? [Inaudible.]


Motion agreed to.










(Member’s Statement)


Ms C PILANE-MAJEKE (ANC): Deputy Speaker, the ANC continues to support the government’s fight against crime and corruption by working on laws and policies that prohibit all public servants and public representatives, regardless of race, colour, creed and political affiliation, from doing business with the state. This is done to limit and, ultimately, eliminate conflict of interest; improve the State’s capacity to investigate, prosecute and convict those charged with corruption; strengthen anticorruption legislation to provide stiffer penalties and strengthen the protection of whistle-blowers; improve management control and operations systems to prevent corruption; ensure that all the people of South Africa, including women, feel safe; enhance the capacity of the courts to eliminate backlogs and increase conviction rate; and increase support for the police.


Fighting corruption and crime is a priority area for the ANC and will remain so until we emerge victorious. Thank you.











(Member’s Statement)


Mr D J MAYNIER (DA): Deputy Speaker, the fact that the State Security Agency has launched and investigation into alleged espionage activities by Advocate Thuli Madonsela and other political figures is bizarre. It proves that the State Security Agency cannot tell the difference between a national security threat and a political threat to President Jacob Zuma. It proves that the State Security Agency cannot tell the difference between fact and fiction. In fact, the investigation is so bizarre, that it makes one wonder whether a brain is a requirement for a job in the State Security Agency.


The African Intelligence Leaks blog is a lunatic fringe blog dedicated to peddling conspiracy theories and cannot even spell “intelligence.” The bizarre and unfounded claims made on the blog should simply have been dismissed, but instead they were twisted into allegations and the allegations were in turn twisted and used as a pretext for an investigation.


Whatever the intent, the effect is a state-sponsored political hit by the State Security Agency. I therefore ask the Deputy President if he will take political responsibility and apologise to the persons concerned and tell this House that this mad investigation by the State Security Agency has been terminated. I thank you.











(Member’s Statement)


Ms N V NQWENISO (EFF): Deputy Speaker, the sanitation in township schools around Johannesburg in Gauteng Province is an insult to our children. After more than 20 years of democracy our children are still treated in an inhumane way and in a manner that violates their dignity. There are still serious disparities between schools in the urban areas, which accommodate mainly white children, and those in the township and villages, which accommodate mostly poor black children.


The ANC-led government has dismally failed to close this gap and therefore children in urban schools remain privileged. They continue to get good quality education in state-of-the-art infrastructure while the children in the township and rural schools continue to be exposed to harsher learning conditions, like the lack of proper sanitation.


The Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, ASIDI, which was launched in 2011 to build new schools and improve infrastructure, has not lived up to expectations. Despite the existence of this programme, many of our children across the country still study in mud and shack schools, as is the case in the Eastern Cape, where the ANC is always bragging that it is opening a new school every week. However, none of those schools are in the same state as the urban schools.


The state of sanitation in Gauteng province schools exposes our children to serious health hazards. Thank you.


Deputy Speaker, as I turned around the Deputy Minister said siyageza [we are silly]. Can she apologise and withdraw that remark?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon Deputy Minister referred to, please do not do that. We have told you that such language is not acceptable.



Asingayenze leyo nto. Akukhulunywa kanjalo.



Ms N V NQWENISO: No, she must apologise! [Inaudible.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! No, no, no, hon member, please do not do that! Go ahead, hon member. [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order. We need to apply the rules of this House consistently. A Member of Parliament has been called to order, so ... [Interjections] ... the hon member must be asked to withdraw those words, please!


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, look at it this way. [Interjections.] Hon member, look at it this way: You have not been recognised, yet you are already speaking. You insist that I must rule according to your wishes. I suggest you sit down, hon member.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Can you recognise me, Deputy Speaker?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, you have said your say, hon member. Take your seat!


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But please recognise me and then implement what I have asked to be implemented. Please!


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order. Hon Deputy Speaker, may I address you?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: What are you addressing me on, hon member?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Deputy Speaker, on a point of order, we request that you implement the rules of the House consistently. The hon Deputy Minister is wrong; it is unparliamentary to say what she said. Please, ask her to withdraw her words so that we can proceed because what she is saying is not correct - Deputy Minister Stella. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY (Mr B MANAMELA): On a point of information, Deputy Speaker, ukugeza is “to wash”. [Interjections.] So, does it mean that she does not wash? That is what it means. Ukugeza is to wash; to take a bath. So, does she not take a bath? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Manamela, you are out of order. You are not supposed to speak before you are recognised. Hon members, I appeal to you to be careful of the precedent you are creating because the things you say and do in the House will come back to haunt you every time you do them. I have made a ruling on this matter and if needs be we will come back to it. I am not changing that ruling for now, hon members! If needs be, I will come back to that.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order. You consistently degenerate when you are presiding. You are the worst presiding officer. We must tell you that because every time you preside, you are unable to take rulings that guide this House on a simple issue that we have asked you to do. We said the Deputy Minister acknowledges that she has made a mistake. Why can we not instruct her to stand up and apologise so that we can move forward? If it was us, you were going to tell us to do the same. Why can you not tell her to withdraw so that we can move forward? What is so difficult about that?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member Ndlozi … I am sorry, hon Shivambu, the first point I want to make to you is that if you choose to use the kind of language you have just used, you are going to find it very difficult for us to work properly in the House when I am chairing. I do wish to indicate to you that you have asked me to always be consistent. I promise you that you will enjoy the fun from today onwards. [Interjections] Yes, what are you rising on, hon member?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order. You have not ruled on the order that I raised earlier.




Mr M Q NDLOZI: We said that unparliamentary remarks were made and there was even an acknowledgement of that. So we request you to ask the hon Deputy Minister to withdraw. If an unparliamentary remark was made, and if you make a ruling in favour of that, then it gets withdrawn. Can you please request the hon Deputy Minister to withdraw the unparliamentary remark? After all, you ruled that it was not right. Why can you not be consistent and tell her that she must stand up and withdraw? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Hon member, take your seat, please!


Mr K Z MORAPELA: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order ...



Ntate Lechesa Tsenoli, re kopa o ke o be monna wa mantswe a hao. Hangata ka lehlakoreng lena, ha re etsa diphoso, o ye o re bolelle hore re kope tshwarelo.



It should also be applied to members who are using unparliamentary language. This is all that we are asking of you. Stop what you are doing! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, please take your seat. I have heard you. Hon member, please proceed.


Ms E N LOUW: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order ...


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: What is your point of order, hon member?


Afrikaans: 15:08

Adjunkspeaker, ons kan nie met die Huis se sitting voortgaan nie as ... [Onhoorbaar.]


Die ADJUNK-SPEAKER: Ons kan en ons sal!


Me E N LOUW: Jy het nog nie ’n reëling gemaak nie!


Die ADJUNKSPEAKER: Ek het ’n reëling gemaak ... [Tussenwerpsels.]


Me E N LOUW: Wanneer ... [Onhoorbaar.]


Die ADJUNK-SPEAKER: ... en u sal dit aanvaar totdat ek na u terugkom. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ek het vir u gesê ek sal terugkom. U sal nou u plek inneem!



Please sit down and we will proceed, hon members. Hon member, please go ahead. No, hon member ... [Interjections.]


Ms N R MASHABELA: Hon Deputy Speaker, on a point of order ...


Mr S LUZIPO: Can I raise a point of order first?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: No, hon member, before you do that, I have ruled on this matter. If this has to do with that matter, please ....


Ms N R MASHABELA: No, hon Deputy Speaker. Can you please apply the rules of this House equally to all members here?


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, you are ... [Interjections.]


Ms N R MASHABELA: No, the hon Deputy President ... [Laughter.] ... the hon Deputy Minister must withdraw her remark. [Interjections.] The hon Deputy Minister must withdraw her remark! She must withdraw it! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, I have said that I have made a ruling. I will come back to you if needs be and that is what I have said. I want to repeat that I have made a ruling on this matter, hon members. It is incorrect of you to force the Presiding Officer to make a decision that is what you want. [Interjections.] Yes! I will come back to you. I have made a ruling and if needs be I will come back. I wish to remind you of that.


Hon members, I am not going to allow any further discussions on this matter because I have made a ruling on it. I wish to appeal to you on this issue. I will come back to you on this matter but now I want us to proceed. Can we accept that and proceed, hon members? [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Deputy Speaker, may I please address you? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order...


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: What is your point of order, hon member?


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Deputy Speaker, there are several points of order. The first relates to your ruling that you do not recognise members to speak unless you specifically pronounce their names and so recognise them. Several members have sought to speak without being recognised this afternoon.


Secondly, it is my understanding that points of order are points of order that pertain to the rules of Parliament and are not meant to be argumentative opportunities for members to argue over a ruling of the Presiding Officer.


Thirdly, I want to suggest that while there may or may not have been unparliamentary remarks made by another member to whom the hon members from the EFF have referred, equally so the Chief Whip of the EFF has made derogatory and, I submit, unparliamentary remarks towards the Deputy Speaker, and this should also be ruled against. [Applause.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members, I will come back to this matter because it raises a number of questions about our presiding practice and the response of members to the decisions that we make in the House on these matters on a regular basis. I would like us to accept that and proceed. What are you rising on, hon member? Is it on the same matter?


Ms H O MAXON: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order.


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: What are you rising on, hon member?


Ms H O MAXON: Deputy Speaker, I believe you should not complicate this matter; it is very simple. [Interjections.] Even Deputy Minister Buti Manamela stood up and said he wanted to interpret the word “siyageza”. Confirming that, the Deputy Minister known as Stella did ... [Interjections.] Just listen to her. She is saying, heyi wena!


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member!


Ms H O MAXON: She is saying “heyi wena” to me! Deputy Speaker, just order Stella to withdraw her remark! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon member, please take your seat. Hon members, can we proceed with the business of this House?












(Member’s Statement)


MR M MATLALA (ANC): Deputy Speaker, South African women continue to explore opportunities created for them by the people’s organisation, the ANC. One of those women is none other than Daphne Mashile-Nkosi, who recently won the Project Finance and Infrastructure deal of the year 2014 at an award ceremony held in London.


Daphne Mashile-Nkosi is the executive chairperson of Kalagadi Manganese and has an impressive track record as an anti-apartheid activist and woman’s rights advocate. As the ANC, we are proud that she is flying the SA flag high on the global stage and hope that her achievements will continue to inspire greater participation by women in the mining industry.


Through tools such as the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act and the Mining Charter, the ANC-led government will continue to ensure that the mining industry contributes meaningfully to the radical transformation of the South African economy. Thank you, Deputy Speaker.











(Member’s Statement)


Mr A M MPONTSHANE (IFP): Deputy Speaker, the falsification of qualifications seems to be everywhere and despite government’s assurance that it is fighting corruption at all levels, most of those who have misrepresented their qualifications are still employed. We have seen this in the SABC, involving Hlaudi Motsoeneng and Ellen Tshabalala. We have seen this at Dube TradePort with the suspended chief executive officer Saxen van Coller. We have seen this in our foreign service, involving our ambassador to Japan, Ms Pheko. Over 600 civil servants are also alleged to have lied about their qualifications and yet most are still in their jobs.


We therefore call on the departments where the fraudsters have been uncovered to act without fear or favour, thereby sending a strong message that they do not tolerate corruption of any kind. I thank you, Deputy Speaker.











(Member’s Statement)


Ms C N MAJEKE (UDM): Deputy Speaker, change processes need to be effectively managed if they are to be successful and sustainable. The demarcation process in South Africa is posing multiple challenges such as community objections to demarcation processes and the service demands on municipalities. Violent protests accompany these objections and demands as a way of registering unhappiness with the final demarcation decisions.


However, these protests signal that the demarcation board and government need to do more homework before coming to final decisions. All stakeholders should be actively involved in the demarcation processes. It is essential that boundary demarcations identify traditional structures attached to land in the rural areas and adopt a socially sensitive approach. Traditional rural communities have knowledge of the history and cultural practices in the areas.


While municipalities and the demarcation board can contribute with expert knowledge and skills, poor communication between stakeholders and little or a lack of public participation destroy good intentions of demarcation. It is true that genuine participation is a lengthy process and does not tally with time frames of set programmes and projects.


To avoid catastrophic situations that will take communities back, citizens must be allowed full participation and inputs in any process that affects the development of their territories. In the true words of the Freedom Charter, “The people shall govern.” Participation must ensure that vital information is not overlooked in this regard. [Time expired.]








(Member’s Statement)


Ms B L ABRAHAMS (ANC): Deputy Speaker, we express our concern regarding the suppression of information and the cover-up that seems to be the order of the day in the DA-led municipality of Swellendam. Instead of fighting and exposing corruption, the unholy alliance in the Swellendam Municipality - the DA and ACDP coalition - has decided to withhold a report by the SIU.


The SIU investigated various corrupt dealings in this DA-led municipality, implicating, among others, the veteran Speaker of the DA. The SIU report has not been tabled to the council although it has been submitted to the municipality. Failure to table or act on the report clearly indicates a DA cover-up regarding corruption.


Other instances of corruption reported by ANC councillors included the following: DA proceeded with the appointment of section 56 and 57 managers without the council approving the process, starting with the advertising of the posts; an SLA was signed with a company, Powell and Kelly, to do legal work for the municipality without a tender process; an ITC company has continued to perform work after their tender expired in 2008 without a new tender being issued; a DA Ward 2 councillor was charged in a child pornography case but no action has been taken and council is still awaiting a decision on the outcome; a tender was awarded to ASLA, a housing construction company with close links to the DA, without a tender process; and the current municipal manager is implicated in the SIU report in George regarding the George Housing Association.


We call on the DA to come clean and table the report to the council. [Time expired.] [Applause.]











(Member’s Statement)


Mr N T GODI (APC): Deputy Speaker, the APC wishes to express its concern about the conditions of communities living next to mining operations. Despite the wealth extracted daily from underneath their communities, or where they have been moved to, they are as poor, underdeveloped and neglected as the next settlement. Tensions persist between these operations and local communities on a range of development issues. The social and labour plans that are a legal prerequisite are substantively there on paper, but whatever little is done has no popular mandate.


Community struggles are very often hijacked by individuals seeking to be noticed for tenders and not to address the needs of communities in a substantive and popular way. When communities protest, police are sent to act firmly against them. But when companies flout their own legal commitments, they are let off the hook or politely begged to comply.


The APC calls on government to act firmly in the interest of the people. We also call on traditional leaders in this regard to stand for the interest of their people. Some traditional leaders, government officials and mining companies have formed themselves into a formidable threesome against poor and rural communities. This we condemn strongly. Thank you.










(Member’s Statement)


Mr S LUZIPHO (ANC): Deputy Speaker, on 12 February 2015, during the state of the nation address, we witnessed all the premiers of the nine provinces being ushered into the House on the red carpet. This was a clear demonstration that they were present in the House not as representatives of their own political parties but as representatives of the people of their respective provinces.


While we acknowledge the right to freedom of association, the conduct of the premier of the Western Cape left much to be desired on this occasion. Hon Madam Zille decided to walk out of the House with the political party that she leads, instead of honouring her oath to represent all the people of the Western Cape, not only those of her party. Such actions must be condemned and Parliament has a duty to ensure that such conduct is harshly dealt with.


This by no means undermines the right of her party to take such defeatist decisions, as they have been accustomed to it due to them being allergic to democratic processes. Thank you. [Applause.]











(Member’s Statement)


Mr B M BHANGA (DA): Deputy Speaker, the DA recently learned that councillor Thembinkosi Mafana, a member of the mayoral committee for safety and security, illegally posed as the executive mayor of Nelson Mandela Municipality, while the chairperson of the ANC Youth League, Xolani Mgxotheni, accompanying councillor Mafana, presented himself as a municipal manager as they signed a mysterious agreement on behalf of the municipality with the city of Fuzhou in China. Both claim that this was a private visit.


However, a clear photo of this historic, illegal and fraudulent agreement shows “a good story to tell” about ANC lies and corruption. The two appear to be signing the agreement surrounded by Chinese nationals and officials, with a banner in the background that read “Signing ceremony for the letter of intent on the establishment of a friendly relationship between Nelson Mandela Bay and Fuzhou”, with both the South African national flag and the Chinese flag on it.


Another shocking addition to this is the fact that Councillor Mafana, on 10 February 2015, wrote a letter to the city of Fuzhou, extending an invitation to his counterparts, in his purported capacity as executive mayor, to visit Port Elizabeth. The question is, Deputy President: Has the municipality or the ANC taken action against councillor Mafana and his self-styled municipal manager, Mr Mgxotheni? The answer is a big no. Has the Department of International Relations and Co-operation taken action in this respect? The answer is a big no. [Applause.] [Time expired.]









(Member’s Statement)


Mr Z M D MANDELA (ANC): Deputy Speaker, a recent report showed that complaints about stories in the press have increased significantly in the past few years and that the national press ombudsman is not biased towards the press. The report further found that the most common mistake the press made was not asking for comment, or asking for it too late, leading to inaccurate and unfair reporting. It also noted that the media houses that ran into trouble were using single, anonymous sources, publishing pictures of human bodies and stating allegations as facts in headlines. The report further noted an increased concern for ethical journalism in the past five years.


Therefore, it is important that we revisit and assess the following: The functioning of the office of the national press ombudsman; the extent to which there has been increased public participation in the Press Council of SA; the extent to which reforms have moved the press from self-regulating to voluntary independent co-regulation; the extent to which the recommendations of the Press Freedom Commission, which was headed by retired Chief Justice uBaba Pius Langa, have been embraced and implemented; the extent to which the Press Council has succeeded in promoting and developing ethical practices in journalism and the promotion and adoption of those standards by the press; and the extent to which the SA Press Code has been adopted and implemented. I thank you. [Time expired.]










(Member’s Statement)


Mr S M JAFTA (AIC): Deputy Speaker, as the political party formed for the cause of the people, the AIC remains unshaken and adamant that it will continue fighting for the voice of the poor to be heard. This party, its principles being based mostly on respect, human dignity and trust, seeks to build a nation that will be responsible for its actions. That is why the AIC is against violence and condemns any sphere of government condoning violence by rewarding it while undermining the democratic and constitutional processes of this country.


We believe in a government by the people. That means people must influence the laws passed by this House through their active participation in public hearings and both oral and written submissions, especially in matters directly affecting them. Public consultation should not be done just to fulfil constitutional requirements; they must be meaningful. All political parties represented in this House should therefore put the people first, not their party bosses, as is usually the case. Our belief is that Members of Parliament must truly represent their constituents. [Time expired.]











(Member’s Statement)


Ms M O MATSHOBA (ANC): Deputy Speaker, the road to South Africa’s freedom was a bitter road where the toiling masses of our country fought with all their might to dislodge the racist, tyrannical junta lead by Verwoerd, Vorster, Botha and Malan. Countless selfless cadres of our glorious people’s army, uMkhonto weSizwe, were prepared and indeed laid down their precious lives for the freedoms we enjoy today. That difficult road to freedom had in its midst a lot of selfish counter-reactionary sell-outs.


Today we remember that 29 years ago, on 3 March 1986, on the dusty streets of Gugulethu, seven young guerrillas of uMkhonto weSizwe were lured into an ambush by an askari, leading to their brutal, bloody slaying at the hands of apartheid police. We can vividly recall horrific TV images where weapons were planted next to their bodies to create the impression that they were shooting at the police. Today we share the pain of Cynthia Nomveyu Ngewu, who witnessed on television her dead son, Christopher Piet, chained and with a rope around his neck, like a dog.


The Gugulethu Seven were selfless young men who spilled their blood for us to be free. [Time expired.]











(Member’s Statement)


Ms L V JAMES (DA): Deputy Speaker, the DA believes that South Africa has made some improvements in reducing maternal mortality, but we still have unacceptably high levels of women and girls dying during pregnancy or shortly after giving birth.


Most of these deaths are completely unnecessary and can be prevented easily. Women and girls are put off from visiting antenatal clinics, as they are often overcrowded, understaffed and dirty. In many rural areas, maternity hospitals are located far from where people live and pregnant women must either walk miles or scrape together money to organise expensive transport to get to these clinics.


Hon Minister, these simple problems of getting to clinics, safety and being assisted properly at clinics force many women to stay away until very late in their pregnancy. This leads to complications not being detected and treated early on. This has fatal consequences when considering that around a third of our pregnant women are living with HIV.


A DA government would invest much more in educating and informing our young girls on antenatal care. They should be made aware of the potential health problems, threats and danger signs related to pregnancy. A DA government would invest in more mobile clinics in rural areas to ensure that clinics are accessible to all people. A DA government would establish and maintain an affordable and reliable public transport service to get women to and from these clinics.


These simple changes can save thousands of lives and improve the lives of our pregnant women and girls. [Time expired.]









(Member’s Statement)


Mr J M MTHEMBU (ANC): Deputy Speaker, the ANC is shocked and appalled by the increasing incidence of racism in the Western Cape, which is fast making this province the capital city of racism in South Africa. As if the recent disgraceful racial attacks suffered by blacks in the province were not bad enough, we wake up to the news that blacks are now required to carry a dompas to access the suburban areas of Worcester.


The dompas was used by the apartheid regime to limit the movement of blacks in the country and to keep black people out of the so-called “white areas”. This apartheid-era dompas system is rearing its ugly head again in the form of black workers in the areas of Worcester being forced to apply for their so-called “green card”, which gives them access to upmarket neighbourhoods in this Boland town. This dompas is designed for domestic workers and gardeners in order to have access to posh areas like Meiringspark, Roux Park and Panorama.


This new dompas requirement that is being forced on black workers follows the recent racial attacks on black gardeners and domestic workers by whites in Cape Town suburbs. This cannot be allowed to happen in our lifetime after 20 years of democracy and when the country is gearing itself for the 60th anniversary of the Freedom Charter, which says that pass laws, permits and all other laws restricting these freedoms shall be abolished.


We condemn the use of any form of permit and we call for the abolishment of this system. No amount of spinning and propaganda by the DA justifies this racist system. [Time expired.]













(Minister’s Response)


THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: Chairperson, I echo the sentiments expressed by hon Pilane-Majake from the ANC who very aptly outlined the various strategies, interventions and institutions that we have put in place to fight corruption in this country.


Actually, as I was on my way to this House this morning, I made a stop at the Emperor’s Palace Hotel in Boksburg, where dedicated men and women of our country who are at the helm of the various anticorruption institutions that we have established as our arsenal in the fight against corruption are busy reflecting, as we are sitting here, on how far we have come and what new strategies we need to develop to up the ante in the fight against corruption in South Africa.


Let me also echo the sentiments expressed by hon Abrahams, also from the ANC, who exposed the double-talk of the DA. One minute they talk anticorruption and the next they do nothing when their own get caught with their hands in the cookie jar. That is typical of a party that says one thing and does something completely different.


Hon Mpontshane, let me indicate this to you: While we agree that this problem of the misrepresentation of people’s qualifications is indeed fraudulent and must be tackled head-on in this country, I think in your criticism you must get the facts right so that people appreciate the issue accurately. The chairperson of the SABC was dealt with by this House; it was not a matter for government. This House constituted a committee that dealt with the matter accordingly and that former chairperson has since resigned. So, to just pile up a list to make it look worse than it really is is really disingenuous. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]











(Minister’s Response)


THE DEPUTY MINSTER OF BASIC EDUCTION: Hon Chairperson, I would like to invite the hon member to accompany me tomorrow to Rosewood Primary School, situated in Bonteheuwel on the Cape Flats. The beneficiaries of this school are coloured and African children from very poor communities. This is one of the 97 schools that we would have delivered state-of-the-art schools to in terms of the Accelerated Schools Infrastructure Delivery Initiative, ASIDI, programmes.


Just last week in the Western Cape in Bellville South we delivered another ASIDI school, a state-of-the-art school with laboratories, libraries, sanitation, water and electricity - all the facilities. The principal from an adjoining school, who is going to be a recipient of one of these schools, said that this happens only once in a lifetime.


I wish to assure the hon member and the House that the ASIDI schools are extraordinary state-of-the-art schools with all the amenities. Even primary schools have laboratories, libraries and specially dedicated sanitation for little children. I certainly urge the hon member to visit these schools. The Eastern Cape, for example, has been the recipient of more than 80 schools. We have delivered more than a school per week in terms of the ASIDI programme.


With regard to water and sanitation, I do share the sentiment of the hon member. It is something that we cannot condone. It is a violation of the rights of our children. The ASIDI programme has intervened and provided sanitation to more than 137 schools in this financial year alone and water to more than 99 schools in this financial year alone. Panyaza Lesufi, the MEC for education in Gauteng, has indicated that he has already started with the prioritisation in terms of infrastructure for sanitation and water. [Applause.] This is happening and the national department is indeed going to help Gauteng and any other province.


The Minister of Basic Education has directed that all provinces should provide an inventory of toilets and sanitation that is inappropriate or inadequate so that we can take urgent and compelling steps in this regard.


I wish to assure the hon House that it is there to see. Go to Libode – there are more than 12 state-of-the-art schools. Go to other parts of the Eastern Cape. I suggest that these schools do not compare. They are simply being economical with the truth. [Time expired.]









(Minister’s Response)


THE MINISTER OF MINERAL RESOURCES: I wish to express my appreciation for the comments made by hon Godi and I fully identify myself with those. We have been unambiguous in our message to the investment community and the mining companies regarding their responsibilities towards the host communities, as I call them.


The language we use in the department is to refer to the social permit to operate the mines, and those permits do not reside with the department. They reside with the communities that the mines are at the heart of, even as I issue licenses on behalf of the government.


Secondly, we are currently reviewing compliance with the charter and we will release the result at the end of this month, March 2015. We are being vigorous in our checking of compliance by the respective companies that have taken this on and have committed themselves to obliging with the provisions of the charter. We are checking whether they are in fact compliant. So, I am appealing for calm and that we hold back until we release the results. We will be vigorous in doing this verification. Thank you very much.







(Minister’s Response)


THE MINISTER OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY: Chairperson, I want to associate myself with the remarks by hon Mthembu about the unacceptable nature of this dompas system as it has been introduced in Worcester. I want to do this in part because I used to be deployed to that area.


But I want to say I think this is part of a bigger issue because, on the one hand, we hear when we come to this House a call for the removal of red tape and allowing free movement of people; everyone must have a right to operate and trade wherever they like. But when we get to the heartland of the DA, the rich suburbs, we find it as a different story. I want to give another example, of the residential suburb of Newlands.


Residents of Newlands in Cape Town recently had a meeting of the Newlands Residents Association, supported by councillors from the DA, who are deployed there - this is the DA’s heartland. What was the issue? They wanted to replace the car-guard people with parking meters so that these people did not come into this area.


This is an example of the kinds of policy that this party supports. That is its heartland and then they come here and tell us a completely different story. It is one story in the township but it is something else in their backyard. “Not in my backyard” is, I think, what informs this party’s constitution. Thank you very much.


Mr I M OLLIS: Chairperson, on a point of order. The Minister is misleading this House. The SAPS issued those cards and he knows that very well. He is misleading this House and he should withdraw those disgusting comments.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ollis, myself, sitting here, I cannot verify the truth of what has been said. If you feel he is misleading the House, you are very much allowed to follow it up and show us why you say so. However, but for now I cannot say he must withdraw his words because I do not have that information. Thank you very much. [Interjections.] That is the end of our ... [Interjections.] Order, hon members! [Interjections.] Hon Steenhuisen, please! This is the end of Ministers’ responses. I will ask the secretary to read the first order of the day.












Mr Y I CARRIM: Chairperson, comrades and friends, here we are in a big bind with no quick fix and, at a time when we all, whatever our differences, need to get together and find the way out of the challenges, we are more polarised than ever. Of course, this polarisation is in good part a reflection of the persisting poverty, unemployment and inequality that afflict our society, leading to increasing social polarisation. But we are the representatives of those in conflict in society and we need to come up with answers to reduce that conflict in the interest of all, but primarily the poor and the disadvantaged.


I will report to Parliament on the Fiscal Framework and Revenue Proposals published in the ATCs of 5 March, which need to be put in context. I will mainly, though not solely, give an overview of the Fiscal Framework Report. The DA, of course, reserved its position on the report and the EFF, needless to say, opposed it.


What are the key issues raised by the majority in the report? The committee believes that the budget should more clearly be located in terms of the National Development Plan, the Medium Term Strategic Framework and the state of the nation address, particularly the 9-point plan to ignite the economy and create jobs. The budget must also, with all its constraints, serve to advance the second more radical phase of the transition and should be broadly understood too in terms of the values and goals of the Freedom Charter, especially in this 60th anniversary of its adoption.


The main overall conclusion of the report is, “In the context of the weak global outlook and the major economic growth and financial constraints the country faces, National Treasury has managed to shape a balanced budget mainly in favour of the poor”. The committee welcomes the budget’s focus on education, health and social grants expenditure. While challenging, achieving the 2% projected growth in gross domestic product is possible, especially if the electricity shortages are managed effectively. We go on to say that the committee expresses its concern about the effect of the low GDP growth on job creation.


The committee appreciates that the social security system plays a huge role in reducing poverty and cushioning the effects of unemployment. The World Bank’s 2014 report on South Africa, titled “Fiscal Policy and Redistribution in an Unequal Society”, examined the redistributive nature of existing South African fiscal policy in comparison to other countries and found that South Africa’s tax and spending policies are significantly progressive. But as the government and a wide range of stakeholders and experts have constantly maintained, the cost of the welfare benefits is not sustainable. National Treasury, together with government as a whole, needs to look into ways of linking social grants to forms of self-employment and skills development and, over time, wean people off the grant system into sustainable livelihoods. We need to give more attention to this than ever before in view of the limited growth projections and huge stress on the national fiscus. Importantly too, we will not be able to forge an effective developmental state.


We need to pay far more concerted attention to the productive economy and create jobs. National Treasury’s budgetary allocations in this regard are welcomed. The Industrial Development Corporation also intends, we understand, to invest R100 billion over the next five years to support industrial development, beneficiation and agro processing. Of course, these allocations will need to be increased by other organisations as well, but even more important is that we need to see the results. While it is true that there are significant global constraints on growth, there are several domestic obstacles that we need to overcome, and we must do this collectively, not just government alone.


In our report, the committee welcomed the Budget’s support for small, medium and micro enterprises and believes that if the programmes to be funded are implemented effectively, our broad-based black economic empowerment goals will be advanced and a significant number of jobs created. The newly established Department of Small Business Development has a crucial role to play in this regard, and we call on National Treasury to give the new department all the relevant support it needs.


As with government, the committee believes that the best short-term prospects for faster economic growth are in the less energy-intensive sectors such as tourism, agriculture, light manufacturing and housing construction. We also feel that the National Infrastructure Plan must be accelerated by every means possible.


The committee noted too that the state is in fact creating more jobs than the private sector and believes that the state should do more to encourage the private sector to invest in the productive economy and create more jobs.


In its submissions, which are hearings, the Parliamentary Budget Office noted with concern that the private sector is investing mainly in maintaining current operations. Given the constraints in the public sector, the role of the private sector, we stress, is crucial.


Tomorrow our committee will be considering a progress report from the Jobs Fund on the number and quality of jobs created. We will also shortly be looking more keenly at the outcomes of the employment tax incentive scheme.


In their submissions to the public hearings, the Financial and Fiscal Commission noted the typical factors constraining growth, and because we have said that so many times before, I refer you to the report.


In the committee’s 2014 Medium Term Budget Policy Statement Report, we recommended the following:


National Treasury needs to be very clear about the criteria it uses to define nonstrategic assets and the terms of any sale of these. Treasury also needs to seek to ensure that the sale of these nonstrategic assets do not lead to job losses or other unintended consequences that undermine the country’s economic growth and developmental goals.


The committee wants to stress that this time around we expect National Treasury to take this into account in its pending sale of nonstrategic assets.


The committee noted moreover that Eskom is to receive a capital injection of R23 billion, to be paid in three instalments, with the first transfer to be made in June this year. We also noted that the Minister of Finance - while recognising the complexities and sensitivities related to the sale of nonstrategic assets - means to table in this Parliament an Appropriation Bill in this regard by early May.


The committee believes that there is significant room to ensure government spending is more efficient and feels that National Treasury should do more to ensure that its proposals on cost containment and efficiency gains are effectively implemented and that it should report to the committee periodically on progress in this regard.


While the committee acknowledges National Treasury’s good work in improving the quality of spending at local government level, more needs to be done in this regard, in co-operation, of course, with the national and provincial departments of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs and, obviously, the provincial treasuries.


While the committee acknowledges the work being done by National Treasury and the SA Revenue Service on base erosion and transfer pricing, or BEPs, as we call it, we believe that more should be done, especially in the context of declining revenues. The committee has had two meetings on this matter over the past six months, the second meeting being jointly with the Minerals Resources Committee. We have engaged further with the Committee on Trade and Industry and all three committees - and any other relevant committee, for that matter - are welcome at the sitting, which is tentatively set for 22 April, to receive the report that we have mandated the Parliamentary Budget Office to undertake.


The Parliamentary Budget Office itself - and the committee agrees with this - has raised the need for National Treasury to provide more information on the assumptions on which its revenue proposals are based and their impact, as well as more information on the impact of the Budget on the poor. As the committee we welcome the role of the chief procurement officer and the centralised supply chain management process in general and we feel that this needs to be taken forward effectively. We would like more information, however, on how this is going to be implemented in practice and on how some of the logistical and practical details will be overcome.


While we recognise the value of having centralised data and the access it will provide to small businesses, allowing them to tender, we are concerned that we should not marginalise small emerging entrepreneurs at local level. So, we would like more discussion about this and we will seek to meet with National Treasury and the chief procurement office before the end of June 2015.


The committee welcomes the commitment of National Treasury, together with - presumably - the Department of Health, to release shortly the National Health Insurance White Paper and also the greater concerted work it is going to do on a comprehensive social security system.


Various stakeholders came to our public hearings. We heard them and we invite National Treasury to respond within a month to those stakeholders and tell us what it is that National Treasury has to say in regard to the many useful points they made. Of course, it is crucial that this happens; otherwise there is no point in people coming and making representations to Parliament. We actually have to engage actively with civil society stakeholders. But obviously we will also engage with National Treasury in the year ahead.


The Minister was asked why his Budget is so boring. He said because it is predictable. So you can understand why our Report too is so boring. Thank you very much. [Applause.]










Dr D T GEORGE: The fiscal framework provides a snapshot of how government is managing the people’s money and how our economy is performing under its economic policies. Economic policy uncertainties feature loudly and clearly in the ANC government and everyone in South Africa is paying the price.


Although the National Development Plan is the stated policy of choice, this is not reflected in government action as economic paralysis continues to drive away jobs and growth. Everything we do must be focused on facilitating more people into productive jobs in our economy. Your Budget, Minister, did the opposite.


The ANC government’s economic philosophy positions the state at the centre of our economy. The state then controls economic activity and dispenses patronage to its cronies so that it can retain political power and ensure that the insiders get rich off the backs of everyone else.


A close look at the fiscal framework reveals the impact of failed economic policy. Estimated revenue declined by R11 billion between October and February, yet expenditure increased by R7 billion and the budget deficit grew to R162 billion. The deficit is projected to fall by R45 billion next year and then increase by R5 billion in the 2017-18 financial year.


The projected revenue increase can only come from increased taxation because projected domestic income growth, even if these dismal targets are met over the next two years, will not generate the projected revenue increases.


The meltdown at the SA Revenue Services, Sars, is not helping with revenue collection either. In 2009, it was already clear that a unit was operating within Sars and conducting investigations. It now transpires that the funding and accountability of the unit are unclear and doubt now exists about whether every taxpayer who owes Sars money is actually paying it. President Zuma never paid fringe benefits tax on the palatial addition to his private home at Nkandla.


The social contract between Sars and taxpayers is precarious and asking compliant taxpayers to pay even more while some do not pay at all is expecting too much of too few. The revenue increases are funding extravagant government consumption spending, among others things on the largest Cabinet in the world, not productive economic growth.


In October, and in our alternative budget in February, the DA set out our expectation that the Minister should focus on two primary concerns: Immediate improvement in the management of the people’s money and longer-term measures to stimulate and accelerate our economic growth; if not, our economy will continue to shed jobs.


The state-owned enterprise model does not work and never will, no matter how much of the people’s money is poured into this bottomless pit. Injecting private sector efficiencies into the state-owned enterprises would be a welcome start to resolving the crisis. The Minister mentioned that nonstrategic state-owned assets would be sold to fund Eskom in particular. This process is apparently in progress but it is shrouded in secrecy. The questions “What assets will be sold?”, “Who will buy them?” and “What process was followed?” have not been answered. The ANC is divided on whether the assets should be sold, possibly because the potential for corruption is enormous and everyone scrambles for their bite of the shrinking economic pie. We will be watching the sale of our assets very closely, Minister.


Negotiations over annual public sector salary increases have begun and agreement seems far away. A restructured Public Service, without agencies and overpaid and underproductive cadres, is possible without any reduction in already suboptimal service delivery to the people. Cadre deployment crowds out jobs for everyone else.


Estimates of how much of the people’s money leaks from the public financial system every year vary from at least R30 billion upwards. Only the political will to resolve this problem will fix it. Year after year, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Scopa, reports specific examples of public financial mismanagement, with the only consequence being an increase in taxation.


Everyone got poorer from this Budget. The increased fuel levy will hit the poorest the hardest because they will pay proportionately more. Instead of passing on the benefits of a weaker oil price, everything just got more expensive. Instead of making the immediate interventions that would have averted tax increases, the Minister did, in effect, balance the Budget on the backs of those who can least afford it. This Budget takes money out of the pockets of the poor and into the pockets of the politically connected few.


It should be clear by now that an incapable state at the centre of our economy will drive GDP growth further down, not up, and certainly nowhere near the 8% that we believe our economy is capable of achieving over time. More activity in our economy will generate more tax revenue from a wider tax base and unlock the human potential of our people.


Our national unemployment crisis, at 35% unemployment, continues unabated, especially among the youth, who account for 67,5% of those who are unemployed. Government cannot deliver jobs; it can facilitate an environment conducive to job creation. The focus must be on small, medium and micro enterprises. This requires a change to the philosophy of the state as the central player in the economy. This is one of the major structural changes that our economy needs but will not get under the ANC’s incoherent policy implementation.


Tax relief for small business is welcome, but will not make much of a difference to the small business that does not make any profit. The focus must be on removing the barriers to doing business; the regulations and laws that crush small businesses before they ever become viable, taxpaying entities.


Government can champion small business incubators and offer a properly resourced national venture capital fund. Infrastructure development creates the environment for business to flourish and steps must be taken to ensure that at least 10% of GDP is invested.


The fiscal framework points to very serious problems in the years ahead, especially with debt servicing costs, if our economy does not grow fast enough. As the Budget ceiling reduces, service delivery is crowded out and this creates a potential powder keg. When a loud crack is heard, and no action is taken, the outcome cannot be positive. We have heard a loud crack from our economy and now is the time for urgent action.

The DA will not support this fiscal framework. Thank you. [Applause.]










Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: House Chair, the fact of the matter, hon Minister of Finance, is that you do not have enough money to finance your projects. The revenue of the state is declining and your intervention is to increase taxes on individuals, thus making them poorer, reducing their capacity to emancipate their families and their lives, and reducing their ability to ensure that they have sustainable livelihoods.


But you also are saying that we should privatise. Well, if the SA Communist Party and Cosatu were still in existance, there was going to be massive resistance to your proposal that there should be privatisation. But they are no longer there. So we stand up here to oppose the privatisation of state-owned enterprises.


The consequences of privatisation are going to be much more dire than you could ever have imagined. Jobs will be lost. That is a given. Additional value will not even be added to the economy through privatisation. It is not a solution to privatise state-owned enterprises. Whether you call them “noncore” or not, it is not the way to go. So, do not privatise state-owned enterprises!


Let us, however, be nuanced and then deal with the issue of what you need to do to gain additional revenue. You must deal decisively with the illicit financial flows. We spoke about it when we debated the President’s state of the nation address. We said that in 10 years’ time, it will cost $122 billion. That amounts to trillions of rand that are lost through trade manipulation by multinational corporations that exist here in South Africa. BHP Billiton, Lonmin – of which the commodore Deputy President is a member – and Glencore are avoiding massive amounts of tax here in South Africa. If there was adequate legislation to deal with tax avoidance, we can assure you that you would collect a minimum of R100 billion annually.


The EFF has made a substantial submission to the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry and to the Standing Committee on Finance on what is to be done with regard to illicit financial flows. We think that it is one of the most important submissions ever made in this Parliament since 1994. [Interjections.] If it were given proper consideration, we would be able to move forward.


Now, you will tell us that you know about the Davis Tax Commission recommendations - the interim recommendations. There is no new recommendation that the Davis Tax Commission is making. It is cutting and pasting the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development guidelines and methods on how to deal with illicit financial flows.


Now please pay attention to what measures countries such as Argentina, Brazil and, recently, Bolivia and India have introduced to deal with illicit financial flows. They introduced a method called “the sixth method”, which is outside the five methods that are proposed by the OECD’s deputy president.


That method proposes, for example, that mineral resources be taxed on the basis of their publicly declared value – that is, before the mineral resource leaves the country – and not on the basis of what is declared to be the value of the mineral resource after it has been sold to a tax haven. This is because, after it has been sold to a tax haven, the sale value of the mineral resource will be declared as R2, which means that only R2 can be taxed, when, in fact, the actual value of those minerals is R10. So, using this method will allow you to generate much more revenue compared to what you are currently generating


There are, however, other political actions that you have to deal with. We proposed what should happen in our submission. Pay detailed attention to all multinational corporations that have subsidiary companies in tax havens. You must then deal with that and then you know how ... But we will make a submission and we will take it from there. Thank you. [Time expired.]










Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon Chair, our country faces numerous and steadily increasing economic challenges. Our macro environment is characterised by continuing low economic growth, high unemployment, ongoing energy crises, poor basic service delivery and a weakening developmental infrastructure. The above exacerbates social inequality such as poverty, health, education and crime and leads to an ever-worsening situation.


How do we correct this downward spiralling trend? We pursue the path of job creation. We create an environment that lends itself to entrepreneurship. We create an environment that supports the small-business person and provides him or her with easy routes to start-up capital, the necessary tax breaks and an overall environment of small-business nurture. We create opportunities for employment.


We see an approach by government that is slanted towards the receiving and redistribution of fiscal revenue, rather than one of creating a sustainable environment where the economy can grow and flourish. This cannot continue. It is not sustainable. It is an approach that will ultimately lead to a failed state.


Greater impetus must be focused on deregulation, labour crises and the removal of taxation that targets capital formation and investment viability. The burden of government must also be ruthlessly addressed and reduced. Yet, in this Budget, we see the opposite, namely the burden of government increased. And even with these increases, there is no corresponding increase in the output of basic services because of the continuing rampant incompetence, corruption and general ineptitude that has come to characterise our public services.


Economists are also noting with great concern the continuing issue of parastatal recapitalisation. Parastatal deficits cannot continue to be financed by government budgets and bailouts. These, together with our mooted and quite unaffordable expansion into greater nuclear energy capacity and public sector wage bill increases, only take us further along the road to a solvency crisis in South Africa. Thank you.










Mr S C MNCWABE: Hon House Chairperson and hon members, in tabling his budget, the hon Minister of Finance tried to raise our hopes and made promises that things would somehow turn out for the better. In spite of a gloomy picture, we all have to be optimistic and cherish a dream that things will get better. The projection is that our economy might meet a mere 2% projected growth.


There is a lot that must be corrected in our country. Mediocrity and underperformance seem to be endemic. Corruption in public and corporate sectors is rife. Unemployment and poverty keep growing. The country is losing jobs, especially in the mining and the textile industries. Most of our graduates do not find employment after graduating. Parastatals and other government entities are draining the government fiscus and perform below accepted standards.


The government is going to inject R23 billion into Eskom, with R14 billion to be injected into the entity with immediate effect. Now the government is footing the bill for poor planning, poor performance and nonperformance. Poor performance by Eskom has already begun to impact negatively on infrastructural development, economic growth and job creation. This adds to the already existing burden of poverty and unemployment. Loadshedding has had a ripple effect on the lives of many people in our country.


As the NFP, we are of the view that we must not just pay lip service to transforming and growing the township economy, but we need action. As the NFP, we were hoping that more money would be planted into small businesses and co-operatives. A rigorous attempt must be made to create jobs and empower both township and rural entrepreneurs financially and also by skilling them. They must not be left in the lurch; they must be mentored and coached on an ongoing basis. We need to expose more blacks to the mining industry, rather than offering opportunities to foreign companies and multinationals.


As the NFP, we welcome the bigger chunk of the Budget to be spent on basic education and higher education and training. However, provincial departments of education are not performing well - two cases in point are the KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape departments of education. In KwaZulu-Natal, almost R1 billion that could have been used to build schools and for infrastructural development had to be returned to Treasury. Thank you so much. [Time expired.]










Ms D G MAHLANGU: Hon Chairperson, hon Deputy President, hon members, the 2014 ANC five-year manifesto committed government to providing, over a five-year period, comprehensive social security protection to all South Africans and made the pledge that no poor and indigent South African shall fall through the social safety net. In this regard, today’s fiscal framework debate highlights government’s fiscal and macroeconomic policies, which are pro-poor.


The ANC’s programme of the progressive realisation and implementation of the prescripts of the Freedom Charter charts a way forward in terms of its socioeconomic policies. In addition, the economic resolutions of the ANC’s 53rd national conference in 2012 commit to radically transforming the lives of the poor through appropriate fiscal policy to end poverty, inequality and unemployment. These commitments were outlined in the 2014 Budget Review, when the Minister of Finance tabled the 2015-16 Budget.


The Budget is the reflection of responsible choices dealing with the challenges of slow economic growth, the fiscal deficit and the rising debt service costs. The fiscal stance of the ANC government recognises that the poor are just as equal as everybody else.


We have an undisputedly efficient tax system. The 2015-16 tax proposals reflect a careful balance, ensuring greater revenue generation while not unduly placing more strain on taxpayers. It also eases compliance and gives further relief to the poor. This Budget, being pro-poor, and contrary to critics who believe it is not, reflects key growth in priority areas in real terms, while supporting fiscal consolidation through reprioritisation in other areas.


A 2014 World Bank study shows that since the end of apartheid, South Africa has made progress toward establishing a more equitable society and that there has been a sizeable reduction in the levels of poverty, in the main due to the comprehensive social security system that the ANC-led government has instituted. This affirms that the ANC’s progressive policies continue to benefit the poorest of the poor. Of the 12 countries sampled in the World Bank study, South Africa has shown the greatest reduction in the levels of poverty and inequality among its citizens. [Applause.]


The 2015 Budget comes at one of the most difficult times in our short democracy of 21 years. Government is aware that what is needed is a radical economic transformation, and that in order to grow the economy, the goals of the National Development Plan and the Industrial Policy Action Plan, Ipap, will need to be advanced with renewed vigour. Government has not only broadened the tax base since 1994 but also built an efficient tax administration through the SA Revenue Service to generate the resources needed to fund the competing priorities in the country.


Our main strategies for social transformation seek to empower people to lift themselves out of poverty, while creating adequate social nets to protect the most vulnerable in our country. The ANC continues to implement a comprehensive programme that focuses mainly on the war against poverty, but also prioritises other significant social challenges, including inequality and underdevelopment, and is based on advancing and defending human rights as articulated in the Bill of Rights.


One way to achieve this reality is to provide support for vulnerable citizens through the provision of social grants. As the ANC, we are committed to protecting the vulnerable. [Applause.] Our social grants are the most direct means of addressing the poverty challenge facing our country.


The wellbeing of a society is best expressed in its citizens’ ability to access quality services, particularly education and health care. South Africa has made tremendous progress in the area of health, in line with the Millennium Development Goals and national policy. We have made significant progress in our fight against HIV and Aids. About 2,7 million South Africans are on antiretroviral treatment. [Applause.] We have 3 593 public health facilities now initiating patients on antiretroviral treatment, compared to 490 in February 2010. The Minister of Finance has announced an investment in the maintenance and refurbishment of health facilities. The Department of Health is in the fourth year of the phased 15-year roll-out of the National Health Insurance and the pilot activities are already under way in 11 districts. [Applause.]



Sihlalo, i-ANC itjheja bonyana aborhulumende bemakhaya bathathe amagadango arhabileko ukuletha iinsiza ezinjengamanzi, iindlela, igezi begodu nokuhlaliswa kuhle kwabantu. Okhunye okuqakathekileko kukobana kufanele kuqatjhwe abasebenzi abanelwazi begodu nabanekghono elifaneleko.



Given the present economic challenges and ever-growing priorities that government has to respond to, fiscal rebalancing is a priority. Fiscal rebalancing in this context involves a shift from expansionary fiscal policy to fiscal consolidation measures, so as to reconsolidate a financial base that will in future years lead to greater expansion. All of these will mean intensified efforts to improve expenditure efficiencies, while also increasing taxes in a responsible and measured manner in order to boost the fiscus.


In conclusion, in his state of the nation address the President outlined the nine strategic priorities that will be pursued this year, in partnership with the private sector and all stakeholders, in order to ignite growth and increase jobs. The 2015-16 Budget responds to the call by the President on the nine strategic priorities. The fiscal framework speaks to these nine strategic priorities, as well as confirms the pro-poor policy stance of the ruling party, that is, the ANC. As the ANC we are appealing to this honourable House to join us in supporting this 2015-16 Budget.



Sihlalo, nginethemba bonyana iNdlu ehloniphekako le izasisekela iSabelo Seemali sonyaka ka 2015-16.



Gona ge, le tla šala ka gore ge e duma e ya tsamaya. Ke a leboga. [Legoswi.]










Mr N L S KWANKWA: House Chairperson and hon members, the proponents of the Washington Consensus policy has always argued that the state should play no role in the economy. The advocates of Adam Smith’s invisible hand theorem believe that market forces would channel the activities of economic agents into equilibrium. The reality could not be further from the truth.


In a developing country such as ours, the state has a critical role to play in the economy. Leading from the front, the state has to intervene in the economy to balance economic growth and social development. The good performance of the South African economy over the past few years could therefore not have been realised without the aid of appropriate government state intervention policies that focused on growth, employment creation and wealth distribution.


However, the critical challenge facing the South African economy today lies not in the developmental state economic model that government has adopted, but in a government that is doing a lot more, but doing it less well. In line with its fiscal countercyclical fiscal policy stance, government has increased its debt stock from approximately 22% of gross domestic product in 2008-09 to 43,8% in 2017-18 - that is a projection. This effectively means that within a period of six years we have used up the entire fiscal space we had created over the past few years to stimulate the economy and expand social programmes. Despite this massive countercyclical fiscal policy stance, the South African economy is still characterised by low economic growth of less than 2% per annum, high levels of poverty, a chronic unemployment problem and growing levels of inequality.


Fanning the flames is the fact that we find ourselves trapped in a vicious cycle of a rising public sector wage bill, which exists side by side with poor service delivery outcomes. We are aware that plans are already in place to ensure that the public sector wage bill is sustainable. However, we are not convinced that enough is being done to deal with the challenge of poor service delivery as this is the only way to make sure that the public gets value for money.


Every year, more than R30 billion is diverted away from the poor by corruption and irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure. We must leave no stone unturned in the fight against corruption because corruption destroys the gains of our freedom. In addition, while we welcome the R1,5 billion reduction in consultants and advisory services, catering and entertainment, travel and subsistence between 2013-14 and 2014-15, you will agree with me when I say that this amount is very small in proportion to the billions of rand [nm1] that departments waste on these services annually.


Unless drastic steps are taken to close the yawning disconnect between commitment and action to improve efficiency in government, attempts to embark on a fiscal consolidation programme will remain a fantastic but vain hope. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]



Heyi, liyakhawulaza eli xesha. Siyabulela.










Adv A de W ALBERTS: Chair, the ANC is sure that it has a good story to tell, but its senseless repetition makes one think that the lady protests too much. It is in fact an illusion that has been shattered by reality in the form of the Standard & Poor’s ratings downgrade of South Africa to just above junk status.



Daar moet in die besonder kennis geneem word van wat gesê word deur Prof Jannie Rossouw van die Universiteit van die Witwatersrand, wat ook ’n voorlegging in die verband aan die staande komitee gemaak het. Hy en sy kollegas toon duidelik aan hoe Suid-Afrika voor ’n fiskale afgrond staan. Daar sal dus drastiese veranderinge gemaak moet word om ’n donker toekoms af te weer.



In order to save us from a dark future, the following needs to be urgently attended to: Firstly, save Eskom. We have ample evidence that Eskom is now teetering on the brink of a complete meltdown. Therefore, Eskom must be forced to freeze any counterproductive programmes, like its ludicrous employment equity plan, whereby more than 1 000 experienced white employees must be made redundant for no other reason than that they are white. One has to ask, at what price to the country? You may exact your revenge on whites, but in the end we will all be engulfed in chaos.


Secondly, strengthen Treasury by eradicating maladministration and corruption. You will save almost R100 million per annum and you can pay the e-toll debt in one instalment. We therefore oppose any tax increases as being unnecessary.


Thirdly, the personal risks of entrepreneurs are always undervalued. Create more tax incentives and reward them for the risks they take to create jobs and value in the economy.


Fourthly, enable foreign direct investment by creating certainty in the private ownership policy by reconfirming private ownership as the cornerstone of the economy.


Fifthly, relax labour laws that only protect the workers but not the unemployed.


Finally, please stop cadre deployment and redeployment. It is just a senseless policy that does not grow jobs.



Minister, u werk is moeilik en ons verstaan dat daar druk op u is om om ideologiese redes die verkeerde roete in te slaan. As u egter daardie druk weerstaan, sal die geskiedenis uiteindelik erkenning aan u gee as iemand wat as staatsman opgetree het. Indien u wel ingee, kan die ANC nooit sê dat hulle nie gewaarsku is oor die toekoms wat gaan ontvou nie. Dankie, Voorsitter.










Mr M G P LEKOTA: Chairperson, Cope endorses the committee’s recommendation in 3.1 that the budget should be more clearly located in terms of the National Development Plan and the medium-term strategic framework. We also agree with the Financial and Fiscal Commission that to stimulate job creation government must address sluggish economic growth, inadequacies in education and training, the skills mismatch, the collective bargaining system, barriers to entry to product markets and the constrained electricity supply. This is in line with the National Development Plan.


The NDP has to have clear centrality in our budget making. If the NDP succeeds, fiscal space becomes available. If the NDP fails, there will be no economic growth and no expanded source for declining state revenue. There can be no cherry picking in implementing the NDP. It must be implemented in its totality. The government must take the medicine the plan prescribes, no matter how bitter it is.


Yesterday Standard & Poor’s gave the government two precious years of breathing space to heal the economy or face a devastating downgrade. This is the last chance for this administration to make the economy work and to husband state resources responsibly. Electricity supply is constrained, yet Sasol can offer Eskom electricity today if a contract can be drawn up. Sugar millers can also do that and want to do that. The problem is that this government is just too conflicted to act decisively and responsibly in the public interest. Government is standing in the way.


Cope also fully agrees with the committee, in paragraph 3.8, that South Africa’s debt to gross domestic product ratio is far too high. Trade economics show this to be at 47%. The committee reckons it is 42,5%. We must tell what the exact figure is at the present time. While in paragraph 3.11 the committee welcomes the progressive character of the tax increases, we are disappointed. It is wrong of government to implement tax increases. It would have been better to reduce the size of government and its bloated administration. This is what is eating up tax revenues. Increased taxes will constrain spending and increase household indebtedness. This will further handicap growth in the economy. It is the wrong move all together. In paragraph 4.2, the committee recommends that the quality and composition of government spending needs to change. Indeed, this is the crux of the problem. The report has laid bare the problems. We now wait to see if government has the political will and the sense of responsibility to remedy the situation, as everyone in the country expects. I thank you.










Mr S N SWART: Chairperson and hon Deputy President, the ACDP shares concerns about the slow economic growth prospects, with the Finance Minister revising economic growth downwards from 2,5% to 2%. The all-important fiscal consolidation path obviously depends on sustained economic growth. We are facing severe constraints: global economic uncertainties, our power crisis, strike action, education and skills challenges, and policy uncertainty.


We in the ACDP agree that the focus must be on speedily implementing the National Development Plan, which in turn should lead to increased economic growth and job creation. Slower growth means lower tax revenues and we see that we have a budget deficit of R162 billion or 3,9% of gross domestic product. Now, that is slightly up from the 3,6% forecast[nm2]  in October.


In order to balance the books, then, additional revenue is required, according to the Minister, and he announced a number of measures such as fuel levy increases, sin taxes and personal taxes. We, from the ACDP, are concerned about the increase in personal taxes. We understand household debt is already at record levels and individuals will be hard pressed to pay the additional taxes, which must be seen together with the substantial increases in the fuel levy.


The alternative to increasing taxes is to increase the taxpayers’ net and Sars has done very well in that regard and, of course, to reduce government expenditure. The Minister stated that he will continue reducing expenditure and addressing corruption and we see that the budget ceiling is to reduce by R10 billion for the year and R15 billion over the next two years. That is to be welcomed and government is to be commended in that regard.


Obviously, we also agree with sentiments about expenditure on the productive side of the economy, as opposed to the consumption side. We are concerned about the public sector wage agreements, as the Minister has indicated. What will be the outcome of that and what impact will that have on the fiscal consolidation path? We welcome the more generous tax regime for small businesses. That is where we will create jobs and stimulate the economy.


Lastly, we note the concerns expressed by the budget office regarding the SA Customs Union revenue model. Minister, given our financial constraints, South Africa as a member state has lost considerable revenue in recent years. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers, the country only received a 17% share instead of the 80% it was entitled to. The question obviously is whether the current model being used leads to an equitable sharing of revenue. If not - and of course without undermining the broad principles and purpose of the union - there could be a need to review that revenue sharing model. I would like you to comment on that if you have time, Minister. I thank you very much.










Ms P C KEKANA: Hon Chair, hon Deputy President, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers, and hon members of this august House, as we support this fiscal framework and revenue proposals for 2015-16, we want to take this opportunity to acknowledge and take note of the achievements of the ANC-led government since 1994.


We are aware that it is convenient for some people to forget that when we came into power as the ANC, the South African economy had collapsed, was in debt and isolated and the concentration of wealth in the Johannesburg Stock Exchange was monopolised by a handful of conglomerates. This government, under the leadership of President Mandela, embarked on a programme of economic revival, stabilisation and shared wealth. It is only under the ANC-led government that the South African economy experienced uninterrupted growth. It is also a known fact that from the year 2007 the world economy was in a crisis bordering on a global recession. The South African economy is not an island unto itself - changes in the global economy also affect us. It is only those who are naïve who believe that this is not the case. South Africa is an economy whose revenue is very much dependent on commodities and when commodity prices depreciate, we are the hardest hit - hence the call by President Jacob Zuma and our ANC-led government to diversify our economy and make it inclusive.


The record of the ANC-led government in uplifting the wellbeing of the marginalised and the downtrodden is recognised by all and has won international acclaim. It is in this context that all of us should analyse Minister Nene’s fiscal framework proposals for 2015-16 and see that the commitment of the ANC government to a better life for all and that the upliftment of the lives of our people remain undiminished.


It cannot be right, therefore, to reduce this budget to an austerity budget by those who choose to do so, because expenditure continues to grow by 2,1% faster than inflation over the medium term. The fastest-growing spending allocations are on local development, social and economic infrastructure, post-school education and training and health. It is also not fair, especially from our colleagues in the opposition, to argue that this budget is balancing on the backs of the poor while non-interest spending continues to grow in real terms by 2,1% over the medium term.


As the ANC, we are saying that this budget continues to be pro poor and it is geared towards stimulating economic growth - of course under difficult economic conditions. We are aware that we are going through tough times and we have to take responsible decisions because we need to adjust to a difficult period ahead.


Through this budget our government still remains committed to social benefits to our people as far as education is concerned, both in basic and post-school or tertiary education. Despite the challenging economic conditions in which the 2015-16 budget has been presented ...



Rena ba mokgatlo wa ANC, mokgatlo wo o se nago thaka, re hlaotše ngwaga wo wa 2015 go ba ngwaga wa Freedom Charter. Re dirile se gore re kgone go keteka mengwaga ye masometshela mola lengwalo le la rena la tokologo le hlathwago kua Kliptown; sebokeng sa MaAfrika Borwa kamoka ka 1955.


Mengwaga ye masomepeditee yeo e fetilego, re dirile go tlala seatla gore dikgopolo kamoka le dinepo tša Freedom Charter di lemogwe. Seo ga se re gore re fihlile mafelelong a phethagatšo bjale ka ge bagaditšong ba rena ba gopola. Tekanyetšo ye Tona ya Kgoro ya Ditšhelete a e adilego fa e bontšha maikemišetšo a mmušo go tšwelapele go phethagatša lenaneo la Freedom Charter.


Mo sebokeng seo, ka 1955, re boletše re sa metše mare gore ngwana yo mongwe le yo mongwe yo a lego mengwageng ya go ya sekolong o swanetše go bona tokelo yeo e phethagatšwa. Go kgontšha nepo ye, mmušo wa ANC o tlile ka lenaneokgoparara la go aga diphapoši. Re phušutše meago ya mobu le letsopa legatong la yona ra aga meago ya sebjalebjale ya go tlabakelwa ka dibaledi, bokgobapuku le dilaborothori.


Re tšweleditše dithuto tša mahlale, dipalontshesere le thekenolotši tšeo e bego e le seila go ngwana wa motho yo moso ka ge mmušo wa maloba o se wa ka wa hlompha mmago wona le tatago wona. Masetlapelo le dipšhiša mare tšeo mmušo wa ANC o di iteile ka ntahle. Re a di fepa digotlane dikolong tša rena. Ba a ja; ba tia mpa ka lenono. Moya wo o renago dikolong tša rena ke mantlapulele. Ke moya wa šebešebe le kagišano.


Ka ge re tseba botlhaki bja ditšhaba tša gabo rena, re tlile le melawana le dipholisi tšeo di hlathago dikolo go ya ka letseno la moo di lego gona, [quintiles]. Re boletše gore dikolong tša letseno la go se tsebalege go tsenwe ntle le tefo, bana ba tsene mahala. Mmušo o phethagatša lenaneo la dinamelwa tša barutwana bao ba dulago kgole le dikolo.


Ga se ka phošo ge dikolo tša boMbilwi, boDendron, boThengwe, boGlen Cowie le tše dingwe di etšwa ka dihlora. Ge go le ka tsela ye rena ba ANC re re mediro e a bolela [mitirho ya vulavula] O R Tambo o ile a bolela gore naga yeo e sa fego baswa ba yona thuto ke mantlwantlwane. E ka se o beše wa tuka. Ke ka fao re bonago katološo ya lenaneo la thuto ya diyunibesithi go bana bao ba hlokago e le bohlokwa.



Having said all that, the ANC’s 53rd conference in 2012 stated that the expansion of the post-school education and training system to achieve the 2030 enrolment target requires extensive infrastructure investment over the next 18 years, including the construction of universities, teacher education campuses and further education and training colleges. We are on track in achieving this target.



Ya ANC ge e duma e a tsamaya.



A post-matric education is necessary for any individual to acquire the skills and capabilities to participate in the economy and contribute meaningfully as a citizen. Expanded access to higher education for the poor and the disadvantaged remains a key priority for the ANC-led government. Research conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council shows that the National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, has been successful in terms of students acquiring their post-matric qualifications. This is a good story to tell. [Time expired.] [Applause.]










Mr D C ROSS: Hon House Chairperson, the fiscal framework as set out by the Minister is indeed a great disappointment. What was needed in this fiscal framework to support economic growth, stimulate the economy and create the job opportunities this country so deeply needs was absent. In regard to creating jobs, the fiscal framework is completely empty.


Chairperson, it is widely recognised that the only long-term solution to South Africa’s economic woes is real economic growth. The newly revised gross domestic product growth figures tell the story. They tell the story of 2% revised downwards from 2,5% - and this is a reminder, hon Minister, of the disappointing low growth path the economy has maintained since 2009. The 2% growth rate is shamefully far off government’s target of 5% and GDP growth has faltered in every successive year since 2011. Also, when we compare it with the global crisis, it is just strange that our colleagues and our peers in Africa are growing at 4,2% while we are stuck at a growth rate of 1,8% or 2%.


Amidst this disappointing growth we have witnessed an ever-increasing unemployment rate, now topping 36%, and unrestrained growth in the country’s debt burden. Minister, it is clear that without real economic growth the millions of unemployed South Africans will be left without hope of ever finding a job in this country.


Hon Minister, of great concern, of course, is the country’s debt burden, as indicated in the fiscal framework. South Africa’s net debt stock has increased to a staggering 71,5% since 2009. In 2009, if my memory serves me right, the debt stock was 28%. It has now increased to 40,8% of GDP. If contingent liabilities are included, this increases the net debt stock to 57,3% of GDP, or R2,8 trillion.


The Minister has stated on more than one occasion that the countercyclical approach has reached its limits, and the National Treasury noted the other day that the Budget deficit is structural. But the DA believes it is disingenuous to describe a budget deficit as structural when it is clear that it is the ANC-led government’s inability to curb spending and tackle corruption that has become structural.


Why is it structural? It is because we are caught in a R30 billion corruption cycle year in and year out. It is noted by analysts that the improvement in revenues would not alone reduce the deficit; other measures are needed. Nevertheless, the government has decided to remedy flagging revenues by increasing the tax burden, and many of the speakers alluded to this.


Hon Minister, allow me to bring the tax burden on the country’s desperately narrow tax base into sharp focus. While government has failed dismally to address the unrestrained expenditure, undoubtedly one of the biggest strains on the public purse in terms of expenditure, hon Minister, is the litany of the state-owned enterprises that are in financial ruin. Not only did the Minister fail to announce any new action but it was even indicated in the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement that there would be a sale of non-strategic assets worth R20 billion to fund the state-owned entities. Still we are left in the lurch with regard to information. All that is indicated is that it will be paid in three instalments. The Minister’s message is therefore clear: The state will continue to fund dysfunctional state-owned entities and the public will pay for the bailouts.


Now, we have to look at the funding of these state-owned entities, Minister - and the DA is only a phone call away to also go into discussion with regard to this. Debt guarantees to state-owned entities are one of the main forms of contingent liabilities. Of great concern is the International Monetary Fund’s analysis that should only 75% of government guarantees be realised, it would increase the country’s debt stock to 72% of GDP. Now, 72% of GDP renders us, to a certain extent, in a very, very difficult position. This would be above the high-risk threshold. This is a clear indication, Minister, of the dire state this economy is in.


Shifting more of the financial burden to customers via tariffs can relieve the demands on the Budget but this will indeed be at the cost of economic performance and our growth potential. Once again, this will impact on jobs. Once again, this is certainly not the narrative that we would like to underwrite.


It should be noted that cost-reflective tariffs include the cost of new generation build and will lead to increased tariffs that are not inflation related. South Africa - and I do not want to go into the old story - has had six years of above-inflation electricity price increases and now Eskom’s application to National Energy Regulator of SA, Nersa, is also imminent to increase electricity tariffs even further to fund the inefficiencies of Eskom. We know that administered prices are driving inflation and that this should be addressed.


Minister, allow me to make a few remarks also with regard to the revenue proposals. It is crystal clear that the tax increases alone will not solve South Africa’s fiscal and economic problems. Indeed, all parts of society will share in this cost - all parts of society. The Budget also has implications for the poorest of the poor. Middle-income and upper-income households will bear the brunt of the personal income tax increases while the lower-income households, Minister, will bear the brunt of the fuel and electricity levy increases. We hope that we can address those levy increases as soon as possible.


Minister Nene effectively announced a bevy of tax increases instead of taking bold steps to cut wasteful expenditure. What the DA was asking for is a thorough analysis in terms of the cost of curbing corruption - R30 billion a year! It has serious implications for the ANC of it cannot make a precise cost reduction analysis in terms of corruption.


We now see the procurement office that he has established but we do not have any information on what can be saved in terms of corruption for the following decade. Moreover, an increase in both the fuel and Road Accident Fund levies will add a combined 80,5 cents per litre to the fuel price and will also impact on the poor, amounting to nothing less than the government robbing South Africa of the relief that the low international oil price has brought.


Chairperson, only structural reforms spearheaded by bold leadership will take the country forward. It is indeed a huge responsibility on the Minister and also on the Standing Committee on Finance. The need to address our energy crisis is of paramount importance. Infrastructure investment is needed to rescue key ... [Inaudible.]. The Budget was the perfect opportunity to beat the new path to growth and prosperity and it was missed by the ANC-led government. [Time expired.] [Applause.]











Me T V TOBIAS: Agb Voorsitter, agb parlementslede, dames en here, goeie dag.



Before I start my speech, let me respond to a few issues that have been raised by hon members who spoke before me. Firstly, let me start with hon Ross and hon George of the DA. It is amazing that when it suits members of the DA, they speak from both sides of their mouths. [Interjections.] When the ANC government imposes corporate tax, they are the first to jump and say, no, no, leave business alone; business needs incentives, so do not tax them. [Applause.]


We followed the advice of the Davis Tax Committee and said, let us be fair in terms of how we apply tax, and we imposed a percentage term – just one percentage term. Today, they pretend to represent the poor, but that is a fallacy. [Applause.] It is a fallacy because we know your interest has always been about big business. You have not, at any point, spoken on behalf of the poor. [Interjections.] You do not have the authority to speak on behalf of the poor. [Interjections.]


Hon Floyd Shivambu, with due respect, we set aside a day to talk about profit shifting and transfer pricing, but you ran away. We requested our chair to make another day available just to engage with you, because for some reason you will be shocked to learn that, in a way, we agree with you. So, come to the committee and engage. Fortunately, the speech was able to pre-empt all of these things.


Hon member from the IFP ... [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Chair, the hon member is casting aspersions on the Chief Whip of the EFF by saying that he ran away. Really? Like President Zuma runs away from prison, Parliament, the courts and everything! The hon member should not cast aspersions. Can you ask her to withdraw that remark because the hon Chief Whip attends every meeting of the committee ... [Interjections.] ... and he is going to educate the entire committee, including everybody in the ANC, on how to run the state. Thank you.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ndlozi, please! There is other advice that she gave to hon Shivambu. I do not want to take ... [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But, hon Chair ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, hon Shivambu, I am still speaking.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Please recognise me afterwards.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Shivambu, please sit down. In my opinion, I do not think that literal and metaphorical language should be interpreted in this House. Other advice was given and on that basis I am going to allow the hon member to continue.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Hon Chair, can you please recognise me?



Mof T V TOBIAS: Ke a leboha Modulasetulo.



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon member, do not continue! I am still coming to ... [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chair, I want us to ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Do not continue!




The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Shivambu, you can speak.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: How do we deal with a situation where a member deliberately does not tell the truth? She is a two week-long member of the Finance Committee. I do not know what she is talking about.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, hon member, you have asked a question. You asked a question!


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The submission was made. The standing committee has never given a date. She is lying ... [Inaudible.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon member, you cannot say that she is lying! Please withdraw that remark before I rule on what you have said.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I withdraw the word “lying”, but she must not ... [Interjections.] ... grandstand; she must debate the content.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Okay, that is enough. [Interjections.] It is enough! Let me rule on the issue.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We understand her weaknesses but ... [Inaudible.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Floyd Shivambu, please! [Interjections.] No, don’t! Hon Shivambu, I believe you and hon Tobias serve in the same committee. As I ruled before, this issue of saying people are being misleading creates a problem for us because we do not attend those committee meetings. Therefore, if you want to assure us that that is happening, go and resolve it, and if you are unable to do so, ask the Table – outside this House –how to go about rectifying what she has said. Please let us do that. Thank you very much. Hon Ndlozi, are you rising on the same issue?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, your response to my request around your ruling regarding the casting of aspersions says that the words “ran away” – when he was supposed to have made a presentation – are metaphorical. I do not know what metaphor that is, hon Chairperson. It is an aspersion and it is negative. The hon member must withdraw it because our members who voted for us are watching ... [Interjections.] ... and will accept that we “ran away” from committees. However, we never ran away from committees and we are requesting you to rule on the matter. She was casting aspersions and she must withdraw it! [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Okay, I think you have made your point, hon Ndlozi.


Mr S LUZIPHO: Chair, on a point of order.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order! I will allow you to raise your point of order later, thank you. Hon Ndlozi, can you please allow us to proceed? Hon Tobias, please proceed.



Mof T V TOBIAS: Ke a leboha Modulasetulo. Ke kopa ke bue le ntate wa rona mane, mohlomphehi...[Keno hanong.]



Ms E N LOUW: Chairperson, on a point of order: I request that you be consistent in your rulings. For the member to say another member “ran away” from a committee is incorrect. The mere fact that you are using delaying tactics by not ruling on this matter is totally wrong. The Chief Whip of the EFF and the government-in-waiting are more than capable of sitting in that portfolio committee, and he will never run away from his duties. That is why she must withdraw her remark.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you, hon member. I think your point has been made and I have ruled. I am not going back to that issue. Hon Tobias, please continue.


Ms T V TOBIAS: Hon Chair, I will try very hard not to tell all of the truth, but the truth of the matter is that the hon member was not available to debate on the particular day that we had made available for him. [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson, we can bring in the chairperson of the standing committee. A date was never set in the standing committee for a presentation of our perspective. We made a submission. There was nothing that was said about us having to go and make a presentation. We have actually ... [Interjections.] ... been begging the committee to give them our perspective. Why does she continue lying?


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Okay, you have made your point. Let me say something. [Interjections.] Let me say something! Your point has been made.


An HON HEMBER: Chair, on a point of order.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: [Inaudible.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Please sit down, hon Shivambu. You do not have to put us in this predicament. We do not attend your committee meetings. She has said that you were not available on that particular day. If it is not true, we cannot prove that here. Again ... [Interjections.] ... Hon members, please listen to me. We cannot prove in the House that he was not there. What I am advising, as hon Shivambu has said, is that we can go and check the documents. Please check those documents, bring them to us and then we will rule on that issue. I cannot rule on something that happens in a committee where I do not sit. Yes, hon member? [Interjections.]


Ms H O MAXON: My name is Hlengiwe Maxon, in case you have forgotten. Chair, we accept your ruling but she must stop saying that Floyd ran away because we are going to contest that. Furthermore, she must produce proof of the minutes now. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Maxon, I have already asked that they should deal with that in their committee, and if it is the truth they can bring it to us and we will rule on it.


Mr Y I CARRIM: Chairperson, I do not know if Mr Shivambu ran away or walked away, but there certainly was a date set with the Mineral Resources Committee for a joint sitting on the matter. As he well knows, there is also a date set - 22 April - for the Trade and Industry, Mineral Resources and Finance committees to deal with this situation. So, the dates are there. Thank you.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Carrim, I do not want to go back to the issue of running away and all that. I think I have made that clear. Proof is not a problem. Please, let us not continue with this matter. The majority of members in this Chamber ... [Interjections.] Hon Ndlozi, sit down! I am still talking! The majority of members in this Chamber cannot confirm whether it is true that he was there or not. That is the argument that we are having now. I have correctly advised on what should happen. Please allow us to continue.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Chairperson, may I please address you? The problem, as I said in the beginning, is the casting of aspersions, which you should have ruled on. If you did, we would not be here. The chairperson of the committee stands up and says he does not know whether the hon Shivambu “ran away” but he also says the date is still coming. It is set for 25 April. We are going to leave Parliament with our people thinking we are running away from our duties! [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order! Hon Ndlozi, we are not talking about ... [Interjections.]


An HON MEMBER: Chair, on a point of order.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: It is not correct! For the sake of progress, I am asking that hon Tobias withdraw her remark, which casts aspersions on the Chief Whip of the second-largest opposition party in Parliament.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ndlozi, I am not going to do that because I have already told you what is going to happen.


Mr S LUZIPHO: Chair, firstly, I stood up and called a point of order and I was told that you would come back to me.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): My apologies.


Mr S LUZIPHO: Next, we find members repeating themselves on the podium. Secondly, they get the opportunity to sneak in matters that are not relevant. Thirdly, it is not an address to the Chair; it is an address to people outside. When people are sent to Parliament, they want disorder, in order to address TVs and not to address what is discussed in the House. It cannot be correct! [Applause.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Your point has been made. Can we continue?


Ms T V TOBIAS: Chairperson, I also want to address hon Msimang from the IFP. Hon Msimang, the issues that you raised had been addressed in the committee. I would suggest that you sneak in just to get a feel of the discussions that we have in the committee. To that effect, I can guarantee you that we have even requested one of the ... [Inaudible.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Tobias, would you mind addressing the Chair?


Ms T V TOBIAS: Okay, Chair. [Interjections.] I will go to my speech because there is a deliberate intention to delay me. Before I begin, I need to say that a writer once wrote:


No matter how educated, talented, rich or cool you believe you are, how you treat people ultimately tells all. Integrity is everything.



The National Treasury, in any given country, has a love-hate relationship with society, as it has to exercise fiscal discipline, which will be viewed as neoliberal by those who only pursue a developmental trajectory. The Minister of Finance has the role of allaying the fears of both the poor and investors at the same time, meaning that the role he or she plays balances the playing field in order to address highly competing needs. Business will be one-sided in its understanding of the role of National Treasury, whereas the same happens to those who want to see more allocations. So, in essence, the Finance Minister of a particular country will be an infamous person, depending on how you look at it and which sector you represent.


The difference between the speech of a President of a country and that of a Finance Minister is that the President needs to address the nation and present the government as caring. At the same time, the Minister of Finance needs to lay bare the financial situation of a country and try to make everybody happy. In a situational analysis made of the Budget speeches over time, Ministers of Finance report on the economic situation of a country in a factual manner.


In the case of South Africa, the Minister reported in his speech that South Africa continues to register positive growth rates and that many businesses struggled to maintain profitability. In the same vein, unemployment remains high and government has to adjust to slower revenue growth. What does this mean to us? It means that, while the economy was growing, unemployment did not change. Therefore, in terms of revenue collection, much has to be done to collect more. The Minister further emphasised that we need to intensify our efforts to address economic constraints by creating more work opportunities and broadening the economic base.


This in essence calls on us to increase our productivity capacity and investment opportunities. The Minister further suggested how this can be achieved. For example, the Minister suggested that we need to invest in infrastructure and also make markets work better.


If you are a Minister of Finance and you need to balance fiscal policy, you will emphasise the strategic objectives, which in our context is the 9-point plan, as outlined by the President in the state of the nation address. However, at the same time you need to make certain choices, based on the economic outlook of your own country in the context of a global economic crisis.


You will have no choice but to present facts as they are. The Minister indicated the structural challenges of our economy and the unreliability of our energy supply, which remains a negative factor. Therefore, the economic growth for 2015 was announced to be at 2%, compared to the 2,5% projected last year. However, we are expected to perform better in the coming fiscal year, based on us addressing the challenges listed above, hon Ross.


In 2017, there is a guarantee that we would have grown at 2,5% and I hope you will agree with me on this. [Interjections.] As I said earlier, there are certain fundamental policy positions that would be taken by any Finance Minister throughout the world. Let me remind you – whether you agree or not – that there are certain cardinal points that Ministers all over the world will look at: Firstly, it will be fiscal consolidation. Whether you agree or not, if you face a situation that we are faced with, you will have to consolidate, and that is exactly what our Minister has done. Since the intention is to grow the economy ... [Interjections.] ... you will have an austerity measure. This is not only in the South African context; it happens throughout the world. You will have calculated borrowing ... [Interjections.] You will have calculated borrowing. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon members!


Ms T V TOBIAS: You will prioritise expenditure. In this context, the South African government has cut expenditure, so I do not understand the issues that were raised in the lamentations here. More resources have been put in place to promote business. We have been putting money into incentives. That is what we have been doing and that is what we have said we should do, but when we do it, you change your mind.


These factors are not prohibiting or limiting a country to pursue a developmental agenda. It actually speaks to a mixed basket of policies, and in our context we have a mixed basket, as outlined in the National Development Plan. We have addressed the NDP, so basically there is nothing new that you have raised that we have not addressed. We believe in inclusive growth, which is in the NDP. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order!


Ms T V TOBIAS: Someone said today that this Budget is being put on the back of the poor. If you tell me that 1% ... Actually, let me tell you something: It has been said that the richest 10% of people pay 87% of tax. That is a fact, hon members. I am not raising it out of nowhere. [Interjections.] Measures need to be taken to balance ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order!


Ms T V TOBIAS: ... development and authority.


Comrades and friends, today the hon Mahlangu explained the expenditure patterns of the ANC-led government in its provision of basic social services. Let me pause and explain. Research has actually found that the South African government spends R7 000 on each household in social services provision - R7 000 on each household! That is what the poor get from this government. [Time expired.] [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you very much, hon member. [Interjections.] Let me assure you that after the points of order had been raised, your time was restored. I can assure you because I was watching.










The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Hon House Chairperson, I thank the members for having discharged their responsibility in this House in terms of the legislation that governs us. Let me start by indicating that this is in compliance with our Public Finance Management Act and our Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act, which require that after tabling the Budget, we need to table this fiscal framework before this House. That is what section 7(2)(a) up to (h) describes - what needs to be in the fiscal framework. It is for that reason that I want to remind members that some of the speeches that members have made here might actually have to be brought back at the appropriate time.


We face difficult years ahead and we know that some of our difficulties arise from weak global growth, hence I am surprised that somebody would come here and say that this challenge is not structural. The hon Ross also comes up and says we need structural reforms. How do you come up with structural solutions to something that is not structural?


All resources available to government come from the economy. Government gets its income from tax when people earn salaries, when companies make profits and when consumers buy goods and services. If the economy is not growing, the income that should be available to government also does not grow. That is a simple fact. Our budget already makes huge contributions to the goals of the National Development Plan. Over the past decade, our government and our spending has doubled in real terms. Millions of our people are now protected from extreme poverty. Spending on health, education and housing and other social services for each citizen is much higher in real terms. We have continued to maintain this, even in this budget.


Our Constitution requires government to progressively realise fundamental, social and economic rights within its available resources, but in times of low economic growth, the question we need to ask ourselves is: How can we continue to improve the impact of public resources on the lives of our citizens?


We need to ask ourselves how we deploy public resources to change society in radical ways at a time when the resources available to us are not growing. These, in my view, are questions that all of us must consider in relation to our fiscal framework that we are tabling today. The answers I submit are not simple - therefore, we need to consider just a few of the answers.


The first answer is that we should continue to increase spending and pay for it by borrowing the money, which is what some of the members here have recommended. The second approach would be to try and use the resources that government already has to achieve a bigger impact. The third is to finance increased spending from increased taxes, as we did in our Budget this time around. The fourth answer to the question on how to raise government’s contribution to development in a constrained environment would be to raise economic growth and to ease fiscal limits. Any fiscal policy approach will eventually become unsustainable if it is not supported by an adequate rate of growth.


Therefore, Budget 2015 makes a contribution to this goal by supporting three economic changes that are necessary for faster growth: Firstly, it was a shift from consumption to a growth path led by investment; secondly, it is a transition towards a less energy-intensive and more employment-intensive growth path; and thirdly, we need the radical transformation of our cities, which are platforms and engines of economic growth. We therefore need to act decisively to create more efficient and more inclusive urban areas, as members have also reminded us here.


Chairperson of the committee, I agree with you that linking social grants to some economic activity is critical. If we look at what our Community Works Programme and other programmes of government do in our communities, perhaps this is the answer, and we are looking forward to engaging with the committee. We trust that the committee will engage with these matters and advise us on the way forward. We also welcome the fact that the committee is going to be engaging with the Jobs Fund and also addressing the issues and reviewing the impact of the Employment Tax Incentive.


Hon George said that economic policy uncertainty prevails in this country and he says that because the state is at the centre, we are likely to fail in achieving our objectives. It is for this reason that it is the state’s fiscal framework that we are debating today - in order to lay the foundation for business to flourish, to reduce costs of employment, the costs of doing business and the cost of living for the poor. It is the government that must lead the process. It cannot be led elsewhere.


With the state being at the centre, it means we should create that conducive environment for both the private sector and the public sector to actually perform its tasks. The falling GDP growth is what we acknowledge. You also raised the fact that one of the problems we have, hon George, is with regards to what assets are to be sold. I heard Mr Ross say when he ended his speech that you would be just a phone call away when we dispose of those assets - it means you would be waiting with some cash. Carry on waiting. We are not going to put market-sensitive matters in the public until we have concluded them. We said to the committee that it only makes sense and, if you are interested, you have to wait until we come to the processes that deal with that at the appropriate time. [Interjections.] Indeed, some people come here with very clear interests that they seek to pursue through the parliamentary process and they think that we are going to just give away those things cheap and they look forward to that.


On matters of looking for money, hon Shivambu, I agree with you. Illicit flows are a drain on the fiscus. I agree with you that the issue of base erosion is a matter that needs to be addressed. I also agree with hon members who say we need a proper discussion on this matter because some of the measures we are already taking are beginning to take shape. We also need more, because the people we are dealing with - as you would know - are crooks and these are people who have resources to be able to do that.


In order to do that, you need to put things in place. Mr Shivambu, you must not always talk against what we have discussed, because we cannot come up with measures to deal with a situation of rogue elements. We lay our plans bare in this House and in committees before we implement them. We are going to need to be very discreet in dealing with the matter and I trust that you will be part of finding a solution. Indeed, it is tax evasion we are dealing with and not tax avoidance, because tax avoidance is a legitimate way of protecting oneself from exposure to tax.


The promotion of small business, as Mr Msimang from the IFP indicated, is at the top of our agenda and we agree that it is an area that we should take quite seriously.


Most of the hon members, even though they were not in support of the fiscal framework - I understand they have a role to play to the gallery, to their members and to their supporters –know that this fiscal framework does exactly what is required by the legislation and it is for that reason that we come before this House to present the fiscal framework.


Hon House Chair, I thank the members and the committee for having processed the fiscal framework and all the submissions that we had. We will come back to the committee at the appropriate time with responses and I take this opportunity to thank all of you for your participation. Thank you. [Applause.]


Debate concluded.


Mr Z M D MANDELA (on behalf of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party): Chairperson, I move:


That the Fiscal Framework and Revenue Proposals and the Report of the Standing Committee on Finance thereon be adopted.


Question put: That the motion moved by Mr Z M D Mandela be agreed to.


Division demanded.


The House divided.


AYES - 214: Abrahams, B L; Adams, P E; Adams, F; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Bongo, B T; Bonhomme, T J; Booi, M S; Boshielo, S P; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chabane, O C; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T P; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Filtane, M L W; Frolick, C T; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Goqwana, M B; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hlengwa, M; Holomisa, B H; Jafta, S M; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Kalako, M U; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, M D; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kilian, J D; Koornhof, G W; Kota-Fredricks, Z A; Kubayi, M T; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Luzipo, S; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabika, M S; Mabilo, S P; Mabudafhasi, T R; Madella, A F; Madikizela-Mandela, N W; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Magwanishe, G; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Mahlobo, M D; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manamela, K B; Manana, D P; Mandela, Z M D; Mantashe, P T; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Maseko, L M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masondo, N A; Masuku, M B; Masutha, T M; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matshoba, M O; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mchunu, S; Mdakane, M R; Mjobo, L N; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga - Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mogotsi, V P; Mokoto, N R; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Moloi-Moropa, J C; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, J M; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndabeni-Abrahams, S T; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Oosthuizen, G C; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, J T; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramaphosa, M C; Ramatlakane, L; Ramatlhodi, N A; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Skosana, J J; Skwatsha, M; Smith, V G; Surty, M E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tom, X S; Tongwane, T M A; Tseli, R M; Tsenoli, S L; Tshwete, P; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; v R Koornhof, N J J; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Williams, A J; Xasa, T; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zulu, L D.


NOES - 85: Alberts, A; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Cardo, M J; Chance, R W T; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Esau, S; Figg, M J; Gana, S M; George, D T; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Horn, W; James, L V; Jongbloed, Z; Ketabahle, V; Kohler, D; Kopane, S P; Kruger, H C C; Krumbock, G R; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lorimer, J R B; Lotriet, A; Louw, E N; Mackay, G; Macpherson, D W; Maimane, M A; Majola, T R; Malatsi, M S; Marais, S J F; Marais, E J; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; Mc Gluwa, J J; Mcloughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mokgalapa, S; Morapela, K Z; Motau, S C; Mulaudzi, T E; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Ndlozi, M Q; Nqweniso, N V; Ollis, I M; Rabotapi, M W; Redelinghuys, M H; Ross, D C; Shinn, M R; Shivambu, N F; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steenkamp, J; Steyn, A; Stubbe, D J; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Terblanche, J F; Van Damme, P T; Van Der Walt, D; Van Dyk, V; Vos, J; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Wilson, E R.


Motion agreed to.


Fiscal Framework and Revenue Proposals and the Report of Standing Committee on Finance accordingly adopted.










(Subject for discussion)


Mr P GALO: Hon Chair, the AIC is of the view that Seymour Lipset’s definition of democracy is still relevant even today. According to Lipset, and I quote:


Democracy in a complex society may be defined as a political system which supplies regular constitutional opportunities for changing government officials and a social mechanism which permits the largest possible part of the population to influence major decisions by choosing among contenders for political office.


The AIC also believes that the definition of democracy ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members. Hon Galo, can you just take your seat, please. Hon members, there is too much movement in the Chamber and the hon member is busy addressing the House. Those who are leaving, do so quietly, so that we give due respect to the member.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Yes, hon member?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I think the members are going to Matatiele or somewhere.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon member, let’s give the hon Galo an opportunity to lead the topic for our discussion.


Mr P GALO: The AIC also believes that the definition of democracy as the government of the people ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!


Mr P GALO: ... by the people, for the people is most popular, given the fact that public representatives are elected by the people through their political parties. Therefore, public representatives in legislatures must govern according to the wishes and will of the people.


The main challenge that we have to face head on is that we have no effective government institutions in this country, when it comes to decision-making, as far as lawmaking processes are concerned. What we do have are the extension structures of Luthuli House.


We have a problem of rampant political corruption and the arrogance of power in this country. This demon is not a challenge facing South Africa only; all African countries that are governed by the so-called liberation movements have similar challenges.


The people of this country, the people of Moutse and Matatiele, and me included, voted with great excitement and with high hopes on 27 April 1994 - for the ANC, of course. We believed and trusted that the ANC would take the people of this country to the promised land, the land of freedom, the land of liberty and the land of an egalitarian kind of society.


[Interjections.] No, I am not talking about the ANC. I am talking about the AIC. The historical elections of 1994 were followed by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act 108 of 1996, which was approved by the Constitutional Court on 4 December 1996 and took effect on 4 February 1997.


Chapter 1, in the founding provisions, states that the Republic of South Africa is “one, sovereign, democratic state founded on certain values. In the interest of time, I will just mention one of the values, which is, under 1(a), human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.


Taking this constitutional value into account, the AIC is of firm belief that the people of Moutse and Matatiele’s dignity, rights and freedom of choice were seriously undermined and they were treated as four-legged animals, when the Constitution Thirteenth Amendment Act, Act 23 of 2007, was passed by this National Assembly against the will of the people. May I use the analogy of a stock farmer, who will do whatever he likes to his sheep? If he wants to take them from one camp to another one, he will just do that with no regard for how the poor animals feel.


The law-abiding citizens of Matatiele followed all due processes to object to their incorporation into the Eastern Cape. This ill-informed and inhuman decision to force the people of Matatiele into Eastern Cape was taken by the ANC National Working Committee on 8 August 2005. The people of Matatiele were sacrificed for narrow and selfish political reasons, perpetrated by political corruption in the ANC.


If the ANC was led by a values-based leadership, then it should have been ashamed for being taken to the Constitutional Court by the poor, ordinary people of Matatiele. [Time expired.]










Mr E M MTHETHWA: Hon Chair, I thought the debate here was changed initially to cover the broad spectrum of the country. I am surprised that finally it went back to the initial position of talking just about Matatiele. So, the issue is about Matatiele.


The honourable cause of nation-building and building social cohesion in a society like ours requires at all times that we must act and behave in a principled manner that will unite the nation behind programmes of action that will address the betterment of their lives.


The honesty with which we carry this out should in the first instance be informed by the unitary nature of our country, as envisaged in the Constitution of the Republic, especially the Preamble, which calls on all of us to heal the division of the past and establish a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights. Yes, any individual or organisation that takes this fundamental clause in the Preamble and seeks to use it to establish a political party, NGO or any other formation and subverts it for narrow and sectional interests can only plough us back into the apartheid era, where racism, regionalism and other forms of division were systematically advanced to abuse the community on whose behalf it claimed to have been speaking, as we have seen in the past.


So, what is the relationship between this motion and such ignoble practices, which can only set us on a path of conflict and division so that individuals can personally and economically benefit and secure a place for themselves in the local sphere of governance? The motion pretends to raise unresolved legitimate grievances in which we are supposed to believe that the problem of a particular community has never been addressed. That is what this seeks to tell us. [Interjections.] It also seeks that the wrongs remain wrong; and no one has addressed these grievances before.


Here is the truth: We are supposed to believe that no one has listened to the grievances and therefore the institution of Parliament must be drawn in, as if Parliament has not already addressed these matters that are being raised. We are supposed to believe that the affected communities continue to suffer and there is no hope other than the ones that are proclaiming from their benches that there are solutions to the problem when in fact they are the cause of these problems, precisely so that they can benefit personally. They are not just looking at the interest of the community out there. What is easy to do is to break down communication and divide through rumour-mongering, deceit, falsehoods and blatant lies so as to gain narrow interests.


The tragedy of this approach is that other countries on our continent have literally gone to war with one another because of territorial disputes. The movers of this motion know this. They know it very well and they further know the implications. However, because their own narrow interests have not been served, the masses must be mobilised in the name of the people to serve the interests of the few. The negotiated settlement between two former enemies who were at war with one another led to a compromise on the actual character of the state in terms of its administrative functioning.


The ANC had at the outset no desire for anything other than a unitary state with strong administrative co-ordination, geographically. We argued in this manner, among other reasons, because of our understanding of the past, of the new imperialism described in 1885, of colonialism since 1652 and of the Act that created the South African Union in 1909, which was to consolidate British and Afrikaner capital and dislodge the African from the country of his birth. We knew at that time of the fragility of the geography of the country and that it would not be difficult to exacerbate this fragility. Settling for the type of provincial powers we have in the Constitution was always going to raise difficulties.


What is fundamentally undemocratic about this motion is that the subject matter has been to the highest court in the land. It went to the Constitutional Court, which, on 24 February 2010, handed down a judgment, which this Parliament is duty-bound in terms of the Constitution to abide by. Instead, what we have today is an attempt to undermine the Constitution, particularly those who think they are defending the Constitution. But here is the fact: They are undermining the Constitution and the Constitutional Court judgment, not by directly opposing it - because that would expose moving this motion as being fundamentally undemocratic - but by hiding behind so-called challenges with the Constitution.


So, if, as a democracy, we agree we should respect the rulings of the Constitutional Court, what other provisions are there for any community to exercise their rights on matters of demarcation? Prior to the local government election - and, by the way, this is the real intention of this motion - the Municipal Demarcation Board began a process of consultation on ward boundaries, which covers every square metre of our country. Any stakeholder has the right to submit to the Municipal Demarcation Board proposals in the shift of ward boundaries from one area to another. The Municipal Demarcation Board gives the MEC of each province and all the councillors guidelines on how to go about this process.


Political parties make submissions and they are consolidated by each province and forwarded to the board, which then brings back the draft proposals to each province for stakeholder engagement. Of course, even this democratic practice will not be enough for the mover of this motion, since their interests go beyond ward boundaries. They have to reconfigure the country around economic interests and nothing else.


Any configuration of a municipality in the country is governed by the broad, inclusive principles that govern our democracy. In addition, it looks at the financial sustainability of any proposal. What the movers of this motion are less interested in is whether their proposal ... [Time expired.] [Interjections.] [Applause.] Thank you.







Mr K J MILEHAM: House Chair, I am not sure if the hon Mthethwa was aware that we are talking about demarcation that refers to outer boundaries and not to the delimitation that refers to ward boundaries. But anyway, there is a saying, attributed to the philosopher George Santayana, that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Examples of this abound. But right here in South Africa, none could be more relevant today than that of Matatiele.


In order to understand this lesson ... [Interjections.] ... Matatiele! There we go! In order to understand this, a brief background is necessary. Matatiele is a local municipality on the border between KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape. Contrary to popular opinion and the stated reasons of the 12th and 13th constitutional amendments, it was never a cross-border municipality. But for some reasons best known to the ANC, it was decided to move the municipality from KwaZulu-Natal to the Eastern Cape.


Now, I say “for reasons best known to the ANC” because the results of the referendum among the residents of Matatiele in 2009, regarding which province they would prefer to be part of, have never been released. No concrete justification has ever been offered as to why the municipality should be moved from KwaZulu-Natal to the Eastern Cape.


At the time of the 2006 Constitutional Court case into the matter, the state argued that the legislature did not have to hold public hearings on Matatiele’s incorporation into the Eastern Cape because the legislature was elected to represent the interests of the people. The court took umbrage at this argument, as reflected by Justice Ngcobo’s words:


Our system of government requires that the people elect representatives who make laws on their behalf and contemplates that people will be given the opportunity to participate in the law-making processes in certain circumstances. The law-making process will then produce …


 – and this is an important word –


… a dialogue, between the elected representatives of the people and the people themselves.


The Constitutional Court required that Parliament and the provincial legislature conduct proper consultations with the public affected by the changes. In this regard, it would later hold that the 13th Constitutional Amendment, which ratified the deficiencies of the 12th, had, in fact, been properly processed and that the public participation had been adequately conducted.


And now for the lesson from history: The outer boundary demarcation process, hon Mthethwa, should have been completed by now. In fact, we should now be finalising the ward delimitation process but neither is complete and this has severe implications for the ability of the Independent Electoral Commission to hold the 2016 local government elections within the constitutionally mandated time frame.


Similar to the Matatiele situation, a constitutional crisis is looming because of excessive executive interference in a separate, independent and interdependent sphere of government. The request to amalgamate a number of municipalities in terms of section 22 of the Local Government Municipal Demarcation Act, while perfectly legal and within the Minister’s rights, does not make common sense. Let us unpack this – why is it so?


Firstly, amalgamating dysfunctional municipalities with functional municipalities does little more than drag the functional down to the level of the dysfunctional. Functional municipalities are barely able to cope with the backlog of municipal services as it is, and now we wish to incorporate a whole new geographic area, frequently with a limited revenue base and poor revenue collection, not to mention an enormous service delivery backlog.


Secondly, in every single instance, no justification has been provided on how the municipalities were selected for amalgamation. For example, why join the dysfunctional Ikwezi Municipality with the well-run Baviaans and Camdeboo Municipalities? Why not with the Blue Crane Route Municipality or Sunday’s River Valley Municipality, both of whom share borders? Why, if not to gerrymander support for the ANC in the DA-run Baviaans and the marginal Camdeboo?


Thirdly - and this is where history becomes really applicable - There has been little or no public participation and consultation on the proposal to amalgamate these municipalities. Did we not learn from the mistakes we made in Matatiele? Can we not see that these municipalities and their residents have a right to be consulted on decisions affecting their future?


We note that in the budget an amount of R139 million has been set aside over three years for the municipal demarcation transition grant. Given that it is estimated that Tshwane’s amalgamation with Metsweding cost nearly R1,2 billion - that is one municipality - how can the allocation of R139 million over three years possibly be enough for all the municipalities it is proposed to amalgamate?


A more appropriate response would be to ensure that there is more compliance with various legislations, regulations and obligations applicable to local government. This implies greater support from both the provincial and national departments, targeted interventions and the removal of nonperforming and unqualified cadres. It requires a greater adherence to the rule of law and a culture of accountability. It requires that those responsible for unauthorised, fruitless and wasteful expenditure – wait for it – pay back the money!


Perhaps now more than ever we need to listen to the voices of those who elected us. We need to acknowledge that wisdom does not reside in the belly of the ANC alone, but that every citizen in this country has the right to have their voice heard and to contribute their opinion on how they choose to be governed in a meaningful manner. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]











Rre A M MATHLOKO: Modulasetilo, go tlhabisa ditlhong gore puso ya ANC le boto ya melelwane e tswelele pele go dirisa batho ba rona jaaka didiriswa tsa ditlhopho. Fa re lebile ditlhophong, re bolelelwa gore go tla kgaogangwa melelwane e mešwa. Ka bo gatlapa jwa ANC, gonne e itse gore e tla tlhoka go falola ditlhopho, e kgobokanya kwa ba se nang dithata tsa batlhophi kwa teng. Ntetle Modulasetilo ke re ...



Fact is that 20 years after the compromise of 1994, black people are still confined to congested townships - what a shame, and yet you have a good story to tell! – that serves as nothing more than glorified labour concentration camps or degraded, ignored, undeveloped and undevelopable rural areas with minimal government services, as in the case of Matatiele. This is a reflection of an ailing ANC leadership.


The Constitution 13th Amendment Act of 2007 speaks directly to the failures of the ANC government to re-engineer our geographical spaces, this time with the consent of our people. But central to this problem of hindering the ability of the municipalities to deliver services to our people, is that it is not determined by the province or municipality in which it is, but by a much deeper structural problem relating to the funding model used in this country.



Le fa go ka tsewa Matatiele ya nna ka fa tlase ga Masepala wa Gauteng, Johannesburg Metro, go tshwana fela. Neelano ya ditirelo e a tlhokega.



At the moment, the municipalities only receive about 9% of the funds allocation; the rest goes to the national and provincial spheres of government to be misused. For most rural municipalities, this form of revenue collection - through rates and taxes - will never work. The poor will be unable to pay the rates and taxes. Municipalities are at the coalface of service delivery and are charged by the Constitution to provide ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Order! Continue, hon member!


Mr A M MATHLOKO: … democratic and accountable government for local communities; to ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner; to promote social and economic development; to promote a safe and healthy environment and to encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in the matters of local government. You do not provide; you give them nothing! [Interjections.]


It is for this reason that about 90% of our municipalities are now dysfunctional, especially those led by the ANC. [Time expired.] [Applause.]










Mr M HLENGWA: Hon House Chairperson, in 1994 South Africa ventured into new waters, and for the first time the collective dreams and aspirations of black South Africans found expression in matters of governance. In the truest sense of the word, the notion that a democracy is “a government of the people, by the people and for the people” was restored.


The day 27 April 1994 ushered in a new era of political dispensation and a people’s government that should hear the voices and action the wishes of the people. That is the essence of our freedom and the ultimate goal of the struggle – that black people, alongside all other South Africans, would never have to struggle ever again.


Yet this noble democratic ideal is not true for the people of Matatiele, Moutse, Khutsong and Malamulele. A democratic government forcefully removed the people of Matatiele from KwaZulu-Natal and demarcated them to the Eastern Cape. Is this not what the apartheid regime did to our people, forcefully moving them from pillar to post like chess pieces against their own will? The majority of the people of Matatiele wanted to stay in KwaZulu-Natal and publicly rejected the demarcation legislation that consigned them to the Eastern Cape. In a referendum, over 80% of the people of Matatiele rejected their Balkanisation into the Eastern Cape.


The IFP has long argued that by ignoring the will of Matatiele’s residents as expressed in the public hearings and submissions, the ANC has effectively turned its back on public participation in law-making, which is one of its trumpeted objectives. This is what you do best: you ignore what people want and do your own thing because you are a runaway train.


In 2007, 5 685 signatures against Matatiele’s ejection from KwaZulu-Natal to become part of the Eastern Cape were received by the KwaZulu-Natal Portfolio Committee for Local Government, but it fell on deaf ears.



Anizwa, anilaleli ninenkani. [Ubuwelewele.]



The IFP calls on the government to respect the ruling of the Constitutional Court of 18 August 2006, where Justice Sandile Ngcobo said in his judgment that the 12th Amendment Act, which altered the boundaries of KwaZulu-Natal, was invalid. Underline this in basic English 101 – it was invalid! Whether you are in power or not, it is invalid. Let it sink in and subside ...



 ... ukuthi niyabhayiza. [Ubuwelewele.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!


Mr M HLENGWA:  The continued abuse of state power in government and of due process in determining boundaries must come to an end. It is typical of desperate people not to listen to the will of the people.



Phindiselani abantu baseMatatiele KwaZulu-Natali la befuna ukuba khona. Sebekhulumile abantu. uHulumeni onjani lo ongalaleli? Anifuni ukukhokha imali yabantu. Anifuni ukubuyisela abantu eMatatiele. Anizwa, anenzi lutho nigqome edwaleni nje lenkani. [Ubuwelewele.]



Take the people back to where they want to be and while you are at it, pay back the money. [Interjections.]



Ake nenze into ekufanele ngabe niyayenza sesikhathele imikhuba yenu. Ningenzi izinto engabe niyazenza. Abantu bafuna ukuhamba ... [Kwaphela isikhathi.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, your allocated time has expired. [Interjections.] Order, hon members!










Prof N M KHUBISA: House Chairperson ...



 ... kusukela ngowe-1996 kuze kube ngowezi-2009 abantu baseMatatiele babekhuluma besho bethi bafuna ukungena KwaZulu-Natali kodwa izimfuno zabo zephulwa banganakwa ngoba kuqondakala khona ukuthi siwuhulumeni ongabanaki abantu. Ngowezi-2009 abantu baseMatatiele abangamaphesenti angama ...



 ... in a referendum, and 87% of them said that they wanted to come to KwaZulu-Natal. Yet no one cared about them. This is the way we do it. Just recently, Minister Gordhan based his narrative on a paradigm which says that the determination or redetermination of municipalities or municipal boundaries is geared towards optimising the financial viability of these municipalities in time for the 2016 municipal elections. What a cool Balkanisation of our state to suit the ruling party! Let’s take one example. The two municipalities of uMtshezi and iMbabazane are both struggling. These are two municipalities that are rural in form and shape, with both depending on very lean budgets to deliver services. For instance, uMtshezi has a budget that does not even reach R400 million. It is struggling. The question that can be asked is what magic or miracle will be used to make these municipalities financially viable when each of them has been struggling and depends on grants and the equitable share to survive.


We are talking about deeply rural municipalities that are sparsely populated. The ploy is just to help the ruling party to ensure that they win elections. Most of the people in these municipalities work on farms and the majority of them are not taxpayers. Most of them depend on subsistence farming. Transport is very poor and most of them struggle to get to towns and municipal offices. Once you change offices and the distance they have to travel, that becomes problematic. For instance, in Mpumalanga, the municipalities of Victor Khanye, Umjindi, Dipaleseng, Dr Pixley ka Seme and Emalahleni will cease to exist should the proposed mergers go through. Some of these municipalities are under administration.



Uthatha omasipala laba abaphilayo abangconywana uyobafaka komasipala abavele nabo bezifele. Yini ezokwenzeka khona lapho?



Their situation is not improving and they are struggling. For instance, Emalahleni Local Municipality is under administration. The question is whether it will help to place Victor Khanye under Emalahleni, since there is no service delivery happening in Victor Khanye. Some of these municipalities lack skills, and the ways and means to collect revenue.



Manje uma ubahlanganisa nabanye bazotholani?



Is that dermacation?



Bazofa baphele ngoba nifuna ukubabulala vele. Yindlela esisebenza ngayo leyo? Ngiyabonga Sihlalo weNdlu.










Ms C N MAJEKE: Hon Chairperson, hon Speaker and members, the demarcation process in South Africa is posing multiple challenges, such as community objections to demarcation processes and service demands in municipalities. Change processes need to be effectively managed if they are to be successful and sustainable.


Violent protests accompany these objections and demands as a way of registering unhappiness with the final decision regarding the demarcation processes. However, these protests signal that the Municipal Demarcation Board and government need to do more homework before coming to a final decision.


All stakeholders should be actively included in the demarcation processes. It is essential that boundary demarcation identifies traditional structures attached to the land in rural areas and adopts a socially sensitive approach. Traditional rural communities have knowledge of the history and cultural practices in the areas, while municipalities and the demarcation board can contribute with expert knowledge and skills.


Poor communication between stakeholders and a lack of public participation destroy whatever good intentions there are for demarcation. Citizens must be allowed to have full participation and provide inputs in any process that affects the development of their territories. Participation could ensure that vital information is not overlooked. Geographical information systems and mapping should be investigated. Also encouraged is intergovernmental communication, in order to avoid the duplication of processes, which also contributes to the realisation of democracy on the ground. Once the people have spoken, their voices must be heard and listened to. I thank you.








Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Voorsitter, ons het baie duidelik ... [Tussenwerpsels.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: Order, hon members!


Mnr P J GROENEWALD: .. hier vandag gehoor dat die meerderheid van die gemeenskap van Matatiele graag ingelyf wil word by KwaZulu-Natal. Die ANC kom en hulle skuil agter elke tegniese punt wat daar is. Nou vra ek vir die ANC, wat het u gedoen in die geval van Merafong?


In 2006 was dit geen probleem vir die regerende party om Merafong in te lyf by die Noordwes provinsie nie. Toe het die mense gegaan en hulle het alles afgebrand. Die ergste was, die mense het nie vir die ANC gestem nie. Hulle het weggebly van die stembus af. Toe skrik die ANC en begin hy Merafong weer terugskuif na Gauteng.


Dit is duidelik dat in die geval van Matatiele die ANC met dieselfde probleem sit. Hy is bang om die gemeenskap te laat oorskuif na KwaZulu-Natal, want hy weet hy kan stemme verloor. Dit is wat die probleem en die kern is van die Matatiele kwessie.


Die ANC moet ophou om die Munisipale Afbakeningsraad te wil misbruik vir sy grille en giere. Die afbakeningsraad is veronderstel om ’n onafhanklike liggaam te wees, maar die ANC-regering misbruik die afbakeningsraad, soos wat hy nou met Midvaal ook wil doen. Die ANC wil dit mos nou een groot metro maak. Eintlik is die onderliggende rede daarvan om die stemme te verdeel, sodat die ANC die meerderheid van die stemme kan kry en oral kan regeer.


As daar swak dienslewering is in die Oos-Kaap moet die ANC al die vingers na homself toe wys, want hy regeer mos nou in die Oos-Kaap. Hoekom sorg hy nie dat daar behoorlike dienste gelewer word nie? Daar is tans die neiging dat die afbakeningsraad misbruik word waar daar gemeenskappe is wat, wil ek amper sê, in ’n droomwêreld leef en dink as ons ’n klomp munisipaliteite saamvoeg, gaan ons beter dienste kry.


Hulle is oral besig daarmee, selfs in Noordwes. In Noordwes wil hulle die Matlosana Munisipaliteit met Potchefstroom en Ventersdorp ook een groot munisipaliteit maak. Daar word vir die mense gesê dat daar dan beter dienste gelewer sal word. Hierdie ANC regering het nie die vermoë om goeie regering te lewer nie. Hy kan nie goeie regering lewer nie, want hy stel nie mense met meriete aan nie.


Die agb Minister van Plaaslike Regering het darem ’n bietjie sterk opgetree en darem gesê die mense wat nie kwalifikasies het nie moet van ontslae geraak word. Raak ontslae van hulle, want anders gaan u nooit behoorlike dienslewering kan lewer nie. Ek dank u.










Mr N A MASONDO: Chairperson, let me begin by acknowledging all the important people who are here: the Ministers, Deputy Ministers, hon members and fellow South Africans. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Hon Masondo, hon members, whether you disagree with or dislike what the member is saying, the member has the right to be heard. Do not drown him out with interjections. Continue, hon member. Hon Masondo, you may continue.


Mr N A MASONDO: Please allow me to begin by making a few comments on some of the issues that have been raised by the opposition political parties. I will do so briefly. Galo of the AIC says we have no effective governing institution in this country. All I can say to that is, what a falsehood! Mileham of the DA says there is an excessive executive influence and he goes on to voice a lot of other negatives. My only response is this: As I have grown to know Mileham more and more, I can only say to you that his hatred of the ANC ... [Interjections.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Chairperson, on a point of order: Members of this House are hon members; they must be addressed as such and not by their surnames.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Masondo, will you refer to the hon members as honourable?


Mr N A MASONDO: Well, all I can say is that hon Mileham’s hatred for the ANC knows no bounds. He hates the ANC with a passion. Matlhoko of the EFF speaks of a glorified ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Masondo, please refer to members of the House as honourable and not by their first name or surname only.


Mr N A MASONDO: Hon Mahlobo says all one can say about townships is that they are glorified labour camps. [Interjections.]


Mr A M MATLHOKO: Chairperson, on a point of order: I am not Mahlobo, I am Matlhoko.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you for that correction, hon member. Order, hon members!


Mr N A MASONDO: ... he said that 90% of municipalities are dysfunctional. Don’t we have in this country many, many areas where water is being delivered daily? Don’t we have electricity being delivered? Don’t we have roads being built? Don’t we have sanitation in place in many, many places? Now, only Matlhoko can say such a thing; that there is no government, that nothing functions ... [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, on a point of order: Can the hon member stop crying and refer to the hon member as honourable.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon member, take your seat. Hon Masondo, take your seat, hon member.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: He is weeping and calling hon members by their names ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Hon members on both sides of the House, can we give the hon Masondo the opportunity to continue with his speech? Please refer to members as honourable.



Mnu N A MASONDO: Usemncane umfana, usemncane kakhulu. [Uhleko.]



Hon Hlengwa makes a remark about forced removals. Now, if you look at him ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Masondo, will you take your seat, please? Hon Masondo, will you take your seat, please? Why are you rising, hon member?


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: Chairperson, on a point of order: I’m sure it is inappropriate for the hon member to refer to another hon member by saying “usemncane kakhulu”, meaning that he is too young. That is not how ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Order, hon members!


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: We have a relationship as Members of Parliament. If we bring age into this ... He is not our grandfather, this man. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Your point is noted, hon member.


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: He is a Member of Parliament; he must stay away from age issues because it is patronising and it is unparliamentary. It must never be repeated again by anyone. If people are old, they must go home.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Shivambu, your point is noted. Take your seat, hon member. Hon Masondo, continue with your speech, please. All members in the House are honourable members, and let’s continue like that, please.


Mr N A MASONDO: I should have said that he is a young man. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon members, it is not strategic to disrupt your own speaker.


Mr N A MASONDO: They also say “young man” in English.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): It is really not strategic. Continue, hon Masondo.


Mr N A MASONDO: I am very disappointed with a professor ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Masondo, will you take your seat? Why are you rising now, hon member?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, please assist the House because we do not want to misbehave. We are calling an hon member to order.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Address the Chairperson, hon member.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: The hon member is not our grandfather. He must not call us “young boy” - “usesemncane”. I am not here for you to address me like your child. You will address me like an hon member. You will respect the Rules of this House. You will respect Luthuli. You will do that.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Ndlozi, you are not to address the member.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I am not your child, okay!


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Ndlozi, hon Ndlozi ... [Interjections.]


Mr N A MASONDO: I will be ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Masondo, will you take your seat, please? [Interjections.] Take your seat, please. Order, hon members! Hon Masondo, will you take your seat, please? Hon Ndlozi, take your seat, please. [Interjections.] Take your seat, please. Hon members, we want to continue with the debate. All members in the House are honourable members and let’s not allow the debate to degenerate into something else. That is why, hon Masondo, you should address all members as honourable, irrespective of their age.


Mr N A MASONDO: Hon members, I am disappointed in the professor there who said that ...



 ... uhulumeni akabanaki abantu. Ngizocela uSolwazi alalele ingoma ethi, “Siyabonga hulumeni eminye imizi ngabe seyavalwa.”



And this was on the question of social grants.



Bathi abantu siyabonga hulumeni eminye imizi ngabe seyavalwa.



Of course, Groenewald is also fairly disappointing. Instead of characterising the ... [Interjections.]


Mr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson, on a point of order: I really want to ask the hon member to understand that he must say “honourable” when he refers to any member. He does not remember this! Please do that.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you, hon member. Hon Masondo, refer to the hon members as honourable, please.


Mr N A MASONDO: Hon Groenewald, all you can say in trying to characterise the situation is the ANC “is bang” [“is scared”]. That is all you can say. It is very sad indeed, because the ANC is governing and succeeding, in spite of the many, many challenges facing it.



Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Voorsitter, ek wil vra of die agb spreker bereid is om ’n vraag te neem.



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, no, hon member, if there is time. He is not prepared to take the question now.



Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Dis baie jammer. Dit lyk my jy is bang. [Gelag.]



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Take your seat, hon member. Continue, hon Masondo.


Mr N A MASONDO: We need to remind ourselves of the work of the Municipal Demarcation Board. The work that the Municipal Demarcation Board does ... [Interjections.]


Mr M HLENGWA: Hon Chairperson, on a point of order: The speaker at the podium had begun addressing me but got disrupted. I was interested to hear what he had to say. [Laughter.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon member, that is not a point of order. You are now disrupting the speech of the hon member, hon member. When you were at the podium, you had all the protection to deliver your speech, so allow the hon member now to continue.


Mr N A MASONDO: All I wanted to say, really, hon Hlengwa, is that you spoke about forced removals, but “waar was jy?” [Where were you?] [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!


Mr N A MASONDO: The work of the Municipal Demarcation Board is intrinsically linked to that of the Independent Electoral Commission, the Financial and Fiscal Commission and the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. The MDB creates and promotes collaboration and partnerships without compromising its own independence. Other critical points that can be raised in this regard include the fact that there has been a great amount of investment in relation to stakeholder consultation. Public participation has continued and has been deepened as we seek to deepen democracy and enrich decision-making. We have also had a situation where the MDB has supported the idea of a sustainable spatial planning framework and had also been able to build the research and knowledge management.


The question that may be posed is: What is the legislative mandate of the Municipal Demarcation Board? I want to summarise this by raising four points.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!


Mr N A MASONDO: Firstly, the Municipal Demarcation Board has been able to help determine the municipal outer boundaries. Secondly, it has been able to delimit municipal ward boundaries. Thirdly, it has been able to ensure the assessment of municipal capacity when determining boundaries; and lastly, it has also been able to render advisory services to various stakeholders.


The Municipal Demarcation Board has faced many challenges, but I want to point out the following: Firstly, there has always been the possibility of litigation by aggrieved parties or groups or individuals. Secondly, the challenge of lobbying has sought to influence redetermination outside the mandate of the board, specifically the attempt to raise a whole range of issues around provincial boundaries. At times, of course, institutional capacity has been a problem in relation to the co-function of the MDB itself. The question of capacity and employment of relevant personnel will be sorted out within the current financial year.


Of course, one must emphasise that we should not expect the impossible. The board cannot just wake up one morning and change provincial boundaries to say less about its own legislative mandate. Our expectation of the board has been, amongst others, the following: To ensure less disruption of the voting process; to ensure that all voters in a ward are able to reach a voting station easily; and to ensure the overall safety and security of voters. Let me also add ... [Interjections.]


Mr M P GALO: Chair, I am rising on a point of order.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): What is the point of order?


Mr M P GALO: The point of order is that the hon member there must not lecture us about the Municipal Demarcation Board ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, that is not a point of order. Take your seat, please.


Mr M P GALO: We are not here about the Municipal Demarcation Board.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): You had your opportunity to open the debate and you will get time to close it. During that time you can dispute what the hon member has said. That is not the point of order. Continue, hon Masondo.


Mr N A MASONDO: It is very important also to add that we have all along been seeking to ensure broadly, through a demarcation board, that residents who generally think of themselves as a community do vote together and are able to participate in this entire process together. We also want to ensure as far as possible that communities are kept together in the same ward. Of course, it has not always been possible in relation to traditional authority areas.


Let me also emphasise that one of the questions that we need to pose is: How is the ward delimitation criteria different from the general criteria guiding decisions on outer boundaries? A demarcation criterion is about ensuring viable, effective and sustainable municipalities and the board is legally obliged to adhere to certain legislation, including, among others, what is spelt out in Schedule 1 of the Municipal Structures Act, Act 117 of 1998.


Mr A M MATHLOKO: Hon Chair, is the hon member a spokesperson of the Municipal Demarcation Board?


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, you must first ask if the member is prepared to take a question. Unfortunately, the hon member has five seconds left. So, even if he was prepared to take a question, he would not have enough time to respond to that question. Conclude your speech, hon member.


Mr N A MASONDO: Let me conclude by raising two questions. [Interjections.]


HON MEMBERS: Four, three, two…!

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon members, I am not going to allow that. Do not behave like schoolchildren. We are all adults here. I do not need the countdown; there are enough mechanisms here in front of us. I really do not appreciate that, that is uncalled for. Conclude, hon member.


Mr N A MASONDO: Those who speak ill of the MDB and similar institutions, do they do so in the interest of South African society, or do they do so to undermine ... [Time expired.] [Applause.]










Mr W M MADISHA: Hon Chair, we contend that we abide by the democratic maxim, and I quote, “Government of the people by the people”. We contend that our present government purports to be concerned about the welfare of its people, but the 13th Amendment Act and all the manoeuvrings that preceded it prove the opposite. Despite the communities’ dissatisfaction, protestation and representations, the ANC forced the 13th Amendment Act through Parliament using their then majority. As a consequence, the communities of Matatiele were banished from KwaZulu-Natal to the Eastern Cape despite their strong desire to remain part of KwaZulu-Natal for emotional, social, economic and governmental service delivery considerations.


The ANC will no doubt endeavour to contend otherwise. The fact of the matter is that the decision forced through by the ANC has resulted in the emergence of the AIC, for example, and of very many other formations. Just why is the ANC hell-bent on banishing Matatiele to the Eastern Cape? That is the question. I am going to contend that the move was motivated by the ANC’s narrow political considerations.


Prior to Matatiele being moved to the Eastern Cape, the municipality formed part of the Sisonke District Municipality. Sisonke District Municipality was, at that time, governed by the IFP majority. A deal was struck to transfer Umzimkhulu Local Municipality from the Eastern Cape to Sisonke District Municipality to bolster ANC support within the Sisonke District Municipality. In return, Matatiele would be sacrificed to the Eastern Cape as compensation. History will reveal that the district municipality was a role model. A district municipality under the then leadership of the IFP is today dysfunctional under the control of the ANC. [Time expired.]






Mr S M JAFTA: Hon Chair, the Constitution 13th Amendment Act, passed in 2007, was about the people - especially the people of Moutse and Matatiele. Though it was passed against their will, it affects them directly. It is not about any political party represented in this House, but it is said that the future of these communities depend on the fate of the political parties here, especially the ANC as a ruling party that showed no interest in or mercy to those communities when voting for this Act in 2007.


Today, we are not representing the AIC in this debate but those poor communities of Moutse and Matatiele who are ignored and undermined and whose rights are suppressed. We say this House must rectify the blunder it committed on 20 September 2007. We are saying, let the voice of the law-abiding citizens of these two areas be heard. Let these communities enjoy their right to reside and be administered anywhere in the Republic.


Many reasons have been forwarded by these people for the province of their choice, but it is surprising that not one reason was given by the government for its forceful removal of these communities from the province they want.


The submissions made by these communities stated clearly what they want. They made it clear in public hearings too. They approached the Constitutional Court for the same reason. Most unfortunately, the people of Matatiele were made to vote for the province they wanted in 2009, but the results are yet to be released to this day. Whose democracy is this, hon Chair? Who must enjoy it, and who not?


These communities were betrayed and robbed of their right as citizens of this country when this Act was passed against their will and against the principles of democracy. We therefore say that the Fifth Parliament must correct that. This House must not allow this to continue. The AIC is aware that loyalty to our parties rather than to our constituencies is the cause of this. This House must be ashamed of the unpopular decision it took about the people ... [Time expired.]










Ms A STEYN: Hon Chairperson, according to the ANC, the people shall govern, but just not at Matatiele. As we have all heard here today, residents of Matatiele ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Steyn, can you just stop there. Can the Table staff please reset the clock? The time is wrong; it is not show three minutes. Will you just take a seat in the meantime, hon member, while they correct the time?


Ms A STEYN: It is getting less and less now, Chair.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, they are busy correcting it. Please proceed.


Ms A STEYN: According to the ANC, the people shall govern, but just not at Matatiele. As we have heard here today, residents of Matatiele are still unhappy about being part of the Eastern Cape. You heard that they were victims of a voter swop. There was no legal or rational basis for the transfer and it was cooked up in some dark backroom to garner more votes for the ANC in the 2006 elections.


Residents of Matatiele have used every possible democratic avenue to get their voices heard. They went to the courts three times, every time at their own cost. They won a Constitutional Court case to force the government to listen to the voices of the people. They have taken part in a referendum and they apparently voted overwhelmingly to go back to KwaZulu-Natal. I say “apparently” because the results were never made public, although it was discussed by the ANC’s national executive council, which I will talk about later. They petitioned Parliament in 2011 and the portfolio committee recommended that the referendum results be made public and that Cabinet must discuss the community’s concerns. This, of course, also never happened. The people shall govern, but not at Matatiele.


This is in stark contrast to what happened in Khutsong, which has also been affected by border changes. Residents of Khutsong resorted to marches, protests, boycotts and stay-aways. Only 220 ballot votes ... [Interjections.]


Mr J M MTHEMBU: Chair, on a point of order: Is she a member of the ANC’s NEC?


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon member, you have the answer to that question. Continue, hon member.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Chair, on a point of order: When hon Boroto was in the Chair earlier, she made an appeal to members to please not make frivolous points of order. That was clearly a frivolous point of order. [Interjections.] It is clearly designed to break the speaker’s pace on the podium and it is interrupting the free flow of the debate.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Your point is noted, Chief Whip. Hon members, may I remind you that it cuts both ways. That is what I have been doing. Let us not make unnecessary points of order to disrupt whichever member is on the podium. Continue, hon member.


Ms A STEYN: Wouldn’t you like to know what I have in my hands?



Die waarheid maak seer.



In Khutsong, only 220 ballot votes were cast in the 2006 municipal elections. Seemingly, this had the desired effect, as Khutsong was transferred back to Gauteng in 2009. Where does this leave the communities of Matatiele, which have always advocated for a form of direct democracy? I can understand that the communities of Matatiele are tired of broken promises by a broken government.



Hierdie totale moedeloosheid het hulle miskien gelei om nou ook, soos ander gemeenskappe, hul tot optogte en betogings te dwing.



Just last week, residents of Nchudo and Mafube burnt down the offices and equipment of a water systems contractor working in their villages. They blockaded the gravel road between Matatiele and the Lesotho border. Currently, there are protests in Ward 4, Tsitsong; Ward 5, Mzongwana; Ward 8, Nchudo; Ward 15, Pontsheng and Ward 24, Fobane villages. These protests revolve mainly around the passive electrification roll-out and the lack of water provision. Only 50% of the 2 000 residents of Matatiele have access to clean drinking water. About 10 000 households must share drinking holes with cattle, sheep, pigs and goats which they still draw from springs and dams - this despite Matatiele being a water-rich municipality.


In some villages people still travel several kilometres to access water. People from approximately 1 300 households travel more than one kilometre to access water. For example, a young mother of three small children, Bulelwani Nongalo, lives in the eastern side of Lugada village, in Ward 17. She has to scramble down a rocky krantz of about 15 metres with her baby in one arm, a 20-litre container balanced on her head, clinging onto the rocks with her other hand, just to go and fetch water from a dirty, unsecured spring. This is sometimes in the middle of the night, when the household needs water. The same rock climbing has to be done to return home, this time with a full 20 litres balanced on her head. What sick society can expect people to live like this while the tenderpreneurs and their contented friends in government drive around in posh imported cars?


Hon Masondo, you said that the Municipal Demarcation Board does not just wake up one morning and decide to change boundaries. I would agree with you. This is cooked up at Luthuli House, as this ANC NEC document confirms. With the discussions on Matatiele, the ANC NEC says: “This process should be led by the ANC and government must provide technical support.” It also says, “ The ANC must facilitate the political process towards reaching an amicable solution to the matter.” It is not a referendum, but a process whose outcomes would be determined by the NEC of the ANC.


It further says, “This will be done to enjoy wide legitimacy.” It further says ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! I said earlier that it is not strategic to disrupt your own member.


Ms A STEYN: The results of testing show that there was an overwhelming majority for going back to KwaZulu-Natal, but these results were never made public. I wonder why. Thank you, Chair. [Applause.]










Mr M R MDAKANE[mm3] : Hon Chairperson, the hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers present here, hon Members of Parliament, the government of the ANC is based on the will of the people. [Interjections.] [Applause.] There is absolutely no question about that. [Interjections.] You must also learn to respect the majority view because the majority of our people - 62% - decided to freely vote for the ANC. [Interjections.] It is for that reason that the ANC has improved the quality of life of our people in the last 21 years. [Interjections.]


All of you accept that the ANC governs the country on your behalf too, because your life has also improved due to the ANC. [Interjections.] [Applause.] All of you are beneficiaries of the sacrifices ... [Interjections.] All of you – in fact, particularly you - are a beneficiary ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick[mm4] ): Hon member, address the Chairperson, please!


Mr M R MDAKANE[mm5] : ... of the struggle of the ANC; the sacrifices that were made by the leadership of the ANC over 300 years. We should accept that that is a reality of our situation. [Applause.] Anything else would be to mislead the House. Anyway, you are Members of Parliament today and you have a right to shout at us precisely because we have liberated you. [Interjections.] [Applause.]


That is why you should do so because if you had not been liberated by us, you were not going to be shouting at anyone. In fact, you would be in jail anyway! [Laughter.] [Applause.] [Interjections.]


The point on hand is that the issue of the demarcation of provincial boundaries, which result in the relocation of communities from one province to another, is always an emotional one. Some communities would claim that the demarcation of provincial boundaries perpetuate apartheid boundaries. The ANC-led government will never repeat the wrongs of the apartheid regime. Hence, anyway, we are allowing you to do what you are doing. [Interjections.] During apartheid, boundaries were drawn to advance ethnic residential segregation, which formed the cornerstone of apartheid policies.


The Municipal Demarcation Board considers a number of key factors when determining municipal boundaries. Such criteria enable the municipality for that area to fulfil its constitutional obligations, which include, among others, the following: The provision of democratic and accountable government to communities; the provision of services to the communities in an equitable and sustainable manner; the promotion of social and economic development; the promotion of a safe and healthy environment; enabling effective local governance; enabling integrated planning; and a tax base that is as inclusive as possible of users of municipal services.


There are many other factors but I just mentioned a few of them. It is therefore clear that we do not do any redetermination of provincial and municipal boundaries in a haphazard manner. We look at critical matters that affect the lives of our people because we are the government of the people, by the people, for the people. [Applause.]


Every time we stand up and talk, we know that we do not have the privilege that you have of criticising just for the sake of doing it. We have got masses of our people to lead, because we all accept, anyway, that the ANC leads the entire society. That is why you are worried when you are even divided among yourselves, because the ANC leads the entire nation – the entire society. The society as a whole has a bearing on the ANC. [Applause.]


It is a fact that cross-boundary municipalities, since their establishment, have been difficult to administer. Before the passing of the Constitution 12th Amendment Act of 2005, in a Repeal Act, the boundaries of Sekhukhune Municipality phased in two provinces – Mpumalanga and Limpopo. The municipality and other similar places in the municipality were described as cross-boundary municipalities. They were established in terms of Section 155(6)(a) of the Constitution on Local Government: Cross-boundary Municipality Act, Act 29 of 2000.


These cross-boundary municipalities were jointly administered by the MECs responsible for local government in provinces whose boundaries they strangled. The legislation and executive authority that is exercised by other departments were administered separately by the responsible MECs in many provinces. Different provincial legislations were applicable to the same municipality. The application of different pieces of legislation resulted in different service delivery standards.


This made it difficult to have in place a workable administrative and legislative system that was conducive to creating sustainable local municipalities. All demarcations, in our view, are about the creation of the strategic capacity of local authorities to serve our people. That is what we are interested in – to serve and serve our people because, primarily, we are here to serve our people. [Interjections.] [Applause.] There is no other reason that you are Members of Parliament except to serve our people. That is why we are here – to serve our people.


Of course, hon members have raised some issues that, I think, would be unfair not to comment on. Firstly, I think it is very wrong for Members of Parliament, who have access to privileged information, to come to the Chamber and distort the information that is given to us freely. The hon Minister has publicly, and also in the portfolio committees, highlighted the municipalities that face real challenges. The majority of our municipalities are functioning very well. [Interjections.] Very well! Though there are challenges, only 15% of municipalities are not functioning. [Interjections.] We have accepted that!


The Minister made this point. Members of Parliament were there in the meeting. Hon Matlhoko was there in the meeting. He had appreciated the information that was given to us. It is free of charge. Therefore, I think it would be incorrect for Members of Parliament to over-exaggerate information that is given to them by the government, because once you do that, you will make it very difficult for us to understand some of the issues.


Of course, this emotion is pre-empting the report that we will be expecting very soon for the House to debate the whole issue of demarcation in our country – not just in Matatiele and Moutse. The entire demarcation of our country is going to be debated. Therefore, I think it was pre-emptive of the hon member from Matatiele to come and start proposing a motion, knowing very well that the bigger issues are still going to be discussed and debated by all of us. We will definitely be prepared when the Minister comes and says to us: This report is ready; let us debate it.


The committee has agreed that there is no harm for us in merging the municipalities. They said that there is no harm because there will be municipalities that are weak; there are municipalities that are very strong - that are privileged and have revenue. Therefore, we all agreed that we should allow the Minister to go ahead with the merging of these municipalities.


However, you must also bear in mind that the Municipal Demarcation Board is independent of government. Whatever they are doing, they are doing with the involvement of the majority of our people. If hon members want to go and participate, they should go there. Public meetings are convened. It is the duty of each and every member to go there and make a contribution. [Applause.] I think it would be very wrong for us to come to the House and start talking as if the Municipal Demarcation Board was not a public institution. It is there! You must go there and participate. Of course, the ANC, as a party, must go and influence it. You must also go and influence it. No one is denying that you must go and influence the public hearing. It is very important to do so because failure to understand these challenges makes it very difficult for us. We have never gerrymandered any ward as the ANC. [Interjections.] We have never!


We have always demarcated areas by talking to them in a manner that assists the creation of the society that we want to emulate. We always wanted to create a national democratic society where all of us would participate equally as residents of this country. [Time expired.] Thank you very much, Chairperson. [Applause.]








Mr M P GALO: I am disappointed, Chairperson, because you are my chairperson in the Portfolio Committee on Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. [Interjections.] Thank you very much for the corrections. There is something that I want to correct here, which I tried to correct with some members on the other side.


We are not talking about the Municipal Demarcation Board here. You know for a fact that the Constitution 13th Amendment Act, Act 23 of 2007, was passed by the NA, not the Municipal Demarcation Board. Do not play politics here because this is a serious matter. [Interjections.] If you are saying that you are the government of the people, for the people, you cannot be doing what you are doing here.


The other thing that you must do as the ANC is that you must transform. You cannot run the country as if you were running the structures of the ANC in exile. [Interjections.] [Applause.] We know for a fact what you were doing in exile. We know for a fact that comrades, like Comrade Chris Hani, were not supposed to come back to the country. [Interjections.] We have that information! [Interjections.]


So, if you want to transform the country, do not do what you are doing. [Interjections.] If you want the people of Matatiele to be violent, they will be violent! Let me tell you something … [Interjections.]


HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick[mm6] ): Order, hon members! Order!


Mr M P GALO[mm7] : ... Order! Fourteen councillors fled the township in Khutsong in December 2005 after their homes were burnt down. You know that! [Interjections.] You know that! That was violence ... [Interjections.] ... but the ANC-led government rewarded the people of Khutsong. What about the people of Matatiele – the peace-loving and law-abiding citizens of this country? [Applause.] Do not play silly politics with human beings because they are not animals; they are human beings just like you.


If you want us to make this Parliament ungovernable, we will do that! [Interjections.] You will call your soldiers! [Interjections.] You will call your members of SAPS to remove us all from here! We will make this Parliament ungovernable, I can assure you! [Interjections.] [Applause.]


HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick[mm8] ): Order, hon members! No, hon members! Hon members, you are not allowed to boo a speaker at the podium. Please do not do that! Hon Mandela!


Mr Z M D MANDELA[mm9] : I rise on a point of order, Chair: I did not want to disturb the hon member while he was speaking but I think it is not proper for him to incite violence. He should refrain from that.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick[mm10] ): Hon member, I will check the transcript of this debate, and if need be, I will come back to the House to ... [Interjections.]


Mr M P GALO[mm11] : No, I wanted to respond to that now! I can do that! [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick[mm12] ): Order! No, hon member! No, hon member! You are not going to respond. You are out of order! You had the opportunity to respond, and you used your time at the podium to respond!


Debate concluded.


The House adjourned at 18:57


 [nm1]“rand”, never “rands”


 [mm3][[xxx Mar 10 18:41:45 2015]]

 [mm4][[xxx Mar 10 18:43:22 2015]]

 [mm5][[xxx Mar 10 18:43:26 2015]]

 [mm6][[xxx Mar 10 18:54:13 2015]]

 [mm7][[xxx Mar 10 18:54:13 2015]]

 [mm8][[xxx Mar 10 18:55:26 2015]]

 [mm9][[xxx Mar 10 18:55:41 2015]]

 [mm10][[xxx Mar 10 18:55:57 2015]]

 [mm11][[xxx Mar 10 18:56:04 2015]]

 [mm12][[xxx Mar 10 18:56:05 2015]]


No related


No related documents