Hansard: JS: Debate on Human Rights Day

House: Joint (NA + NCOP)

Date of Meeting: 19 Mar 2015


No summary available.




19 MARCH 2015









Members of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces assembled in the Chamber of the National Assembly at 14:00.


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




Start of Day






The MINISTER OF ARTS AND CULTURE: Madam Speaker, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers, ladies and gentlemen, hon members, comrades, and friends, this weekend, we will be bidding farewell to one of South Africa’s finest – a revolutionary intellectual, a commander, an administrator, an organiser, a Minister, an artist par excellence, the “Animal”, Inyamazane, the man I called Holobye – Minister Collins Chabane.


Thank you to all the parties represented in this House for a moving tribute befitting the stature of the late unassuming, towering, gentle giant of our time. No one knew better the struggle for equal human rights for all than this leader of our people.


Human Rights Day 2015 is commemorated under the theme, Celebrating the Freedom Charter, enjoying equal human rights for all. This year’s commemoration will be in Uitenhage in the Eastern Cape, coinciding with the 30th anniversary of the massacre. The basis of Human Rights Day is the Sharpeville Massacre that took place on 21 March 1960, when 69 unarmed people were killed by apartheid police.


This year, we are celebrating the Freedom Charter as one of the building blocks of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as adopted in 1996. We are celebrating an unbroken legacy of human rights of the ANC.


Other such landmark perspectives are the ANC’s 1923 Conference Resolution on the African Bill of Rights, the 1943 African Claims, and the 1989 Constitutional Guidelines for a Democratic South Africa. The thread that runs through all of these perspectives is the human rights culture for all. These are the birthmarks of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa as adopted in 1996. Because of this unbroken devotion of the ANC in the human rights culture, South Africa is a better place to live in today.


Speaking on the same issue of the human rights tradition within the movement, then President Nelson Mandela had this to say, and I quote:


Since 1923, when the first ever bill of rights in South Africa was adopted by the ANC, human rights and the attainment of justice have explicitly been at the centre of our concerns.


The main theme of the African bill of rights document is that, amongst others, it sought to achieve human rights, that human rights should be universal, that all South Africans had an inalienable right to the ownership of land, that there should be equality before the law and equal political rights, and, finally, that all should be able to have an equal share in government.


The ANC led all in the country and the world to having equal human rights for all. In 1948, when the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Human Rights Charter, the ANC was more than two decades ahead of those who regarded themselves as part of a civilised world.


I would like to quote the UN Declaration of Human Rights and Diana Ayton-Shenker:


‘All human rights are universal, indivisible and interdependent and interrelated.’ This means that political, civil, cultural, economic and social human rights are to be seen in their entirety. One cannot pick and choose which rights to promote and protect. They are all of equal value and apply to everyone.


As if to settle the matter once and for all, the Vienna Declaration states in its first paragraph that ‘the universal nature’ of all human rights and fundamental freedoms is ‘beyond question’. The unquestionable universality of human rights is presented in the context of the reaffirmation of the obligation of states to promote and protect human rights.


The legal obligation is reaffirmed for all states to promote ‘universal respect for, and observance and protection of, all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all.


Furthermore, the obligation is established for all states, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and other instruments of human rights and international law. No state is exempt from this obligation. All member states of the United Nations have a legal obligation to promote and protect human rights, regardless of particular cultural perspectives. Universal human rights protection and promotion are asserted in the Vienna Declaration as the ‘first responsibility’ of all governments.


Everyone is entitled to human rights without discrimination of any kind. The nondiscrimination principle is a fundamental rule of international law. This means that human rights are for all human beings, regardless of ‘race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status’.


Nondiscrimination protects individuals and groups against the denial and violation of their human rights. To deny human rights on the grounds of cultural distinction is discriminatory. Human rights are intended for everyone, in every culture.


When some amongst us propagated for privileges and rights for a select few through qualified franchise, the ANC pressed for universal human rights. They would not listen. Even when the then president of the ANC Z R Mahabane warned that Africans are not political children, the friends of the natives insisted on being the trustees of the natives.


Today, they claim to be champions of the Constitution whose birthmarks are self-evident and whose grain they stood opposed to for decades.


In any event, the aim of the struggle was, amongst other things, to liberate white racists from the false ideology of racial superiority and the insecurity attached to oppressing others. Today, an equal human rights culture is a lived experience in South Africa.


The ANC was formed in 1912 as an instrument for the liberation and restoration of the human dignity of Africans. However, right from the beginning, the ANC, in the face of the gravest injustice, never once abandoned its principles. The very act of the formation of the ANC, against the historical injustice by our erstwhile colonisers, was a surge of equal human rights culture for all. We have been on this journey for the past 21 years, and we keep on improving as we go. Again on this matter on another occasion, the late former President Mandela stated, and I quote:


We now live in a constitutional state based on the protection and promotion of basic human rights, a state in which the protection of human dignity stands supreme, and in which the constitution guards over such fundamental values as equality, nonracialism, nonsexism and the rights of all citizens.


This is yet another testimony highlighting the fact that South Africa is indeed a better place to live in. The ANC and its alliance partners have been at the forefront of fighting for and promoting a culture of human rights in this beautiful land. This reality will continue as we further level our sociopolitical landscape; yet, the structural legacy of colonialism and apartheid that denied people their human rights is still with us today. We have come a long way but much more still needs to be done. The challenges of discriminatory practices in our society, such as racism, xenophobia, Afrophobia, sexism, homophobia, and related intolerances are still persistent. These are a blight on our path towards achieving a universal human rights culture.


We call upon all peace-loving people in this country to join us as we crisscross the country engaging in community conversations. We request everyone to support our social cohesion advocates as we deepen dialogue on the fundamental issues affecting our society.


These campaigns are aimed at denouncing such practices and, at the same time, educating our fellow compatriots about their own responsibilities. They are meant to cultivate within us humanity’s best qualities. They remind us of the noblest of principles for humankind, such as Ubuntu.


The government continues to do everything in its power to improve the quality of life of all the people. It is doing so cognisant of the fact that such actions will further bolster equal human rights for all our people.


As we take this moment to remember these milestones in our history and plot the way forward, we pledge once more in the words of Tata Nelson Mandela at his inauguration in 1994:


Let each know that for each the body, the mind and the soul have been freed to fulfil themselves.


Through our national efforts for social cohesion, through our heritage and legacy projects, through our collective wisdom and through transforming our economy, the sun will always shine upon us and our achievements as a people. South Africa is indeed a better place to live in today. I thank you. [Applause.]














Mr T W MHLONGO: Madam Speaker, hon members, good afternoon, dumelang, sanibonani.


On 21 March 1960, in the streets of Sharpeville 69 people died and 180 were wounded when the police fired on the crowd that had gathered peacefully. They were protesting against pass laws. This day will forever remain an iconic date in our country’s history.


On 20 March 1996, former President Nelson Mandela, our father, esimthandayo, said, and let me quote him:


21 March is South African Human Right’s Day. … March 21 is the day on which we remember and sing praises to those who perished in the name of democracy and human dignity. It is also a day on which we reflect and assess the progress we are making in enshrining basic human rights and values made in protecting basic human rights and values.


As we celebrate Human Rights Day on Saturday, it is important that we remember the sacrifice made by our forefathers.


The Bill of Rights remains a pillar and cornerstone to ensure that we are committed to protect and realise human rights for all. The Constitution is the supreme law that governs this country and not the Freedom Charter. We must use only the Constitution as a foundation for us to build a caring society for all. [Applause.]


Yes, we agree that things are better in South Africa where we live and I do commend the Minister. The DA is committed to protecting the Constitution. Our dream for South Africa is an open opportunity society for all in which everybody is free, secure and equal before the law, and where everyone has an opportunity to improve their lives or to pursue their dreams.


The South African dream is one nation with one future, living together irrespective of race ...



... abantsundu nabamhlophe...



... under one Constitution. [Interjections.] Madam Speaker, let us remember our people living in different parts of South Africa, men and women living in an unequal society.



Umphakathi wethu esihlala kuwo awulingani.



Let us look at Kliptown, where the Freedom Charter was adopted. Our people live there in squalor.



Bahlala emijondolo, bahlala odakeni.



But we have R3,4 billion which was not spent by the metros in Gauteng. [Interjections.] [Applause.]



Izindlu ziyawa e-Kliptown, ...



... but the budget is not spent. This is shocking. Our people are still waiting for their title deeds. Minister, redress is not redress without title deeds. The ANC-led government has failed to provide leadership in providing access to land, especially for people...



... abahlala lapha eNingizimu Afrika.



This remains one of the greatest obstacles in realising the value of our Constitution and human dignity that we spoke of to achieve equality in advancing human rights and freedom. After 20 years of democracy that we are enjoying, we are still waiting for the government to make good on its promise to address the injustices of the past, especially on the land issue.



Somlomo, amalungelo wabantu bethu awahlonishwa uhulumeni ophethe. Imibono yabantu bethu ayifezwa uhulumeni ophethe.



The ANC-led government has dismally failed in land reform. One of the government’s strategies is for us to build a caring society in which human rights for all are protected. We must provide people living and working on communal land and former Bantustan communities with title deeds so that they can participate in the economy. [Applause.]


Furthermore, the ANC-led government must fix the problem of current projects before proposing further radical projects, such as the 50/50 project which will fail.


The DA believes that the land-reform strategy must be informed not by the need to achieve quantity and that it’s not about the numbers, but it’s about the target that will ensure that it meets its own objectives for ordinary people.


The success of land reform will, therefore, be determined by support and economic value created rather than the hectares that are transferred — quantity, the number that I was speaking about. The DA supports land reform processes that achieve redress by promoting economic inclusion to uplift our people who live in poverty to growth and prosperity.


South Africa deserves a DA-led government which is serious about accelerating effective land reform and building a secure country. [Applause.] [Interjections.] The DA is committed to the culture of ubuntu. Let’s build a caring society. Redress without title deeds is not redress. I thank you. [Applause.]












Ms N R MASHABELA: Madam Speaker, according to the story of creation, it is said God took the soil from the land to create human beings. Even scientists say that when we die we all turn into dust, meaning we return to the land that we are made of.


By this logic, it means without land we cannot exist. We are from the land and we shall return to the land. The land is the alpha and omega of human existence.


The crimes of colonisation and apartheid were crimes against humanity because they dispossessed people of their land, the very thing that makes them human. This means that until we have restored land to the people we have not humanised them; we have not even begun to allow them to exist.


This discussion of human rights remains empty and superficial if its demand and assessment is not based on restoring land to our people. It means that Sharpeville day should actually be called land day because the pass laws were about restricting people’s movement on the land and also marking them as those who cannot own land, declaring them as cheap and easily disposable labour in the migrant labour system.


It is about 55 years since 69 residents of Sharpeville were killed while marching against pass laws. It is also 21 years after the promise of democracy in 1994, and yet our people remain landless, jobless, homeless and hungry on their land.


The ANC-led government has dismally failed to humanise our people. It has reduced the struggle for humanising black people to superficial achievements like the Expanded Public Works Programme, EPWP. They declared this year the year of the Freedom Charter, but there is nothing to show for it, only mediocrity and easy victories. [Interjections.]


Yesterday we visited Gugulethu and witnessed that the Group Areas Act lives on. Our people continue to live in cramped conditions. They live with rats and rubbish, and no one helps them to improve their conditions. [Interjections.]


This means economic freedom is the most important human right. Freedom of speech, freedom of the media, freedom of thought, freedom to vote and be voted for will come alive when economic freedom is achieved.


Economic freedom is the only blanket that can cover the indignity that our people have suffered for centuries and continue to suffer till this day. Economic freedom is what will end the xenophobic, racist and sexist violence that we experience in our communities.


Sharpeville must also remind us of the massacre of the democratic government, the Marikana massacre. [Interjections.] This is history in its own right. The ANC-led government presided over the largest massacre, over a labour dispute, since the Rand Revolt of 1922.


Marikana workers have found no closure to this day. They still do not earn the R12 500 for which they died or were injured. They still work under exploitative conditions. But a government of cowards can never deliver human rights; a government of dishonest people can never deliver human rights.


A Parliament that thinks people are not equal before the law can never deliver human rights. A Parliament of people who think that the President is not equal to all other South Africans before the law, will never deliver human rights. [Interjections.]


A Parliament of people who protect corruption, even when it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt will never give our people dignity. A Parliament that cannot tell the President to pay back the money unduly spent on Nkandla cannot give us human rights. [Interjections.] Only a Parliament and government of economic freedom can give dignity and reconcile human rights with the primary existence .Thank you, Madam Speaker. [Time expired.] [Applause.]









Mr M KHAWULA: Hon Speaker, the IFP salutes the bravery of the men and women who selflessly dedicated their lives to protesting against the pass laws in Sharpeville, Orlando, Pretoria, Langa, Durban, East London and other areas on 21 March 1960, under the leadership of the Pan-Africanist Congress, PAC.


These were peaceful nonviolence protests which were met with brutality by the oppressive National Party, NP, government of the time.


This is where we have come from as a country; this is how far we have travelled. It has been a long, tedious and painful journey that has nevertheless yielded favourable results to the benefit of all South Africans.


The IFP is proud to have been part of the negotiation process of a peaceful settlement for the new South Africa. The IFP also campaigned for the inclusion of the Bill of Rights in our Constitution.


The freedoms that we enjoy today entrenched in our Constitution, namely the freedom of expression, the freedom of association and the freedom of religion, belief and opinion are all freedoms and rights that were hard-earned.


The country has gained rights which are also entrenched in our Constitution, such as political rights, the right to life, human dignity, privacy, access to information, justice and so on and so forth. However, these freedoms and rights were hard-earned and we need to ensure that they are treasured dearly by all South Africans, including the rights of people living with disabilities.


As was the case at the time when there was a deafening political silence after the gruesome occurrences in South Africa in the 1960s, the IFP is also proud to have rekindled the political voices and aspirations of millions of South Africans in 1975 for the release of political prisoners, the unbanning of political organisations and the return of political exiles. These conditions put forward the start of many political negotiation processes for the future of South Africa.


The universal principles of human rights are parallel to our democratic values of equality, justice and the rule of law, gender equality and respect for the institutions of democracy. Chapter 9 of the Constitution of the Republic South Africa establishes the existence of state institutions supporting a constitutional democracy which operates as checks and balances and the separation of powers.


The important questions that we need to ask ourselves are: Are these institutions, 21 years into our democracy, serving the democratic purpose for which they were established; do they still operate freely, independently and without any interference; are the principles of impartiality and transparency still observed; and do they perform their functions without fear, favour or prejudice?


In conclusion, the value of safeguarding our human rights is an important contribution to the survival and stability of the many future generations still to come in our country. I thank you.










Mr S J MOHAI: Hon Speaker, Comrade Minister Mthethwa and all members, the march to restore the dignity of our African majority is unstoppable, even by those who claim to represent our people during the day and connive with corporate big business during the night. [Applause.]


We enter this House today inspired by the collective heritage of the struggle of the people of South Africa, united in diversity, to create a country where everyone will live in peace, equality, harmony and common fraternity.


This struggle was not rosy, but a battleground littered with corpses and the blood of innocent men, women, workers, youth and children of our country. Our people, led by the ANC, came together in Kliptown to adopt a road map for their liberation, the Freedom Charter.


As we seek to break with this painful past, we do so inspired by these heroic men, women, youth and workers of our country who laid down their lives in the line of duty to liberate our country from the bondages of the monstrous and diabolical system of white minority domination.


This evokes painful memories of the abduction, torture and inhuman killing of our people by the apartheid death squads. The DA does not even attempt to reflect on this historical background.


Our memory goes back to Cradock in 1985, where our late comrades, Matthew Goniwe, Fort Calata, Qaqawuli Godolozi Sipho Hashe, Sparrow Mkonto and Sicelo Mhlauli were abducted and killed gruesomely.


Madiba declared that their deaths marked a turning point in the history of our struggle throughout the country. Yes indeed, the 1980s were characterised by a period where young people took to the frontline of our struggle to demand their human rights. This clearly reveals how, by its very nature, the apartheid regime was inherently an anti-human-rights culture.


No amount of political posturing, neither historical nor contemporary archival evidence, can disprove the fact that as we speak today about a human rights culture in this country we do so because of the ANC. [Applause.]


The marginalisation of the black and African majority from economic ownership and participation, and denial of access to basic rights like education, health and social security — including access to basic services like water, electricity, housing and security were all apartheid machinations declared by the international community as inhuman.


The Freedom Charter, our road map to the future as a nation and a country, remains our loadstar for the human rights culture that we seek to build today. There has never arisen a single document by any political force in this country that can equal the Freedom Charter in terms of appeal to the broad masses of our people. [Applause.]


While building on this vision and road map inspired by the collective wisdom and experiences of our people, the ANC further articulated in its 1969 document, Strategy and Tactics, and other subsequent policy documents that there can be no meaningful political freedom without economic emancipation of the historically oppressed and colonised in South Africa.


It is for this reason that the ANC has always understood economic freedom, not as an isolated aspect of the struggle or a momentous discovery of an idea, but as integral to the overall strategic objectives of fundamental social transformation.


The history of South Africa is replete with evidence of failed attempts by many forces in this country that sought to evoke narrow economism as an attempt to position themselves as alternatives to the ANC. In all its manifestations, this tendency is always driven by sheer populist demagogy that seeks to pander to the sentiments of the masses without a concrete programme or clear vision. [Applause.]


We stand here today as the family of the ANC, proud of our past and confident of our future. [Applause.] We do so, drawing inspiration from one of our own, the late Comrade O R Tambo, in 1985 when he said:


The future is bright. The end is glorious; it is peaceful. But the intervening period is dark, bitter and finds its glory in the act of struggle. [Applause.]


We are indeed proud that today South Africa, a developing nation, stands toe-to-toe with most developed economies in terms of the fight against poverty, as recently reported by the World Bank. In the spirit of the Freedom Charter we have introduced a growing, social safety net, which has been critical in the alleviation of poverty.


The ANC-led government has, amongst other things, introduced free primary health care, no-fee schools, social grants – notably old age pensions and child support grants - state subsidised housing and the provision of basic services and millions of state-subsidised houses. You have had and you have enjoyed its privileges for decades. Only now are our people enjoying their fundamental human rights. [Applause.]


This is a vast improvement from the 1990s, where more than 40% of our people lived in poverty with no access to water, sanitation, electricity, education or many other basics under the apartheid rule. Our country is indeed the epitome of the Freedom Charter as we weather storm after storm to deliver on the vision formulated in Kliptown in 1955.


Despite the global economic meltdown, our economy still displays resilience and indeed we remain on course to deliver on the mandate of the Freedom Charter. We are continuing to ensure that our people’s rights, engraved in the Freedom Charter and epitomised in the Bill Of Rights, are upheld at all layers of our government since 1994.


In 1991, South Africa had a Gini coefficient of 0,68 and it stood at 0,61 in 2013. We do acknowledge that this is not enough, but the more than 0,07 decline in the gap between the rich and the poor since 1994 cannot be dismissed.


All the achievements I mentioned are a product of people’s participation in governance. We have created various platforms across all three spheres of governance to ensure that our people are not mere passive recipients of government’s decisions, but that they become an active part of those decision-making processes.


We will be the first to acknowledge that a lot still needs to be done across a wide spectrum of social issues. However, there can be no denying that the ANC is on track in terms of delivering on the Freedom Charter mandate and indeed the people are governing. [Applause.]


Our 2014 election manifesto remains our guide in bridging the gap insofar as the remaining backlogs in the provision of water, electricity and sanitation. Indeed, we applaud the recently launched Back to Basics programme, which will become the vehicle through which we will upscale provision of these basic rights for our people.


The escalating global contradictions of capitalism and the concomitant increase in the levels of poverty, unemployment and inequality pose a serious threat to our efforts to build a caring society. This calls for a fundamental rethink on how Parliament as a tribune of the people should exercise its oversight and the task of deepening popular participation. It is through this that we can ensure that the caring society we seek to build is firmly placed in the hands of our people, thus becoming agents of their own future.


We dare not fail in this task, hence the ongoing debate on building an activist Parliament continues to occupy centre stage in our strategic reflection.


Often, our discourse on a human rights culture tends to be limited to the role and capacity of our law enforcement agencies. This narrow view loses sight of the fundamental task of forging a collective sense of human solidarity within our society by mitigating the emerging subculture of crass materialism and consumerism in the midst of poverty that continues to define our majority.


Culture cannot be legislated. You build culture and you sustain it through the value systems that you embrace. [Applause.] None of us can afford to come here and adopt a political posture without genuinely engaging with the daily struggles that our people are faced with. The ANC will continue to march unhindered in implementing the Freedom Charter. [Applause.]












Mr S C MNCWABE: Hon Speaker, hon Chairperson of the NCOP and members of this august House, the NFP fully ascribes to human rights, believing that in many ways it ties up intimately with the concept of ubuntu, widely revered amongst our people as an ancient guiding philosophy for a caring society.


Human Rights are enshrined in the Bill of Rights in our Constitution, which is aligned with the United Nations, UN, Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Bill of Rights is also informed and shaped by the noble ideals set out in the Freedom Charter.


Equality and human dignity underpin the tenure of our Bill of Rights, for these were at the root of the social injustices of our past.


Human Rights on paper, however, no matter how well and beautifully formulated, do not in themselves guarantee that a society will be more caring. It is the responsibility of the state to create an environment conducive to human rights being realised, and it does so foremost through legislation.


To this effect, many of our laws have been enacted while keeping in mind the social and legal injustices associated with apartheid. Institutions have been created to ensure that human rights in South Africa are enforced, most notably, the SA Human Rights Commission, and the Commission on Gender Equality.


Creating an environment conducive to the realisation of human rights is not the only responsibility resting upon the state. The state also has a duty to lead by example in conducting the affairs of government as part of the process to entrench human rights, and in the process, to give effect to the provisions of the Bill of Rights.


When we look at the many social protests flaring up in our beloved country almost daily, and consider the indignity of households still having to use the bucket-toilet system, we realise that the state still has a long way to go.


When we se the majority of our people still excluded from full economic emancipation and the hunger for land omnipresent in daily discourse, then we realise that the state has a very long way to go indeed, before we can say that human rights are truly entrenched.


We submit, hon Speaker, that a caring society cannot be legislated, nor can it be brought about by solely the state giving effect human rights. It also requires a paradigm shift by the people themselves. Just as the Bill of Rights binds the state in a vertical application, so it does also bind individuals in horizontal application. Just as charity begins at home, so does respect for and adherence to human rights.


We are a bruised society; our collective conscience is still reeling from the social injustices of apartheid. The greatest challenge facing us as South Africa lies in rekindling the spirit of ubuntu. Once we achieve that, we will truly start the slow process of entrenching human rights amongst ourselves and contribute to building a caring society. I thank you.













Mr N L S KWANKWA: Madam Speaker, hon members and fellow South Africans, Human Rights Day is a reminder of the sacrifices our struggle heroes and heroines, who lost their lives during the Sharpeville massacre, made for our freedom and democracy.


These struggle icons fought bravely to extricate themselves and us, their progeny, from the apartheid regime’s comprehensive web of oppressive entanglements.


Through their sacrifices, today we pride ourselves on having one of the most progressive constitutions in the world, whose cornerstone is the Bill of Rights. Our freedom therefore symbolises a resounding triumph of the human spirit over adversity, thanks indeed to our struggle icons for the freedoms we now enjoy.


While we can proudly proclaim that our society is built on the principles of human rights and that significant progress been made to create awareness about human rights and to ensure that our people’s rights are guaranteed, much more must be done to translate these rights into material improvements in our people’s lives.


It is no secret that South Africa has fared poorly in the provision of second-generation human rights such as the right to work, education, health care, shelter and so on. Nowhere is this more evident than in the millions of South Africans who are jobless and have access only to poor quality education and poor health care, while millions more are without shelter. Working together, we should ensure that these socioeconomic rights become a reality for our people.


On first-generation human rights such as the rights to freedom of speech, equality before the law, and so on, I must state it categorically that our leadership here has sometimes seemed to be at variance with the objectives of building a cohesive nation.


Many a time we failed to give practical expression to the delicate balance between rights and responsibilities. At times, some among us regrettably abused their rights while those tasked with ensuring that the responsibilities that come with rights are met, also responded with more abuse. Rather than reaching out to one another in order to resolve our political impasse regarding this delicate balance, we tended to resort to the primitive doctrine that might is right.


The question now remains: How shall we ensure the entrenchment of a culture of human rights when this important delicate balance seems to elude us?


Hon members, our people are yearning for leadership on this and many other issues. Let’s lead! We should not allow national interests to play second fiddle to cheap political point-scoring and vote maximisation. When we do this, we forfeit the right to call ourselves leaders. Colleagues, we have been called to lead. Let’s lead!


We have to make our people believe again that South Africa is a country of exciting challenges and infinite possibilities. This is the only way we can change the thorny road on which we perambulated yesterday to a beautiful road for future generations on whose tomorrow our actions today impact.


God bless South Africa! I thank you.











Dr P W A MULDER: Speaker, yesterday the hon Deputy President said that all of us, as leaders, need to act against the cancer of racism. I agree 100% with him. Leaders must set an example, but let me give an example to show what a complicated country South Africa is.


Recently an old couple was attacked by three young men on their smallholding near De Wildt. Mr Motswaledi Moloto is 80 years old and his wife Constance Moloto is 74. The attackers were three white men. The young white men attacked Mrs Moloto with an axe and made racist remarks.


When Mr Moloto refused to give the keys of his vehicle to the young men, they took an iron and burnt his legs with it. The neighbours, who later took him to hospital, described how the skin fell off his legs as a result of all the wounds on his legs.


The question is: Is this an ordinary crime or racism? About this, one finds different opinions. I would describe it as white racism due to the cruelty of the crime and the racist comments.


This attack did take place earlier this year, with one difference. You did not read about it in the media. The newspapers and television largely ignored it. Why? Because the attack was not perpetrated on Mr Moloto but on the old couple, Hannes and Annetjie van der Merwe from De Wildt. They are white and the attackers were black.


If it had been three young white men who had attacked a black old couple, it would have brought South Africa to a standstill. Every talk radio programme would have discussed racism for hours. The Human Rights Commission would have immediately started an investigation and politicians would have angrily issued media statements about it.


Why these double standards? Is it political correctness? Are journalists scared to tell the truth? Of course, it is not only white farmers who are being killed. Elisa Mokoena and Augustine Khonjana, two farm workers, were strangled during a farm attack and shot in the stomach. Last year in the Free State, a black commercial farmer was shot dead by attackers and his wife was kicked and raped.


Statistics show that in South Africa, many more black people are murdered than white people. The world’s average for murders is 7 in 100 000 of the population. The South African average is a shocking 31 for all people. For police officers, it is 54 and for farmers and farm workers, it is 133 — I am using the SA Security Council’s statistics. Clearly, this is a crisis.


Section 12 of the Constitution reads:


Everyone has the right to freedom and security of the person, which includes the right-

  1. not to be deprived of freedom arbitrarily or without just cause;
  2. not to be detained without trial;
  3. to be free from all forms of violence from either public or private sources;
  4. not to be tortured in any way; and
  5. not to be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way.


When cash-in-transit heists were a crisis, the Minister of Police made it a priority crime. Within two years the problem was largely solved. Why can’t this also be done for farm murders and what’s happening on our rural areas at the moment because the statistics show that this is a crisis if you look at the statistics that I gave to you? I thank you.















Mr F ESSACK: Hon Speaker and fellow South Africans, respect for our human rights is at the heart of realising the full potential of our constitutional democracy. Our Constitution safeguards the right to life, human dignity and freedom, but in our day-to-day existence we experience a true disparity between these laws and the quality of life in the South Africa of today.


Of course, you’ve heard a lot about the 1960 massacre where 69 lives were lost - lives of people who wanted one basic right, namely the right to move freely. This was one of many apartheid laws that took away the dignity of our people.


I ask today: Have we come far enough in fulfilling the legacy of these 69 fallen heroes and also, of course, the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and of our own late President Nelson Mandela?


Yes, today we have overcome these atrocious apartheid laws, but now we face a new set of challenges as we remember those who sacrificed their lives to give us the right to freedom and equality. One of three Chapter 9 institutions that deal with human rights, the SA Human Rights Commission, SAHRC, was established to promote respect for, observance of and protection of our human rights without fear or favour.


The reality is that we live in a South Africa where a community like Letlhabile in the North West has still not had water for 20 years now. I must then ask: What has happened to the right of access to water?


AN HON MEMBER: Hear, hear!


Mr F ESSACK: In Gauteng, thousands of learners are expected to use filthy and blocked toilets that are not being maintained. What has happened to their right to sanitation?


Around South Africa, lesbian women and gay men are still being targeted and murdered for being who they are. Where, then, is their right to equality? It is appalling that close to 500 000 disabled learners are still not in school in this country due to accessibility issues. What, then, has happened to their right to education? And the list, of course, goes on and on.


Every year, the SA Human Rights Commission must require relevant organs of state to provide information on the measures that they have taken towards realising the Bill of Rights concerning housing, health care, food, social security, water, education and, of course, the environment.


Hon Speaker, I implore the Human Rights Commission to pay more than just lip service and begin to address the real issues that are in violation of our human rights in South Africa today. National departments and government entities that neglect their role in providing basic human rights must be managed robustly and now be brought to account.


The Human Rights Commission should show that it will conduct investigations without fear or favour and begin leading the charge to prosecute those who are responsible for human rights violations. The Human Rights Commission should use its powers given by the Constitution more often to challenge human rights violations in a court of law in this country today.


Every day we hear about another racist or discriminatory incident. In our goal towards transformation and the acceptance of one another, the Human Rights Commission should take a leading role and be an active participant in this conversation.


Hon members, the best Constitution in the world provides a very clear mandate on the role of the SA Human Rights Commission — something that we should be very proud of. As a Chapter 9 institution, the Human Rights Commission is an independent body and should not allow the ANC to continue infiltrating and demanding. [Interjections.]


I expected to get your blood pressure up, so it’s not a problem. [Laughter.]


Today I ask that the Human Rights Commission takes leadership and clearly demonstrates that those 69 South Africans did not die in vain during the 1960 Sharpeville massacre.


To conclude, here is simple advice from one of the biggest defenders of human rights in the world, and I ask that you listen very carefully. Martin Luther King said, I quote:


The hope of a secure and liveable world lies with disciplined nonconformists who are dedicated to justice and peace.


Colleagues and fellow South Africans, I thank you. [Applause.]













The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker and hon members, our struggle for liberation was a humanist one, one that put the right to human dignity at the very heart of what the ANC hoped to achieve.


However, today many still say, and believe, that the Bill of Rights was a concession on the part of the ANC to allay minority fears during the negotiation process. This may have been the effect of its introduction on the part of those minorities, but the assertion is fundamentally incorrect.


Our Bill of Rights is a very differently crafted instrument to any other similar instrument, as it upholds the right to human dignity as an essential component of every right. Our Bill of Rights was drafted, not unmindful that the legacies of the three-and-a-half centuries of colonial oppression would have to be addressed in material ways in the postcolonial era.


So, in designing the equality clause, for example, the question of the redress of past inequalities is specifically provided for in the form of affirming persons who were previously excluded. In other words, affirmative action is a constitutional imperative that would have had to be implemented even if the National Party, NP, had won the 1994 elections.


Other rights too have been crafted in such a manner as to redress the past. The right to freedom of expression, for instance, is not unrestricted as some would have us believe. In exercising your right to express yourself, due regard must be given to people’s dignity, and in South Africa that right does not extend to hate speech.


Again, in this regard our Constitution is fundamentally different to others in the Western world. The Freedom Charter gave us our ideal vision for a country that we hoped to build. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the vehicles to attain that particular vision.


It is not, as some would want us to believe, a mechanism to preserve the status quo of the old regime. As for those who have in the past spoken out against a two-thirds majority of the ANC because they suggested that we wanted to amend fundamental tenets of the Constitution, their misapprehensions frankly belie their fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the struggle and the nature of the ANC and its values.


They conveniently have forgotten the price that the ANC paid for this democracy. We will jealously guard this Constitution and this Bill of Rights on behalf of our people as a monument to the lives laid down in the struggle.


Some care not to remember that as much as our transition to a democratic order was a negotiated one, it was not completely peaceful. At his inauguration, the former President Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela spoke of the transition to democracy being relatively peaceful. Relative to what, one may ask?


In the French Revolution, 44 000 revolutionary councils were tasked with purging royalists and in the American Revolution over 50 000 young men perished. It is estimated that a million people perished during the Russian Revolution.


Indeed, Madiba was correct. It was relatively peaceful by those standards, but he more than anyone else was acutely aware that during the series of negotiations from 1990 to 1991 between the ANC and the National Party government, thousands of our people were killed, particularly in KwaZulu-Natal, the East Rand and the Vaal Triangle.


The Goldstone Commission revealed the extent to which political violence was fuelled by a third force.


In March 1992, the referendum in which only whites were able to participate saw former President De Klerk receive a mandate of 68% to continue to negotiate a new Constitution. This was a victory, not only for the National Party but for the country, in that it ensured that the process towards a negotiated settlement could continue. Notably, 42% of the white population at the time were opposed to this and said no to removing apartheid. Not surprisingly ... [Interjections.] Yes, just 32%.


Just three months later, Boipatong and several other attacks took place. The Bisho massacre followed and literally every other day there were reports of killings. Then in April 1993, Comrade Chris Hani was assassinated, nearly derailing the negotiations.


Once again, the forces opposed to change showed their opposition to burying apartheid and white minority rule. Yet again, the ANC leadership pressed on with negotiations under enormous provocation.


Finally, on 18 November 1993, the negotiating parties agreed on the Interim Constitution under which the historic elections of 1994 were held.


However, the killings did not stop. In the first 18 days of January 1994, a total of 193 people were killed. Two days before the historic elections, bombs rocked Gauteng. Seven people were killed in an explosion in Germiston, while nine were killed in a massive explosion in Johannesburg’s city centre. Several polling stations were also bombed.


I recall all of these events in order to bring into perspective a few things. Firstly, this Constitution was hard won, and in the big as well as the small things we must spare no effort to protect it; and secondly, neither our democratic order, nor the Constitution, nor the Bill of Rights itself, had their origins in absolute unanimity. This dissension continues to manifest in diverse ways.


The hon Mcloughlin reminded us of this last week when he contended that South Africa’s challenges did not arise in 1652 but in 1994. It would be easy to simply dismiss the hon member’s assertion as baseless, but for the fact that the hon member is a leader and he and his party occupy their seats in this House where they are tasked with representing the views of their supporters, who while not a majority, are nonetheless a significant number of people in our country.


President Mandela continually urged these South Africans to join hands with those of us who were victims of apartheid, in our mammoth task of together building the South Africa envisaged in the Freedom Charter which proclaims a vision of a country in which all shall be equal and proud.


Our struggle was nonetheless founded on the fundamental principle that all of the people, both black and white, had to be liberated from apartheid and that this system had damaged us all; in different ways perhaps, but it was in essence a crime against all of humanity.


It seems that today, 20 years into our democracy, we are still at the point where the ANC holds out its hand to fellow South Africans and says, “Let us work together to create a better future”.


Speaker, it is heartening that the bold vision of 2030, as captured in the National Development Plan, NDP, has been welcomed by so many in the country. One of the abiding legacies of the late Minister Collins Chabane, MP, is the 20-Year Review of the period 1994 to 2014, which was published under his leadership when he held office as Minister in the Presidency responsible for Performance, Monitoring and Evaluation.


It is a seminal document which I urge all members to study closely. I do believe that it has as its essence a road map towards social cohesion and reconstruction. In the limited time available, if I may be allowed to read out just one study from the 20-Year Review, which is quite seminal:


The revolutionary difference between the old and new Home Affairs is revealed sharply in a story told by a white staff member who joined the old Home Affairs in 1973. Working at the birth registration counter, she describes how a baby was typically brought to the office by the mother and was taken by staff to a tea room. They locked the door while they unclothed the child and examined it to determine the race according to the Population Registration Act of 1950. In difficult cases, specialists from Social Services were called in. The process disturbed her at the time and still troubles her. The entire life of the child depended on the racial identity the child was given in that office or through the Bantu Administration System. In the case of Africans, there was a denial of citizenship and of every one of the other 27 rights set out in the Bill of Rights.


Since 1994, in total contrast, the registration of the birth of a South African child by the Department of Home Affairs guarantees that the child has an inalienable right to the status of being a citizen and to all the equal rights and responsibilities set out in the Constitution.




The same white staff member reported that, as a woman, she suffered severe discrimination and had to resign and later reapply as a temporary worker every time she fell became pregnant, as there was no maternity leave. She was paid less than men for doing the same job, and she was never promoted until the new government came into power in 1994.




Let this remind us of the words of former President Nelson Mandela that never, never and never again shall one race dominate another; and once again, let us renew our commitment to all, of our social contract, big or small. I thank you very much. [Applause.]














Ms D CARTER: As a patriotic opposition, Cope fully supports the need to build the most caring society in the world by deeply and continuously entrenching human rights for all.


Cope believes that, as a society, we should be debating a report on our failure of the past year, with regard to the above. We need corrective action, not rhetoric. Our intervention must ensure that there are incremental gains each year.


After each year of assessment, without finger-pointing, we should honestly confront the deficit in achieving our goal of an entrenchment of human rights for all in our country.


Today we agree with the Deputy Chairperson of the South African Human Rights Commission, SAHRC, Pregs Govender, who asserted that poverty is the greatest human rights violation.


Most distressing of all is the fact that one-third of our fellow citizens do not have access to proper sanitation. Just as the late Kader Asmal made the provision of water a human rights issue, the installation of proper sanitation should also be a human rights issue.


When we meet again next year, we should assess whether these human rights were entrenched for all who live in South Africa. We can no longer differ on this matter. A lack of proper sanitation offends and it is offensive. Let us, in a show of total solidarity with the poor people, the people of South Africa, make our intention and commitment in this regard noticeable.


Our fellow citizens must value our Constitution and must believe in the merits of democracy. They must choose to assert their constitutional rights rather than protesting violently and destructively in the streets.


Cope urges government to create a legal desk to support aggrieved communities. Let the people use our Constitution and the law without inhibition and constraint to secure their human rights.


Today, let us also remember the tragedies at Sharpeville and Langa. In doing so, we must measure the distance we have come from and project the distance we still have to go in order to reach our destination, as enshrined in the Constitution.


That is how we can honour the sacrifices of those who died on 21 March 1960. On Freedom Day in 2012, Mosiuoa Lekota, Leader of the Congress of the People, stressed that Human Rights Day was for all South Africans and not for a particular area or group. We must, through what we say and do here, encourage our fellow South Africans to celebrate Human Rights Day together, as a united nation.


On that occasion, Mr Lekota lamented the absence of other political parties at an event and said that it is a national event and that on that day, we must all forget about our differences. Political parties must educate South Africans on the fact that the human rights issues were not only about the Sharpeville and Langa massacres but about a whole wide range of human rights that affect each and every one of us.


Let us, in a show of unity, entrench human rights for all in our country. Thank you.












Ms S J NKOMO: Hon Speaker, in a country as diverse and pluralistic as South Africa, with its veritable melting pot of cultures and ethnicities, its young democracy, constitutional dispensation and myriad of social and economic challenges, it is nothing less than a gargantuan task to build a caring society by entrenching human rights for all. Yet, it is a task that we must be equal to.


Our democracy follows closely on the heels of an authoritarian, apartheid regime, built upon the cornerstones of separate development and inequality. In the 21 years since the fall of apartheid, we have still not been able to redress or reduce, in large numbers, the imbalance in any significant measure.


With our Gini coefficient, which is a measure of inequality in our society, currently at 0,63, we are still one of the most unequal countries in the world.


In addition, our heterogeneous nature — with our 11 official languages, four major racial groups, each with their own ethnic linguistic subgroups — makes it an extreme challenge to foster social cohesion.


On top of this, we have an economic environment characterised by high unemployment and low economic growth. We must build our society so that we can have low unemployment and high economic growth instead. This is not an easy task, but one that must be done.


We must also build strong foundational human rights structures in this country. Our Chapter 9 institutions remain a concern and need to be accorded greater mechanisms of enforcement. These institutions are meant to safeguard our democracy. Instead, we have seen the independence of the Independent Electric Commission, IEC, come into question and the Public Protector being attacked for doing her work in an impartial fashion.


How can these guardians of democracy be praised on the one hand, but at the same time be undermined by the very people who praise these establishments?


As the IFP, we want to see human rights for all, with a specific focus on women’s rights. The chronic underrepresentation and undermining of women in our society is appalling, in spite of claims that South Africa is progressing on gender issues.


The progressive nature of human rights in South Africa is consistently limited, due to the laws that are not well implemented, as well as other factors. I thank you.















Ms C DUDLEY: In today’s debate about entrenching human rights for all, I would like to talk a little about the right to freedom of religion and belief.


On International Woman's Day in 2014, in the midst of escalating global violence linked to religious extremism, I reminded the President of South Africa and Members of Parliament, MPs, that freedom of religion will not hold up on its own.


I said that if we stand by while global terrorism destroys freedom of religion around the world, we will stand alone when we are under siege.


The situation in Africa with terror groups like Boko Haram, burning towns and abducting and killing thousands, brings global terror much closer to home and reminds us that South Africa cannot afford to be complacent.


We know that freedom of religion is restricted in many parts of the world and it is restricted in different ways. According to nongovernmental organizations, NGOs, working on the ground, there is often a connection between high restrictions of freedom of religion and belief in a society and high levels of violent conflict and military spending.


Poor economic development, a low status and participation of women in social and economic matters and poor health are also generally evident.


While we would expect the governments of nation states to respect, protect and promote human rights, far too many are the ones committing the violations through restrictive or unfair laws and regulations, state harassment, monitoring, raids and imprisonment without legitimate legal processes. Parliaments throughout the world need to be vigilant in this regard.


Violations also occur at the hands of communities, as we have seen in South Africa when violence flares up against foreign nationals. If the state fails to take action against acts of hostility, there can be no freedom, no peace and no growth.


The ACDP is committed to seeing our Parliament in South Africa being better equipped to protect freedom of religion and belief and we invite you to join us.


We have, for example, called on this Parliament to consider initiatives to protect freedom of religion and belief, as we believe there is an urgent need for lawmakers to pay more attention to the impact of legislation and policy on this freedom.


The ACDP calls on this House today to express concern over the recent attack on Christians in Lahore, Pakistan, and the arrest of 400 Pakistani Christians in Thailand who are likely to be deported back to Pakistan. These are just two incidents linked to inadequate protection of freedom of religion and belief out of many happening all over the world.


Freedom of region and belief gives people their identity - the freedom to form and express personal beliefs. It protects not only those who believe in God, but also those who do not and those who believe that it is impossible to know whether there is a God. Protecting freedom of religion or belief is of course not about protecting religions and beliefs from criticism or from ridicule; it is about the freedom of people themselves to believe in different religions or concepts.


This freedom has sadly taken on an orphan-like status and for this reason we need to remind ourselves ... [Time expired.]
















Ms M C DIKGALE: Hon Deputy Chairperson, hon members, one is indeed honoured and privileged to be afforded this opportunity to take part in this debate, under the theme of celebrating the Freedom Charter, enjoying equal human rights for all.


This theme is most appropriate and could not have come at a better time, as this month we are celebrating Human Rights Month. We are also celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Freedom Charter, which is the foundation of human rights that are entrenched in the Constitution.


In celebratory or anniversary language, achieving a 60 years milestone is called a diamond jubilee. It is called a diamond jubilee because a diamond is a symbol of beauty and endurance, and beauty and endurance are associated with women. So today I want to talk about human rights from the perspective of women’s rights.


Therefore the logical question will then be: Do the women in South Africa have or enjoy these rights? In trying to answer this question it is imperative that we take a “sh’ot left” to the past — as a African scholar once said, the shortest way to the future is via the past.


The oppression and abuse of women, based on gender, is a historical fact. In South Africa we have documented tales of how women, like Sarah Baartman, were enslaved and robbed of their dignity just because men saw them as sexual objects rather than fellow human beings. Customs and traditions made their lives unbearable and this still continues to happen in some of our areas today, especially the rural areas.


Rural women still face difficulties when trying to access productive and economic resources such as land. They often have limited or no decision-making powers or protection from violence. They also play an increasingly important role as farm workers, but are the most exploited.


There are many more examples, but to continue listing them all will be, as we say in my language, go kwa mpa mokhora. [take long to finish.]


Hon members, it is only a fool who will not see that these are barbaric acts that must be eliminated from the society. Women and men of honour should, therefore, stand up to fight against this evil, whether individually or collectively.


In South Africa, black people organised themselves in 1912 and formed one giant organisation precisely to fight against all these and other forms of oppression. People of other races joined this organisation because they realised that this organisation was fighting a noble cause.


In 1956 the women associated with this giant organisation marched to the Union Buildings against the pass laws. From then onwards, these women intensified and broadened their struggle to cover all forms of women’s rights in particular. So it was not surprising that when this giant organisation came into power in 1994 it ensured that human rights, including women’s rights, are entrenched in the Constitution.


So, over the past 20 years, our new democratic order has evolved and established a sound basis for the advancement of women’s rights. We are now better positioned than before to address the challenges that are still facing women; and this is all thanks, in the main, to this giant organisation.


We have, for instance, passed a number of laws to empower women to improve the quality of their lives, and we have opened up the space for their voices to be heard on matters concerning their lives. More importantly, opportunities for women to access basic services and social, economic and political opportunities have been actively promoted.


Some of these pieces of legislation, to mention a few, are the Constitution itself, Domestic Violence Act, Labour Relations Act, Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Employment Equity Act, etc.


This giant organisation also ensured that the issues affecting women are accorded the status they deserve in government. Thus, during the ANC’s 52nd National Conference, it resolved to establish the Women’s Ministry in the Presidency. Today we have the Ministry of Women in the Presidency. It also adopted a 50/50 representation of women across the spheres of government. That is why we have so many women Members of Parliament, MPs, today.


There are many more examples that I can cite, but due to the time limit, to continue listing them, e tla ba go kwa mpa mokhora. [will take long to finish.]


However, despite all these efforts and progress in transforming our society, we still have enormous challenges. South Africa is still home to high levels of violence against its women and children.


In some parts of the country, we still continue to experience the perversion of cultural practices, something that perpetuates the abuse of women and children. For instance, we have ukuthwala as well as female genital mutilation. These are practices which are in violation of human rights.


These practices are, in the main, as a result of stereotypes regarding the traditional roles of men and women, whereby men show their masculine status by abusing the vulnerable women. Unfortunately, this will persist and be passed on to future generations unless a concerted effort is made to change it.


We must remember that though children have not always been very good at listening to their elders, they have never failed to imitate them. So if children witness this abuse, they will in all likelihood grow up to become abusers themselves.


This will be a vicious circle that will weaken our nation and the pillars on which it is based. As a result, we stand to lose an important layer of our future generation, the children, who are the future of this country. A children’s rights activist once said: “If we don't stand up for children, then we don’t stand for much”. In my language we say that ...



 ... tlogatloga e tloga kgale, modiši wa kgomo o tšwa natšo šakeng.



This is exactly why there were reports last week that the SA Police Service, SAPS, and community policing forums, CPFs, in the Western Cape town of Worcester still have the apartheid mentality of requiring black workers, including builders and gardeners, to carry the dompas when they enter the affluent sections of this town. This is the worst form of racism and should not be allowed in the present South Africa! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member, can you take your seat?


Mr M WATERS: May I address you? Hon Chairperson, the speaker is misleading the House. The speaker knows ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Order, order members! I can’t hear hon Waters.


Mr M WATERS: The speaker is misleading the House. The speaker knows that the green cards were introduced by SAPS, which is a national constituency that the ANC is in charge of and responsible for, not the DA. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): What is it? No, hon members, order, order! [Interjections.]Order, hon members! You are making my life very difficult. Here is a statement that has been made about cards that have been issued by the Western Cape government. We are not aware of that. May I caution ... [Interjections.] Hon members, order! May I caution members not to make statements of which we would not be able to test the factuality. [Interjections.] The member can continue with the debate? [Interjections.]



Mohl Motlatšamodulasetulo, bomaganagobotšwa, bomailadiphetogo, re nyaka go ba botša gore ...



 ... South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white. [Interjections.]


Mr G G HILL-LEWIS: Will the hon Mmakgoši be willing to take a question?


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No, order hon members! Hon Mmakgoši, are you able to take a question? [Interjections.] No, she is not prepared to take a question.


Ms M C DIKGALE: This is what was said in 1955 in the Freedom Charter, and the Constitution also shares the same sentiments. This applies to all places and provinces in South Africa, without exception.





Taba ye nngwe ye e makatšago ka profense ye ya Kapa Bodikela ke ge go etla go tshwaro ya magoši, e lego baetapele ba setšo. Mmušo wa profense ye o eteletšwego pele ke DA o nagana gore profense ye ke naga yeo e ikemetšego. Profense ye ke yona fela ye e se nago le ntlo ya magoši gomme mmušo wa gona ga o bonale o ikemišeditše go šuta mo tabeng ye, le ge go na le bohlatse bja gore MaKhoi le MaSan le bathobaso ba bangwe bao ba dulago mo ba na le magoši, e lego baetepele ba setšo.



Ge re le dikopanong tša Contralesa, sello sa magoši se segolo ke gore magoši a go tšwa gona mo profenseng ye, Tonakgolo Hellen Zille ga a nyake le go ba bona ka leihlo. Bjale re na re le ba ANC re rata go botša boetapele bja Kapa Bodikela gore bogoši le ditokelo tša bjona ke karolo ya Molaotheo wa naga ye. Ba swanetše go o latela, ba rata goba ba sa rate.



The rights of women are fundamental human rights, entrenched in and protected by our Constitution. They are thus inalienable from, integral to, and indivisible from the human rights framework. Their violation in all its different likenesses is incompatible with the dignity and worth of the human being, and must be stopped.


There is as such a need to accelerate and enhance women empowerment, including strengthening awareness-raising, information and communication. Strengthening women rights and moving towards full equality between women and men are vital components of achieving a happy and egalitarian society.


So we must all do our best to ensure that we achieve the realisation of the human rights that are enshrined in the Constitution. We owe it to the people of this land who sacrificed their lives to ensure that we have democracy and human rights. These are the people of, but not limited to, Sharpeville to whom March 21 is dedicated.


To correctly honour their memories we must ensure that those who continue to exact this terrible toll of violation of human rights on the country and its citizens are dealt with. And we must start with the likes of these people just around the corner



Lehlaka le kobja e sa le le le nanana gape šepa la mpša le lona le dubja e sa le le le meetse, ka go realo, le ka oma la hlaba. [Applause.]













Ms T E BAKER: Deputy Chair of the NCOP, hon Speakers and guests, the reason we celebrate Human Rights Day is precisely because we are human.


As South Africans our rights are enshrined in the Constitution. Chapter 2 of the Bill of Rights states that the state must respect, protect, promote and fulfill these rights in the Bill of Rights. It further states that everyone has the inherent dignity and the right to have their dignity respected and protected.


The effects of apartheid on the dignity of the South African people was abominable, which is why one of the main goals of the democratically elected government post-1994, was to restore dignity to the people by abolishing poverty and through the provision of housing, water and sanitation.


Today, as we sit here in the year 2015 – 21 years into democracy – this scourge of the rights of the South African people through the violation of their dignity still prevails. We have to ask ourselves: Why? Why is it that the number of people living in informal settlements rising every year?


In 1994 the backlog was 1,5 million, in 2015 it is in access with 2 million. In actual fact, over the past five years the delivery of houses has dropped by 25%. Why? [Interjections.]


The struggle for housing is the struggle for freedom – a freedom which is denied to too many in our democratic South Africa. The logo of our national Water and Sanitation Department is, Water is life, sanitation is dignity. When you consider that this very department has underspent its budget by a staggering 48%, coupled with the ever-increasing number of bucked toilets still in existence, it boggles the mind. This underspending is a clear indication of the neglect of the rights of our people.


The SA Human Rights Commission conducted a study and compiled a report entitled, Water and Sanitation, Life and Dignity: Accountability to People who are Poor, which provides a unique look at the reality faced by rural communities.


This report was drawn up after an in-depth study of the level of access to water and sanitation in the poorest communities of all the nine provinces. Now what is even more mind-boggling is the statement by the previous Minister of this department, Ms Edna Molewa, who said that this report was outdated, baseless and misleading. It boggles the mind.


I think it is time our government of the day faces up to reality and recognises that by failing to provide these basic human services they are failing to uphold the basic human rights of all South Africans.


The 2006 Nobel Peace Price winner, Muhammad Yunus of Blangadesh said, and I quote:


Poverty is the absence of all human rights. The frustration, hostility and anger generated by abject poverty cannot sustain peace in any society. Lasting peace cannot be achieved unless large population groups find ways in which to break out of poverty.


Never has this rung more true than it does in the current context of life in South Africa where abject poverty is still a harsh reality for millions, and peace is still a dream unrealised. Peace is not lasting.


Human Rights Day was formerly known as Sharpeville Day. In fact, 55 years ago today, on Saturday 19 March 1960, Robert Sobukwe, President of the PAC, not the ANC ... [Interjections.] … the PAC, not the ANC announced the intention to embark on an antipass campaign on 21st March 1960.


Coincidentally it was stressed that this campaign was to be carried out in the spirit of nonviolence, but we all know what ensued. I put it to you, hon members that this direct violation of human rights that is ongoing in South Africa today is a direct result of the neglect of the rights of the South Africans.


Since 2009 there have been 3 000 protests, and counting, for housing and water in what is supposed to be a free and democratic South Africa.


When a young 15-year-old boy was shot and killed by police during a protest for water in Mpumalanga earlier this month, the rights of all South Africans were violated. When a young six-year-old boy died in a pit toilet in Limpopo in 2014, the rights of all South Africans were violated. When 34 striking miners in Marikana were shot and killed by the police, the rights of all South Africans were violated.[Applause.] When a young man was shot and killed in Sebokeng in 2014 while protesting for housing, the rights of all South Africans were violated.


The list of South African citizens killed during protests for basic services — basic human rights guaranteed to us in our Constitution — is a long one.


Hon members, fellow South Africans we can put a stop to this violation of our rights. We can put a stop to a government which has forgotten its people by voting next year, in 2016, for a government which will be a clean government. [Time expired] [Applause.]








Mr L M NTSHAYISA: Thank you, hon Deputy Chairperson. Hon members, on 21 March 1960, when masses gathered in Sharpeville to protest against the pass laws of the apartheid regime, the situation in this country was completely different from what it is today.


Even those who were part of the system that oppressed the people of this country can really feel that today South Africa is different.


The AIC believes that a lot has been achieved, but a lot still need to be done to recognise and protect the rights of individuals in this country.


Everyone can now move freely without any passbook in his or her pocket. The challenge that we still face today is that not every citizen of this country knows or enjoys his or her rights equally.


The country still has poor students who cannot complete their studies due to financial constraints, but we have this National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, which does not satisfy all the students.


In most parts of the country people still drink impure water with cattle from rivers, while in many villages in rural areas it becomes a struggle to get to health facilities mainly because of the distance and the condition of the roads. Some villages like Bhubezi in Matatiele do not have electricity and are still waiting for it.


Indeed, South Africans now have, and are enjoying human rights. Some of these rights cannot be celebrated by us as AIC; for instance, we don’t cherish the right that a man can get married to another man. We are against the fact that a young girl or woman should have an abortion because that unborn child is being denied life. We don’t cherish that.


Such rights, we believe, cannot move South Africa forward as they are in conflict with humanity.


However, we do not wish to undermine the role that was played by our leaders to change this country in order to become home for citizens of all races. We must therefore strive to build on the foundation laid by leaders such as the former President Nelson Mandela. We need to change bad attitudes and behaviour, and come together to reason together. [Time expired.]












Ms S DAVIDS: Hon Deputy Chairperson, before I start with my contribution to the debate, I just want to say to the DA that they must not leave the House, because history is the past and the present. [Interjections.] They must accept the reality that they are part of the racism in this country.


Racism is the monster that destroys the tree of equal human rights for all. This dangerous worm threatens our efforts for a more just and equal society. The virus that causes racism is only one: the belief that some race or people are superior to others. [Interjections.] And that is what you believe. You believe that you are superior to others. [Interjections.]


It causes those people to hate others, treat them badly and deem to be inferior. [Interjections.] It is worse where a small minority like you holds power over the majority through wealth.


Racism is not the mere mention of race or a discussion about it. Too many people want to forget about race because they are beneficiaries of past racist policies or state engineering. [Interjections.] They quickly shout about the race card when these realities are discussed. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Order! Order, hon members! Hon members, heckling is allowed in the House, but let us not interrupt the speaker.


Ms S DAVIDS: If we can just remember, comrades, if you go to our history you see that in the past we couldn’t even swim at the same beach. We had to swim at separate beaches. We couldn’t even travel in one bus. If we had to travel in one bus, some had to sit at the back while the others sat in front. [Interjections.]


You are in denial, DA. You are in denial. You cannot recognise racism because it is in your bosom. Of course, we must honestly talk about how racism... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, please take your seat. Is that a point of order, hon member?


Ms S P KOPANE: Chair, could you kindly ask the hon member to lower her voice. We can’t hear her; she is shouting. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Do you see now? [Interjections.] No, no, hon members. You see, the reason she has to raise her voice is precisely because of the interruptions. So if you can give the member an opportunity to speak, then she would not have reason to raise her voice.


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, hon Deputy Chairperson.


Of course, we must honestly talk about how racism, discrimination or inequality destroys the fibre of the new tree under which we all may find protection. [Interjections.]


Like our late comrade, President Nelson Mandela said, South Africa is for all who live in it, white and black. Not the closing of discussion and the denial of race, like we see in the Western Cape under the DA. We cannot allow a party for the minority to define or labels us when we talk about this matter in the national interest. [Interjections.]


Racism is not what our critics want us to believe. It is the conviction that the one is better than the other. In the Western Cape we are bombarded by the DA telling us that it is better than the ANC — I don’t know where they get that from.


They tell us it governs better than any other area in our country and even that it is the best-run regional government in the world, forgetting that just around the corner they have Blikkiesdorp which they put there in Delft; and not once did they go back to those people to rectify their mess. [Interjections.] [Applause.]


Why? Because it feeds the racist dinosaur the DA still harbours. [Interjections.] It is they who say, only whites can govern; blacks are incompetent and inferior to them. [Interjections.]


It comes from a book that I read. The Broederbond book. That is their history.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, please hold on. Hon member, did I hear you saying that hon Davis is talking shit or rubbish?


Ms S DAVIS: Yes, I heard it.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Please withdraw that statement, hon member. [Interjections.] Withdraw the statement that the hon member is talking rubbish. [Interjections.]


Mr M S DE FREITAS: I used the word “rubbish”.




Mr M S DE FREITAS: I said the word “rubbish”.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Please withdraw the word.


Mr M S DE FREITAS: I withdraw.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Thank you. Please continue, hon Davis.


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Chairperson. They will only say that because I must be inferior, and I’m not! [Applause.]


Everything the DA touches turns to gold and everything the ANC touches to...


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson!


DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Please take your seat, hon Davis. Hon Ndlozi?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, I want to understand. Did you just ask a member to withdraw the word “rubbish” and could you please explain why you asked the member to withdraw the word because “rubbish” is not unparliamentary.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): You asked me to tell you why. It may be a word than can be used, but the context in which it is used in Parliament... [Interjections.] Therefore, because it is belittling to say that a member is talking rubbish, and unbecoming of a member, I requested the member to withdraw. Hon Chief Whip?


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon Chair, the only words that you can rule unparliamentary in a Joint Sitting are words under Rule 14(p), and those are words that are offensive or unbecoming. I would submit to you that “rubbish” is not offensive or unbecoming. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Order, hon members! [Interjections.] Hon members!


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION : Chair, you are not going to resolve this now. May I ask you to come back with a considered ruling on the matter?


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon members, I may not necessarily have to come back to that. I am ruling on the word that was used, and am saying that it is unbecoming and unparliamentary.


If members are not satisfied with that ruling, such members have the right to approach the Chair or the Speaker about that particular ruling. For now, the ruling is that the word “rubbish” is unparliamentary. [Applause.] Please continue, hon Davis.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, may I please address you?




Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, do you know what happened? During the pronouncements of the hon member, the speaker, she said the DA or someone must go fix up a mess that they had created. [Interjections.] I put it to you, hon Deputy Chair... [Interjections.]


We want to be able to say “rubbish” in this Parliament, man!


I put it to you that, in substance, “mess” and “rubbish” are the same thing.


AN HON MEMBER: Hear, hear!


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, you could rule that in that context it was not parliamentary, but you can’t say the word “rubbish” is not.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi, can I address you on that?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Because we want to be able to say there is rubbish or people are living with rubbish, and all those sorts of things.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi, I want to address you on that. I want to say to you that I made a ruling... [Interjections.] Hon members, order, order! I said I made a ruling based on the context in which the word was used. If members are not happy with my ruling, there are processes that members can follow to register their dissatisfaction with the ruling. Please continue with the debate, hon member.


Please wait, hon member. Hon Chief Whip?


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Deputy Chairperson, every day, we discipline the members of the ANC. [Interjections.]


I will never shout at you. I will allow you to say what you want to say so that I can understand what you want to say. If you shout at me it is because you do not want to hear what I have to say. [Interjections.]


What I wanted to say is that every day in this House, we sit here and listen to the EFF defending the DA. Every day! [Interjections.] Every day! And they make their own rules here. We cannot allow it. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon members ... [Interjections.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Stop defending your bosses! [Interjections.]




The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Chief Whip, hon members, we don’t need that.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order ...


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): We don’t need that.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order, sorry ...


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No, we don’t need that.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order, Deputy Chairperson.


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


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Okay, who do I take first now? Because I have made a ruling... [Interjections.]


Ms H O MAXON: Human rights is about women. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Okay... [Interjections.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: But Chair, I’m the Chief Whip of the Opposition! [Interjections.] [Laughter.]




Ms H O MAXON: Hon Deputy Chair of the NCOP, we cannot allow the Chief Whip of the ANC to distort the words of the EFF by saying we are defending bosses. We do not have bosses here. [Interjections].


When we as members of this Parliament stand up and correct things here, we do it for all members. Even if the ANC needs to be protected, we will do so because we are here for justice. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): All right. Those are statements. Hon Steenhuisen? [Interjections.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Thank you very much, hon Deputy Chair of the NCOP. I think it is very important that people must rise on the Rules.


The last point there was a political statement that was snucked in through the back door by the Chief Whip, who should really know better because we should be setting the example as the Chief Whips in the House. We should be setting the example. So standing up on a frivolous point of order to take a cheap political shot should not be allowed.


But I do just want to say this because it is very important: I am happy to discipline my members, but for the last three weeks Castle corner over there has been haranguing us … [Laughter.] … and being verbally abusive.  Even when one of my members was speaking, the member was shouting. The gentleman was shouting, “Ibhunu, ibhunu, ibhunu! [“Boer, boer, boer!] the whole time from the back there.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member, you are doing the same thing now.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: No, but I am using my opportunity.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Now you have used your opportunity to make your point.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Deputy Chairperson, let me guarantee the Chief Whip of the Majority Party that the day the Speaker of the NA ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi... [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... treats all of us... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi! [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... as equal here, that is the only day they can expect the protection of the EFF. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi! Order, hon members! [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: The day the Speaker and all the presiding officers...


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Order, hon members! Hon Ndlozi!


Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... stop treating ANC members and their Cabinet as spoilt children, they will get protection from us. Until that day, we will protect one another in these benches.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi! Hon Ndlozi, can you take your seat. [Interjections.] Can you please take your seat!


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Because you get people to kill us. You get people to come and beat us up here. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi, can you take your seat, please! [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: We are left to protect ourselves! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Can you take your seat, please! [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: The Speaker does not protect us. The presiding officers don’t protect us. What must we do? [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi, can you take your seat! [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: So you will only get protection the day you are not treated like spoilt children by the Speaker. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Ndlozi, can you take your seat. [Interjections.] Hon members, I do not know what it is that we want to achieve, because we are now degenerating from having a debate to ... [Interjections.]


I want to go back, hon members, to say that there was a ruling, and the ruling was accepted or, if it wasn’t accepted, I said that then there were processes to be followed. Can we allow the member to conclude her contribution to the debate? Hon Davis, please continue with the debate. [Interjections.]


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Chair. I just hope my time is still fine.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): It is still fine.


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Chair.


When anything scandalous is exposed –the multimillion-rand corrupt communication contract in the Department of the Premier, improper DA cadre deployment, the unfolding Filcongate that drained off more than R400 million, and even the R5 billion overpaid to the colluding construction companies for the Cape Town Stadium and BRT – the DA is quick to point to other provinces it deems worse and the DA faithful say that they are governed by whites and the other provinces are failing because they are governed by blacks. [Interjections.] That is how small-minded they are.


To the EFF, you are speaking about getting the land. Then you must speak to your bosses, because they have the land. [Laughter.] [Applause.]


But the Western Cape, the so-called DA beacon of hope, is still very unequal, even though ...


Mr M S MBATHA: On a point of order, Chair.


Ms S DAVIDS: ... it is one of the richest areas in Africa.


DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, can you take your seat. Let me take the point of order.


Mr M S MBATHA: Chair, is hon Davis willing to take a question?


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, are you willing to take a question?


Ms S DAVIDS: I don’t take questions from kids — honourable kids. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): I take it that she is not prepared to take a question.


Mr M S MBATHA: On a point of order, Chair: I request that she withdraws that statement. I have never been her child or whatever the story is.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): What is it? Did she say “kids”?




The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Okay. Please withdraw that statement, hon Davis.


Ms S DAVIDS: Chair, I said “honourable kids”. [Laughter.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No, hon Davis. [Interjections.]


Mr M S MBATHA: Order, Chair, order! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, please withdraw any reference to any member as a kid.


Ms S DAVIDS: Okay, I withdraw, hon Chair.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Thank you very much.



Mnu M S MBATHA: Usijwayela kabi.



Ms S DAVIDS: Skewed apartheid development patterns continue in this province. There is no integrated development happening in the Western Cape. The privileges for those in the rich areas grow and the race divide deepens. They are pleased, as the DA looks after white interests only in the Western Cape.


This is but part of the institutionalised racism we see sharply imprinted in the Western Cape. But the Western Cape, the so-called DA beacon of hope, is still very unequal, even though it is one of the richest areas in Africa.


Inferior service delivery in poor areas continues. Go to Langa. Go to Khayelitsha. Go to Netreg. Go to Bishop Lavis. You will see there is no service delivery happening there...  [Interjections.] ... despite the fact that development in this province should be far more advanced.


Hon members, I am saying that development in this province should be far more advanced because this is the apartheid province that was well-developed in the apartheid era. [Interjections.]


Employment equity is still skewed.


Mr B M BHANGA: On a point of order, Chairperson. On a point of order.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, please take your seat.


Mr B M BHANGA: Chairperson, today, on the day of Human Rights, we have heard the most racist speech from the hon member. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No, hon member, that is not a point of order; that is a point for debate. [Interjections.] Continue, hon Davis.


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Chairperson. Employment equity is still skewed. The hon Zille claims that there are not enough qualified blacks to appoint, but her MECs are still mostly pale and male — so is the majority of the heads of the provincial departments.


The rest of the province’s business leaders see that they can disregard social transformation or pretend that the Western Cape is an island on its own.


They take their cue from hon Zille when she calls our people coming from other provinces refugees. [Applause.] [Interjections.] We must say it because it is our Human Rights Day on Saturday. So we must really implement human rights on the ground and it must start with Premier Zille in the Western Cape.


She insults our people on Twitter, also when she says that people must pay for their own HIV treatment — even in the legislature, in a recent outburst. She said, in 1999, black women on party lists take up space, eat a lot and take padkos [provisions for a journey] without adding value. [Interjections.] She recently even linked some to elephants who should exercise like her. I don’t want to exercise like her or look her! [Applause.]


She has serious race issues and the DA faithfully follows that.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order ...




The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: My point of order is that you have made a ruling earlier about the use of the word “rubbish”. The member is now casting aspersions on a Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP. I would suggest to you, hon Deputy Chairperson, that the Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP needs your protection from these unsubstantiated statements that are being made about her.


The quotations that are being attributed to her are just simply not grounded in fact. And you are allowing this member to cast aspersions on a member of your House. I think she needs to be given your protection.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon members, can we allow the member to conclude her speech. [Interjections.] The reason is... [Interjections.] No, no, no!


Ms S DAVIDS: Horror stories are reported in this model province ...


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Just hold on, hon Davis. Just hold on!


I am listening to this political speech that is being presented in this House and it is about a member who ordinarily would have been part of this House because she is being addressed in her capacity as the premier of the province, and not as Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP. [Interjections.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Deputy Chairperson, I am happy for us to continue, but I am going to instruct my next speaker to spend the next 20 minutes of her speech calling the President of the Republic a thief. [Interjections.] [Applause.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, please continue with the debate. [Interjections.]


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson.


We see how people of colour are made unwelcome and too frequently suffer abuse. Over the past two weeks we saw that people of colour had to carry a dompas, as in the past, to go and seek work or to enter their workplace.


We then went to the Human Rights Commission, HRC, which then intervened and it was taken back by the community policing forum, CPF, and also that white community... [Interjections.]


Ms D KOHLER BARNARD: On a point of order, please!


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member, take your seat, please.


Ms D KOHLER BARNARD: Deputy Chairperson, it has already been pointed out to you, sir, that the SA Police Service, SAPS, is a national competency which has admitted it distributed those cards. This person is now saying it is the DA! We have told her ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No, no, hon member, this is an honourable member.


Ms D KOHLER BARNARD: This hon member ...




Ms D KOHLER BARNARD: ... has now made the same claim again when it has been pointed out to her that it is a fabrication. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Order, hon members! Hon Davis, and everybody else, I made a ruling earlier on statements on the subject of the carrying of those cards. Tempting as it may be, let us avoid making statements where we cannot prove anything. Can you conclude, hon member?


Mr J MTHEMBU: Chair!


Ms S DAVIDS: Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. Luckily I was part of the meeting where we rectified that.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Please take your seat, hon Davids.


Ms S DAVIDS: Horror stories are reported in this model province ...


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Davis, can you take your seat, please. Hon member?


Mr J MTHEMBU: Chair, the hon member from the DA benches calls hon Davids “this person”. She deserves to be respected.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): I have asked her to withdraw it.


Mr J MTHEMBU: She is an honourable member. [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Yes, I asked her to withdraw and she did. [Interjections.] Hon Davids, please continue.


Ms S DAVIDS: Oh, it’s nice to be here. [Applause.]


Horror stories are reported in this model province of how some white people laugh when they urinate on blacks, and how blacks are assaulted – like the mother of 52 who was beaten up by a gang of young white men in front of her teenage son, and the domestic worker on her way to her work who was attacked by a white neighbourhood-watch member.


We see in various areas that people of colour are being kept out of certain rich developments or suburbs. Just last week, in Stellenbosch, a young farm boy of 21 years was killed by a rich wine farmer while he was with his friends. He was shot three times, like a dog. And that white farmer was not even arrested... [Interjections.] ... because he had the protection of the farm security guards. [Time expired.] [Interjections.]













Ms M P CHUEU: Hon Chair, on a point of order: Can you call hon Ndlozi to order because you allowed hon Davids to withdraw the word “kids” in this House. He, just the other day - I think two weeks back ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): No! Hon members ...


Ms M P CHUEU: He stood up in this House to say that he is not the child of anybody, but today, again, hon Ndlozi says that ANC members are treated as children, special children, in this House.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member! Order, hon member!


Ms M P CHUEU: We are not the children of anybody. He must stand up and apologise. We are not children! [Interjections.]



O nyaka goreng? O nyaka goreng?



The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member! Can you take your seat please. It would be very difficult for me to make a ruling on something that was said in a previous sitting. Therefore ...


Ms M P CHUEU: He said it when he stood today up whilst he was shouting. [Interjections.] He said it today. He repeated what he said the other day.




Ms M P CHUEU: We are not children in this House!




Ms M P CHUEU: Why does he... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Okay, hon member, okay! If there is a strong view, hon members, can I make a ruling on the matter? If the words were repeated today, which I did not hear, may we then allow the praesidium to look at Hansard because I would take it that it was on record, if it was said. I will then come back a make a ruling on the matter.










Mr M A PLOUAMMA: Hon Chair, I do not want us to distort history. I think we must accept that those who came before us, our forefathers, who managed to actually fight for the freedom of this country have made it possible for us to enjoy our rights, including the right to vote and the right of freedom of association. I just want to thank them for that.


However, I also want to say that there is too much that we still need to do. The majority of black people still feel that prisoners are better fed than good citizens. They still believe that as long as they live in squalor in informal settlements, they don’t enjoy the rights that are enshrined in our Constitution.


We still live in a society where there are great disparities in wealth and millions of our people are still living in deplorable conditions and in great poverty.


We must know, however, that these conditions existed before we attained our democratic dispensation, and for as long as these conditions continue to exist, our foundational values enshrined in our Constitution will remain a farfetched dream.


The real threat to our democracy and not achieving these rights is because most of the leaders that we have today are enriching themselves and causing our people to lose trust in the leadership that is currently in power.


We must first acknowledge that the status quo is not sustainable where a few keep acquiring more wealth and the majority are subjected to abject poverty. We can’t have a country where the majority depends on social grants for their survival, while those who were chosen to lead become arrogant, living in opulence, stealing tenders and yet are celebrated.


Our people are watching, and if we don’t stand up we will lose this historical opportunity that we have today.


I do not think we can talk about human rights without pushing robustly for structural economic change. We should also place more emphasis more on quality education because it is paramount to lift our people out of their unfortunate situation.


I think what we need to do is to agree and accept that poverty is still racially distributed. We need to change that because we can’t have a majority who are born poor and die poor, whereas there are a few who are born rich and even forget how many cakes they have in their fridges. So we need to change that as soon as possible.


We can romanticise, we can fight and we can howl, but when we leave this place we face our families and our communities who do not know where their next meal is going to come from. So I urge all political parties to treat this as a matter of urgency.


While we are earning our salaries here, there are some people who do not know what to feed their children. Thank you.













Mr Y C VAWDA: Hon Chair, allow me first and foremost to acknowledge the presence of our supreme forces, irrespective of whatever our perceptions might be. I greet all of you with As-saalamu-alay-kum. [Peace be with you.]


Amilcar Cabral once said:


Always bear in mind that the people are not fighting for ideas, for the things in anyone’s head. They are fighting to win material benefits, to live better and in peace, to see their lives going forward, to guarantee the future of their children.


Human rights stem from two foundational principles, namely dignity and equality. Our Constitution guarantees both of these principles when it says that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. But this, unfortunately, is only on paper and not reflected in the daily lives of our people, where many still do not have adequate housing, clean drinking water, access to education and many other basic human rights.


This marginalisation unfortunately is clearly distinguishable largely on the grounds of race. Unfortunately, the darker you are, the more difficult your life is likely to be in South Africa and in other parts of the world.


Section 26 of the Constitution places the responsibility of delivering on basic human rights squarely on the shoulders of the state, and 20 years into the new South Africa, failure on the part of this government to deliver in this regard is a regrettable indictment indeed.


The right to housing requires adequate and available land, and at this point it is necessary for us as the EFF to place it on record that the land laws of this country make it extremely difficult for land reform to take place, and it is this ANC government that is sustaining and maintaining these laws.


We, in the EFF, have offered you the two-thirds majority to make the fundamental and necessary changes ... [Interjections.] ... and once again we invite you to join us ... [Interjections.]


Ms M T KUBAYI: House Chair, I apologise to the speaker, but on a point of order: - is it parliamentary for a member to wear a sunhat when even the sun has set outside? [Laughter.] I don’t know, I just noticed a member wearing a sunhat.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon member, you are putting me in a very difficult position. [Interjections.] Take your seat hon member. Let me just say that that is not a point of order because I will be accused now of not respecting women’s rights by not allowing women to wear hats in the House. Continue, hon Vawda.


Mr Y C VAWDA: So together we can make those necessary fundamental changes in the laws of this country to bring about and to deliver on land reform.


The right to housing requires adequate and available land as well as appropriate services such as the provision of water and disposal of sewage. This is not the case in many parts of the country.


The people are unemployed and live in inadequate structures they call homes. Basic human rights mean nothing to them but remain an elite conversation in the ivory towers of this country.


In many parts, the elderly and their children share their accommodation, and up to 15 to 30 people are found in one room sharing a single toilet.


Adequate housing can only be possible if the state expropriates land without compensation for the benefit of the majority of the people. Black people often literally live on top of each other, with their toilets and the accumulating garbage presenting serous health hazards indeed.


Section 27 of the Constitution also enshrines the right to social security, food and water but one in four persons in South Africa goes to bed hungry every night. The people are jobless, landless and hopeless. Section 29 states that everyone has the right to a basic education including adult basic education, Abet. [Time expired.]













Mr Z S MAKHUBELE: Hon Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers, hon members, it is a difficult week indeed for the nation as we mourn and celebrate the passing away of Minister Collins Chabane and the two VIP protectors, Sergeant Sekele and Lentsoane, who died in the course of duty on 15 March 2015.


The spear has fallen and it is our task to take the baton and run with it in pursuit of the transformation agenda that hon Chabane championed.


Comrade Collins “Animal” Chabane was a true servant of the people, a revolutionary and a great man in his own way. May their souls rest in eternal peace.


Every time I ascend this podium to make a contribution to any debate on behalf of the ANC, I feel very honoured and I do so, consciously, on behalf of the millions of people who have voted the ANC into power, but equally so for those who have perished for the cause of our struggle for liberation in order for us to be where we are today. [Applause.]


It is an undisputed fact that the ANC, as a liberation movement has since its inception fought for the liberation of our people who had been oppressed and exploited under colonialism and apartheid.


In South Africa, subjugation of human rights of the nonwhites, in particular Blacks and Indians, existed long before the institutionalisation of gross violations of human rights as promulgated in apartheid socioeconomic and political legislation and policies from 1948 onwards.


In their paper, a contribution to the publication, Reflections on Democracy and Human Rights: A Decade of the South African Constitution, by the South African Human Rights Commission, SAHRC, Landsberg and McKay alluded to the fact that South Africa had four centuries of oppression which started in the 17th century.


By the way, the wars of resistance were fought long before the formation of the ANC in 1912 as the South African Native National Congress, SANNC. These wars were a response to several pieces of legislation passed from 1856, which sought to subjugate the rights of nonwhites.


The SANNC was a black liberation movement formed to fight against further oppression resulting from the Union Government segregation policies. These policies were meant to control the blacks, famously known as the natives, and the supremacy of the whites, the Afrikaners and English.


The formation of the ANC witnessed an end of an era and the beginning of another, when our people saw the struggle for liberation not as particular tribes or ethnic groupings. They were to use the ANC as a political instrument at their disposal in their fight for freedom based on their practical and painful experiences.


The promulgation of the Native Land Act of 1913, and subsequent Acts which were passed, in the main to disinherit the indigenous people of South Africa of their land, intensified the need for the black people to fight for their human rights.


Through the engagement with the colonial and apartheid regimes at various stages the ANC policy development evolved naturally. That saw the development of the 1923 Bill of Rights, the African Claims of 1943, and the Women’s Charter in 1956, and most importantly, the Freedom Charter in 1955. There were other similar policy documents, for example, the Harare Declaration.


These documents, developed by the ANC during the struggle for liberation, underline and confirm South African’s long-standing and systematic development of policies affirming human rights; and these largely contributed to and informed the Constitution of the Republic at the dawn of freedom.


Hon Deputy Chairperson, allow me briefly to discuss each milestone outlined by the movement led by the visionary and collective leadership of the ANC. Firstly, in 1923, the South African Native National Congress assembled at its annual convention on 24 May. This was the representative organisation of African from all the then four provinces of the Union of South Africa.


The convention adopted the African Bill of Rights, and the first and fundamental right was, and I quote:


  1. That the Bantu inhabitants of the Union have, as human beings, the indisputable right to a place of abode in this land of their fathers.
  2. That all Africans have, as the sons of this soil, the God-given right to unrestricted ownership of land in this, the land of their birth.


These were but some of the progressive resolutions of the 1923 annual conference, which confirms the ANC’s long history as a human-rights-based organisation.


Secondly, the African Claims of 1943 was a result of the ANC annual conference resolution in December 1942 to request President Dr A B Xuma to appoint a committee to study the Atlantic Charter and draft a bill of rights for presentation to the peace conference at the end of the Second World War. Accordingly an Atlantic Charter Committee was established consisting of prominent African professionals and intellectuals, and Prof Z K Mathews was elected as its chairman. The committees’ report was adopted by the ANC at its annual conference on 16 December 1943.


The ANC in 1943 had already accepted women as members of the organisation, and in the same year the ANC Women’s League was formed. In 1947 the ANC signed an agreement with the Natal and other Indian Congresses, in what became known as the Three Doctors’ Pact, which saw the deepening of relations between them.


The Formation of Defiance against Unjust Laws launched jointly by the ANC and the South African Indian Congress, SAIC, was one of the nonviolent and passive resistance campaigns. Resistance to the pass laws intensified during the 1950s.


Thirdly, the Women’s Charter was adopted at the founding conference of the Federation of the South African Women, Fedsaw, in Johannesburg on 17 April 1954. The Charter in terms of a single society declared that:


We women do not form a society separate from men. There is only one society, and it is made up of women and men. As women we share the problems and anxieties of our men, and join hands with them to remove social evils and obstacles to progress.


The Charter called for the enfranchisement of men and women of all races; equality of opportunity in employment; equal pay for equal rights; equal work in relation to property; marriage and children; and the removal of all laws and customs that deny women such equality.


On 9 August 1956, Fedsaw organised a march of approximately 20 000 to the Union Buildings in Pretoria to protest against the pass laws. This was one of the organisation’s most important campaigns.


Fourthly, the Congress of the People adopted the Freedom Charter on 26 June 1955, in Kliptown, Johannesburg. The President of the ANC declared 1960 the Year of the Pass. The Freedom Charter became the common programme enshrining the hopes and aspirations of all the progressive people of South Africa.


If we look at our history, one can make an observation that our people have been their own liberators. Our generation should continue to advance and deepen the culture of human rights and let the masses of our people to be the masters of their own destiny. We call on all our people to actively defend human rights.


The delegates to the Congress of the People, where the Freedom Charter was adopted — whites, Africans, coloureds, Indians and all our people from various corners of the country — all agreed that all they wanted to see happen was enshrined in this Freedom Charter.


Nonracialism was then cemented. Nonracialism is not merely the absence of racism but much more than that. I thank you.


Ms E LOUW: Hon Chair, through you, I just want to put it on record to hon Khubayi that at least I do not paint my nails during Parliament’s time while I am supposed to do the people’s work. [Applause.] [Laughter.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon member, that’s not a point of order. I will not consider it. Hon Godi, continue with the debate.












Mr N T GODI: Deputy Chairperson, comrades and hon members, I dedicate my speech to the memory of the fallen of Langa and Sharpeville; to the memory of Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe; and to the memory of about 30 000 marchers who came to the gates of hell, demanding to see the devil himself.


The marchers, led by the likes of Clarence Makwetu and Phillip Kgosana, came to the gates of Parliament demanding to see the then Prime Minister of the white minority government, to demand the release of Sobukwe and other leaders; to protest the murder of our people; and to demand an end to the pass laws.


The pervasive inequality and the gut-wrenching poverty that is still the lot of the majority is a violation of the dignity of the person. Yes, our Constitution and laws guarantee fundamental human rights, but we need to move towards addressing the material needs of our people. Freedom must add material meaning to the lives of our people. When we fought for freedom we wanted to see the lives of our people move forward.


The APC believes that unless we change the relations of production, we will not deal with the inequality and poverty that dehumanises our people. Their right to live happy and fulfilling lives will be a dream perpetually deferred.


The APC believes that only socialism can guarantee and actualise the political, social and economic rights of all in society. As we celebrate Human Rights Day this weekend, let’s spare a thought for those who struggle to survive in rural areas, on farms, in the mines and slums of our land.


As we celebrate Human Rights Day, let’s commit ourselves to protecting and advancing the rights of workers and women, in particular, from labour brokers and patriarchy, respectively.


Our rights are enshrined in the Constitution and we are all equal before the law, but these rights, and equality, can only be fully realised in practice, according to Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. Thank you. [Applause.]















Me A M DREYER: Mnr die Adjunkvoorsitter, ek oefen vandag my menseregte uit deur in my moedertaal te praat.


Die DA het ’n trotse rekord as kampvegter van menseregte. Die DA was daar toe die Grondwet, waarin die Handves van Regte ingeskryf en ingebed is, onderhandel was en deur alle Suid-Afrikaners aanvaar was. Dit behoort nie aan een faksie of aan een party in hierdie land nie; dit behoort aan ons almal. [Applous.]


Mnr die Voorsitter, voordat ek enigsins verder gaan, moet ek kommentaar lewer op die agb lid Davids wie hier so skuins voor my sit. In my 10 jaar wat ek in hierdie Parlement is het ek nog nooit so ’n verdelende en rassistiese toespraak gehoor nie. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Dit het gespreek van suiwer haat teenoor haar medemens. Dit, terwyl die tema van vandag se onderwerp is: Building a caring society. [Die bou van ’n samelewing wat omgee.] Is dit die manier hoe sy dit wil doen? Ek glo nie so nie. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Dit is ’n perfekte demonstrasie van wat menseregte nie is nie. En, om sout in die wonde te vryf, toe staan die ander ANC lede op aan hierdie kant en gee vir haar ’n staande applous, nadat sy gepraat het. Ek glo dat Madiba in sy graf omdraai. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Oor die Weskaap se regering het sy ’n klomp goed gesê. Ek wil drie feite noem:


Eerstens, dit is nie wat ons sê nie. Die Ouditeur-generaal gee jaar na jaar skoon oudits vir die Weskaap, want hulle bestee die geld op ’n skoon en eerlike manier. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Tweedens, die sentrale regering se eie moniteringsdepartement het die Weskaap aanbeveel en aangewys as die bes-regeerde provinsie in Suid-Afrika. [Applous.]


Laastens, die belangrikste van alles is die kiesers; dit gaan om die kiesers. Ons is hier vir die kiesers en die kiesers het in die vorige verkiesing vir die DA in die Weskaap ’n vergrote mandaat gegee om verder daar te regeer. [Tussenwerpsels.]


In skerp kontras met die agb lid Davids, het Minister Mthethwa baie mooi en rustig gepraat, en dit was aangenaam om na hom te luister. Baie dankie daarvoor, agb Minister. Die Minister het egter hoogdrawende woorde gebruik en van ideale gepraat. Minister, daar is ’n groot verskil tussen planne maak en uitvoering daaraan gee, en die realiteit op die grond sien dikwels vir die gewone kiesers heel anders daar uit. Die regering se dagdrome is in werklikheid dikwels die kiesers se nagmerries.


Kom ons kyk na gehalte onderwys, want agb lid Dikgale het juis gepraat van die regte van kinders, ons jeug. Hulle is ons toekoms. Kom ons kyk na die regte van kinders en wat ons met hulle maak.


Onderwysers in staatskole kan dikwels self nie die toetse slaag van die vak wat hulle onderrig nie. Onder die ANC regering word skoolboeke in Limpopo nie afgelewer nie. Onder die ANC regering val die helfte van kinders wat Graad 1 begin uit en bereik nooit eers matriek nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Die ministers weet dit en daarom stuur hulle hul eie kinders na privaatskole toe.


In teenstelling hiermee, het die DA in die Weskaap die beste deurvoer syfer. Met ander woorde, die meeste kinders wat in Graad 1 begin gaan deur en op die einde skryf hulle matriek. Dit is deel van ’n samelewing wat omgee.


Daar is heelwat gepraat van water en sanitasie en die reg op waardigheid. Die agb lid Mohai het gepraat van die “access to water and sanitation”. [toegang tot water en sanitasie.] adjunk minister Chohan het ook gepraat oor waardigheid, maar, soos my kollega Tarnia Baker uitgewys het, wanneer kinders in pit-toilette verdrink, waar is die waardigheid daarin; en wanneer gemeenskappe vir weke sonder water sit, waar is die waardigheid daarin?


Terwyl ministers in die luukse woonbuurt Bryntirion in Pretoria met vyfster-geriewe woon, sterf 13 babas in Sannieshof weens riool-besoedelde water.


In die Weskaap waar die DA regeer, gee ons om. Daar is geen pit-toilette nie en paaie is sigbaar beter as in enige ander deel van die land. Vra vir enige persoon van enige ander provinsie wat onlangs in die Weskaap gekom het, en die eerste ding wat hulle opmerk is die goeie instandhouding van paaie. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Die agb lid Mashabela van die EFF – my kollega daar – beklemtoon eiendomsreg. Dit is baie belangrik en ek stem met haar saam. Eiendomsreg is ook baie belangrik, ook vir die DA, en ons wil hê dat meer mense eienaars van grond moet wees.


Wat doen die ANC egter? Minister Jeremy Cronin wie na my gaan praat, is intussen hard besig om die wetsontwerp op onteiening deur te voer met mag en mening, maar hulle beskik nie eens oor ’n bateregister nie. Hulle weet nie eens wat hulle het nie!


Terwyl die ANC eiendomme verwater en wegvat, gee die DA eiendomsregte aan mense. Sedert 2012, het meer as 13 000 mense van voorheen benadeelde areas in Kaapstad die transportaktes vir hul huise ontvang. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Kom ons praat oor veiligheid. Een van die mees basiese regte is die reg tot lewe. Minister Mthethwa, die eerste taak van die staat is om sy burgers se veiligheid te verseker. In hierdie debat is die uiters geweldige aanvale op weerlose mense ook uitgewys. Hierdie reg op veiligheid is die eerste verantwoordelikheid van ’n staat, en daarom word dit baie duidelik in ons Grondwet uitgestippel.


Dit is die taak van die polisie om misdaad te voorkom, te beveg en te ondersoek, maar wat gebeur in die werklikheid? Moord en roof neem toe – moord met 5% en roof met verswarende omstandighede met 13%.


Daarmee neem vertroue in die polisie af. In 2012, het 60% van Suid-Afrikaners nog die polisie vertrou, maar deesdae is dit minder as die helfde van Suid-Afrikaners. Daarom neem die burgery ook toenemend self verantwoordelikheid vir hul veiligheid. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ja.


’n Goeie voorbeeld hiervan is die burgerregte-organisasie AfriForum, wat sy eie 911 nooddiens verlede jaar ingestel het. Dit is 24 uur per dag, elke dag van die jaar, beskikbaar. Mense moet betaal om lede te wees, maar hulle doen dit graag want hulle kry goeie diens, in teenstelling met die regering se dienste.


’n Hoof rede vir hierdie gebrekkige dienslewering is egter kader-ontplooiing. Die President se vriende, familie en diegene wat vir hom van vervolging kan beskerm, kry poste met vet salarisse, of hulle nou die werk kan doen of nie. Ons sien dit by die Suid-Afrikaanse Uitsaaikorporasie, SAUK, Eskom, die Valke, die Nasionale Vervolgingsgesag, NVG, en helaas nou ook by die Onafhanklike Verkiesingskomissie, OVK.


Dit, agb Voorsitter, is ’n miskenning van die gewone kieser se reg op gelyke behandeling en gelyke beregtiging. Agb lid Chohan het gepraat van die dignity of all. [waardigheid van almal.] Ons stem saam.


Terwyl die ANC regering dus ons toekoms en ons land se kinders verwoes met swak onderwys, sorg die DA dat kinders so lank as moontlik op skool bly, want ons gee om.


Terwyl pasiënte in staatshospitale vir jare op operasies wag, lewer die DA regering in die Weskaap medisyne aan ou mense by hul huise af, want ons gee om. [Applous.]


Terwyl die ANC eiendomsreg verwater, gee die DA transportakte aan eienaars sodat hulle sekerheid oor hul huise kan bekom, want die DA gee om. Die menseregte van elke burger, ook die geringste, is vir die DA ’n prioriteit. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.]














THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Deputy Chairperson and hon members, in January 1929, 96 years ago, here in Cape Town, a South African political party adopted a remarkable and, at the time, an unprecedented programmatic perspective. It called for one person, one vote; for democratic majority rule; for what it called a black republic, to reflect the demographic realities of South Africa – but with equal rights for all South Africans, white and black.


The party in question was the Communist Party of South Africa, as it was then known. [Interjections.] The 1929 resolution of this party also called on its members to work closely with what it described as the nascent or emergent, national liberation organisations - and the ANC was specifically mentioned.


At first, I don’t think the Communist Party of South Africa fully grasped the wisdom and potential of its own strategic perspective. It was only in the latter part of the 1930s, and with the leadership of outstanding revolutionaries, like Moses Kotane and J B Marks, who were both communists and ANC leaders, that this appreciation was developed, in theory and in practice.


At the heart of this perspective was the realisation that, in our South African reality, the struggle for an egalitarian society, for equal rights for all who live in our country, was of necessity and intimately connected with the struggle for the national liberation of an oppressed, black majority.


As a well-known 19th century political philosopher - he had a big beard and spoke English with a German accent - writing about the English colonial oppression of Ireland, said:


A people that oppresses another can never itself be free.


In short, there is a deep connection between the democratic struggle for equal rights for all and the national liberation struggles of oppressed peoples against colonialism, neocolonialism and all other forms of national and racial oppression.


The white minority in South Africa - into which, yes, I was born – we, the collective beneficiaries of centuries of aggressive colonial dispossession and of decades of white minority rule, this white minority into which I was born, itself required the advance of a national liberation struggle of the black majority.


It was the overwhelming electoral victory of the ANC in 1994 that created the conditions for all of us – all of us as South Africans, black and white – to finally live within a shared, nonracial democracy with one of the most progressive Constitutions in the world. [Applause.]


It’s a Constitution that affirms equal rights for all. These rights are both individual but also, importantly, collective rights; of taal en kultuur [language and culture] - yes, hon Dreyer, of language and culture; of belief – yes, hon Dudley, both those who are believers in God and those who are nonbelievers. We all have the right to aspire to our beliefs.


There are workers’ collective rights to organise; and the rights of communities dispossessed of property to restitution and equitable redress.


However, the 1994 democratic breakthrough and the 1996 Constitution were not the end of the process. They were, and remain, important bridgeheads and entry points for an ongoing struggle to provide real, substantive content to our nonracial democracy; to ensure the progressive realisation of the rights that are enshrined in the Bill of Rights. In short, an ongoing national, democratic struggle, a radical, national, democratic struggle is required in order, not just to advance, but to defend the very advances that we made in the mid-1990s in terms of our democracy, our Constitution and the nonracial society in which we live.


This is a reality, however, about which the DA, in particular, is in deep denial. This is why the DA gets into such a tangle over employment equity – a tangle that was to lead to the demise of Lindiwe Mazibuko, their former leader in Parliament. [Interjections.] This is why, last week in this very House, a DA member could tell us, without blushing, that the problems of this country didn’t begin in 1652 but in 1994. I mean, what blatant racist amnesia! [Interjections.]What else can you say it is?


Now, DA leader, Premier Zille, is much more sophisticated and wouldn’t say something as stupid as that. However, it’s precisely the same outlook that was at play when, last year, after the elections, she told a journalist in the United Kingdom — not here in South Africa — that the DA wasn’t ever expecting to win a national electoral majority. Rather, she said, the DA game plan is to divide the ANC. This is how she put it:


The battle is on in the ANC. It’s a huge contestation. The battle within the ANC is who controls the brand.


As if the ANC was a brand! As if we were some commodity on the market! [Interjections.] No, Premier Zille, the ANC is the story of millions and millions of South Africans in a century-long struggle ... [Applause.] ... in the face of a crime against humanity and the ongoing legacy of that crime in our society, as we speak today. [Interjections.]


Let us return, however, to what Premier Zille said in her interview - and this is not making it up; this is quoting directly from the interview:


Who gets to hold on to the biggest political brand in South Africa?


She was talking about the ANC, thinking we’re marketing. She wasn’t talking about the DA. She said:


Is it the people who support the Constitution or the people who support the national democratic revolution?


She talks about a division between these two things – that’s their problem. Eventually, she says:


The realignment of politics will happen around the principles espoused in the Constitution and our job ...


 ... meaning the DA’s job ...


... is to be a catalyst to bring all the people together who support the Constitution, the rule of law, and support for an open-market economy.


[Interjections.] Now, you can go with a large magnifying glass, the largest you can find, and go through the Constitution. You will not find a single reference to an open-market economy in our Constitution. [Interjections.] [Applause.]


To return to the main point, Premier Zille imagines that there is a division within the ANC and its alliance; between those supporting the Constitution and the rule of law and those supporting an ongoing national democratic revolution. There is absolutely no such gap whatsoever. [Interjections.]


We are united in the conviction that the ongoing national democratic struggle and the Constitution are not in contradiction with each other. On the contrary, unless we press ahead with determination, South Africa’s democratic and constitutional advances will be eroded and dissipated. [Interjections.]


We were told by the hon Mahlangu, who was the opening DA speaker, about an open-opportunity society. Now, let me read what the DA says about an open-opportunity society:


In an open-opportunity society, your path in life is not determined by the circumstances of your birth, including your material circumstances ...


they don’t like to use the word “wealth”, so they say “material” ...


and regardless of your demographic ...


they don’t like to use the word “race”  - regardless of those circumstances ...


but rather by your individual talents and your individual efforts. That is why, in an open-opportunity society, a child born in poverty ...


Clearly, in their open-opportunity society, children will still be born in poverty because they’re not trying to address that!


... should, nevertheless, be able to become a brain surgeon, provided he ...


I think they also meant he and she.


... has the talent and puts in the individual effort required to succeed.


This is a B-grade version of Oprah Winfrey’s world view. You don’t need radical transformation of poverty and inequality. What you need is to create opportunities for some talented individuals to rise. It’s a horrible, myopic, self-satisfied and ultimately cruel illusion for the majority of South Africans. {Applause.]


The Freedom Charter, in both its opening statement and its closing clause, firmly locates its vision within the context of winning national sovereignty. When we talk about the national question and the national democratic revolution, we often forget about national sovereignty, and yet, it’s so important. In 1994, we seemed all to agree that we finally won a one-person-one-vote, nonracial, majority-rule democracy.


This historic victory, however, was gained in a global situation in which there are powerful forces that actively seek to erode the significance of national democratic mandates. Let them have their majority rule, but we will erode it. This is the case, even in the advanced economies of the West.


In 2007, for instance, Alan Greenspan, who was then the US Federal Reserve – the Reserve Bank - Governor, was asked which candidate he supported in the US presidential elections. His response was extremely revealing. This is what he said, and again, this is a direct quotation:


We are fortunate that, thanks to globalisation, policy decisions in the United States have been largely replaced by the global market. It hardly makes any difference at all who will be the next President. The world is governed by market forces.


Now, I’m not sure if Greenspan thought this was a problem for democracy. I don’t think he even cared. However, this casual disregard for democracy and for national electoral mandates was dramatically evidenced, once more, in 2013, with the top-down replacement of two elected governments - one, a right-wing government – in Italy and in Greece, with European Union, EU, sanctioned technocrats representing the interests of German and French bankers.


It’s also playing itself out, right now, with the electoral mandate of Greece’s new Syriza party actively being blocked by the same banking interests. [Interjections.] So, let’s not collectively, as South Africans, be naive about the world in which we are living.


As our Parliament wobbled on the brink of becoming dysfunctional on the night of the state of the nation address last month, there were other forces outside of this Chamber gleefully watching what was happening in here. These are the forces who would be quite happy to see Parliament gridlocked; to see us become defocused, entwined in a web of filibustering points of order and smart-alec, schoolboy-debating-society arrogance; a Parliament incapable of passing legislation or of attending to its strategic, national responsibilities. Those who are driving Parliament in this direction from inside need to know what game they are playing and whose agenda they are playing into – perhaps unwittingly. [Applause.]


On the very day after the state of the nation wobble, the American Chamber of Commerce in South Africa expressed alarm at what it called a plethora of new pieces of legislation before our Parliament. It said several pending Bills, including the Expropriation Bill, were said to be “of concern” by the American Chamber.


An editorial by their local, thoroughly unpatriotic megaphone, the Business Day, faithfully took up the cudgels on behalf of those interests. [Interjections.] The Bill, it complained, allows for expropriation in the public interest. Precisely! That’s because the Bill of Rights explicitly introduces expropriation in the public interest. Hon Dreyer, of course I am pushing forward for an expropriation Act from Parliament. Why? Because the Constitution requires it. The Bill of Rights requires an expropriation Act, a general law of application. [Applause.]


So, you can’t claim the Constitution on the one hand, and then on the other, complain when we try to implement precisely the requirements of the Bill of Rights and the property clause. [Interjections.] [Applause.]


What the American Chamber and others who don’t like an expropriation Act want in South Africa is for expropriation Acts not to be the subject of South African law; not for disputes to be heard in South African courts in terms of our Constitution, but rather, to be subject to technocratic, foreign arbitration that will favour the interests of the global 0,1%, not the people of South Africa, black and white.


They don’t want reindustrialisation, like this bunch. They don’t want beneficiation of our mineral resources. They don’t want national food security. [Interjections.] They don’t want a Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, Brics, alliance.


Mr M WATERS: Chairperson, on a point of order: The hon Cronin called us “a bunch”. [Interjections.] We are hon members and I think he should withdraw that.


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Hon Cronin, if it is true that you used the word “bunch”, would you please withdraw that and refer to hon members.


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: I am very happy to withdraw the word “bunch”. I think that the point is made, nonetheless. [Laughter.]


This brings me to Henry Kissinger - if we are talking about national sovereignty. Between 1969 and 1977, Kissinger – and I hope I have got some time added, because I was stopped there – played the leading role in US foreign policy. [Interjections.]


During this period, the United States developed a strategic perspective on Southern Africa. It does have everything to do with South Africa, as the “Tar Baby” Option. It argued that the Portuguese colonial regimes in Mozambique and Angola, Ian Smith’s regime in Rhodesia and the apartheid regime controlling Namibia and South Africa were all here to stay. These regimes, it argued, were the only effective agents for constructive change.


Last year, Premier Zille boasted that when the former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, visited South Africa in 2010, he asked to meet her. I am quoting from her speech:


He asked to meet me, to discuss the DA’s growth, and he described our success [the DA’s success] as a project of international significance.




Deputy Chairperson, I rest my case. Thank you very much. [Applause.] [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): Can members just settle down? [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: No, no, I ...


An HON MEMBER: Order, Ndlozi!


Mr M Q NDLOZI: We have been appealing, hon Chairperson, throughout. It’s freezing cold. We have spoken to the Table staff; we have spoken to everybody ... [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): What is the point there? What is the point? [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: It’s freezing cold. Can you please resolve the question of the air conditioning for the next time we come back here? [Interjections.] We want to put it on record. It’s freezing cold! We leave here with the flu.


An HON MEMBER: Point of order! [Interjections.]


The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr R J Tau): All right. [Interjections.] Hon members, order! The problem is being addressed. At the next sitting, I’m sure it won’t be freezing cold. [Interjections.]


Debate concluded.


The House adjourned at 16:50.



No related


No related documents