Hansard: NCOP: Unrevised Hansard

House: National Council of Provinces

Date of Meeting: 25 May 2016

Summary

No summary available.


Minutes

UNREVISED HANSARD



WEDNESDAY, 25 MAY 2016
____

PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES

____

The Council met at 10:02.

The House Chairperson: Committees, Oversight, Co-operative
Government and Intergovernmental Relations took the Chair and
requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or
meditation.

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): I have been informed by the
Whippery that has agreed that there will be no notice of motions or
motions without notice. The Secretary will read the First Order of
the Day.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS - PROTOCOL AMENDING THE MARRAKESH AGREEMENT
ESTABLISHING THE WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION (WTO), INCLUDING ANNEX 1A
ON THE AGREEMENT ON TRADE FACILITATION, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE
NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON TRADE FACILITATION

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 2 of 37

Mr E MAKUE: Hon Chairperson, hon members and our children in the
gallery, welcome. Africa is our beginning and Africa shall be our
ending. May the celebration of Africa Day invoke, renew commitment
determination and vigour for all of us to create a better Africa and
the better world? My input is on the Marrakesh Agreement. However, I
want to quote the words of one of Africa’s greatest leaders, Chief
Albert Luthuli when he received the Noble Peace Prize on 11 December
1961. Our hon Chief said:

This award could not be for me alone, but it can also not be just
for South Africa as a whole, Africa the continent presently is
most deeply torn with strife and most bitterly stricken with
racial conflict.

This was in 1971.

How strange then it is that a man of Africa should be here to
receive an award given for service to the cause of peace and
brotherhood between men.

I am sure that Ntate Luthuli would not mind if I add the sisterhood
and the peace between us all. The Marrakesh Agreement and its Annex
1A is intended to deal with an Agreement on Trade Facilitation and
what is referred to as ATF. This matter was for the first time
raised in Singapore at the Ministerial Conference in 1996. Then in
July 2004, a mandate to clarify and improve the General Agreement on

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 3 of 37

Tariffs and Trade what is also called GATT, Article V for Freedom of
Transit, Article VIII for Fees and Formalities connected with
importation and exportation and Article X, the Publication and
Administration of Trade Regulations was discussed.

This Agreement also aimed at enhancing technical assistance and
capacity building in the area of trade facilitation to improve
effective co-operation between customs and other appropriate
authorities on trade facilitation and customs compliance. The
provisions of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, TFA, in terms of
General Agreement on Tariff and Trade, GATT, is to ensure
transparency and appeals in terms of GATT Article VIII for the
import, export, transit and fees formalities and in terms of GATT
Article V for the issue of transit.

The Agreement also has three Categories: Category A is commitments
that the developing country and a least developed country member
designates for implementation upon entry into force of the TFA, or
in the case of the least developed country, LDC, within one year
after entry into force.

Category B, relates to commitments that the developing country
member or LDC member designates for implementation on a date after
the transitional period of time after the entry into force of the
TFA, and that can be one to five years.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 4 of 37

Category C, relates to commitment at the developing country member
or least developed country member designates or implementation on a
date after a transitional period of time following the entry into
force of the TFA and requiring the acquisition of implementation
capacity through the provision of assistant and support for capacity
building.

Early warning mechanisms have been considered. If a developing
country or a least developed country considers itself to experience
difficulties to implement its commitments by the definitive dates it
has notified, it should notify the trade facilitation, TF,
committee. The developing countries must do these no later than 120
days before expiration, while least developed countries must do it
at least 90 days before such date.

It is important that we recognise that this is a very technical
Agreement of the World Trade Organisation, WTO, but it is an
important one. The WTO also looked at the grace period and dispute
resolution and it has formed a Dispute Resolution Unit. Members can
however resort to the Dispute Resolution Unit to settle disputes
against developing countries and least developing countries.
Developing countries in Category A has two years for that; least
developing countries in Category A have six years and least
developing countries in Category B and C have eight years to do
that.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 5 of 37

The timeframes leading to implementation of the TFA is what it is
important. The TFA is concluded in Bali in 2013. The drafting of
Protocol and Amendments to the Marrakesh Agreement to include the
TFA were handled. The WTO General Council adopted a protocol in
November 2014, and opened this protocol for acceptance. The TFA
entry into force or will enter into force when two-thirds of WTO
members have ratified that.

At the time of the presentation we were informed that the WTO has
108 members and 77 has already given notice of ratification. What
does it mean for South Africa? South Africa emphasised that the
consideration must be given to the impact of the TFA on the regional
integration processes in Africa and working on this in the African
Union. We worked closely with the South African Customs Union,
member states in terms of co-ordinating our respect of commitments.
There is also an inter-departmental working group established and it
developed a list of South Africa Category A commitments, the terms
of reference for establishment of a National Trade Facilitation
Committee and legal opinions were obtained from the Department of
Justice and Constitutional Development and the Department of
International Relations and Co-operation.

What is then the final point to ask? The Cabinet approved the
National Committee on Trade Facilitation to be co-chaired by the
Department of Trade and Industry and the SA Revenue Services. The
first meeting of the National Committee on Trade Facilitation was

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 6 of 37

held on 6 May where it looked at South Africa’s Category A
commitments for submission to the World Trade Organisation. The
Cabinet further approved that the protocol be submitted to
Parliament for ratification - that means the National Assembly and
the NCOP. The protocol was accordingly approved by the National
Assembly already in March 2016. Therefore, it is my pleasure and
honour on behalf of the Select Committee on Trade and International
Relations to present this Marrakesh Agreement, the Protocol
Amendment and Agreement establishing the WTO including Annex A on
the Agreement on Trade Facilitation to the NCOP for ratification. I
thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Thank you. Hon members, allow
me to acknowledge and welcome the future of our beloved country, the
beautiful learners of Zimasa Primary School from Langa here in
Western Cape. [Applause.] That concludes that debate, I shall now
put the question, and the question is that the Report be agreed to.
In accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the
opportunity to make their declaration of vote if they so wish. I
shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this in
an alphabetical order per province.

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Report be adopted.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 7 of 37

In favour: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal,
Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the
Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON CO-OPERATIVE
GOVERNANCE AND TRADITIONAL AFFAIRS – INSPECTION IN LOCO ON NOTICE OF
INTERVENTION ISSUED IN TERMS OF SECTION 139(1)(B) OF CONSTITUTION,
1996, IN THABAZIMBI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY.

Mr M J MOHAPI: Chairperson, the Chief Whip, hon members of the NCOP,
guests, and learners who are the future leaders, as correctly said
by the hon Chairperson, the provincial executive of Limpopo had, on
17 February 2016, considered the progress report of Thabazimbi on
the intervention in terms of section 154 of the Constitution from
August 2015 to January 2016.

The executive council approved that Thabazimbi Local Municipality
should be placed under administration in terms of section 139(1)(b)
of the Constitution and thereafter instructed that the MEC for Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs
assumes the responsibility of the accounting officer on behalf of
Thabazimbi Local Municipality in terms of section 139(1)(b).

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 8 of 37

The basis for invoking section 139(1)(b) of the Constitution is the
following. Thabazimbi Local Municipality started experiencing
challenges around May 2015. A rapid assessment team that of
consisted of officials from the Limpopo Department of Co-operative
Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs, the
provincial Treasury, and Salga Limpopo was established to provide a
fair, objective report on the state of affairs in the municipality.
The task team focused on all key performance areas with specific
recommendations for remedial action or support required for the
municipality.

The task team observed that governance in the municipality was
compromised and that the financial health of the municipality had
deteriorated since the 2011-12 financial year. Further, there were
signs of inability by the council to exercise its oversight role in
municipal affairs, as well as nonadherence to legislation and
policies, for example supply chain management and human resources.

The task team further observed the high litigation costs as a result
of not honouring financial commitments. The municipality was
technically bankrupt and could not sustain itself. The conditional
grant was used for operational expenses. There was increased
irregular expenditure from R73 million in the 2011-12 to
R209 million in 2012-13 due to noncompliance with procurement
processes. The municipal public accounts committee was not
functional due to a lack of support from management, and the

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 9 of 37

municipality’s debt was around R320 million, which exceeded its own
income. An administrator was appointed in the municipality and
tasked with the preparation and implementation of the recovery plan.
His responsibilities were outlined in terms of the terms of
reference.

After deliberations, the select committee is of the view that, since
the financial health of the municipality deteriorated from 2011-12,
sound financial management practices are essential to the long-term
sustainability of the municipality. They underpin the process of
democratic accountability. Weak financial management results in the
misdirection of resources and increases the risk of corruption in a
municipality.

The provincial task team has also observed that good governance in
the municipality was compromised. As the select committee, we
believe that, to ensure good governance, the municipality should act
as a focal point for and the custodian of good governance. The
council should play an active role in the strategic development
process. It should ensure that the long-term strategy and integrated
development plan are aligned to the expectations and needs of
members of the community and other stakeholders. Proper induction
and skills development programmes for councillors are essential to
ensure effective execution of duties.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 10 of 37

Lack of adequate oversight by the political leadership in the
municipality contributed to the lapse of financial and performance
management disciplines. It is clear that practices that promote
clean administration were not entrenched within the daily, weekly
and monthly activities of the municipality, hence the increased
irregular expenditure from R73 million in 2011-12 to R209 million in
2012-13.

Our recommendations are the following. As the select committee, we
recommend that the NCOP approves the intervention in Thabazimbi
Local Municipality in terms of section 139(1)(b) of the
Constitution. The MEC for the provincial Department of Co-operative
Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs and Salga in
Limpopo province should spearhead a capacity-building programme for
councillors and officials in the Thabazimbi Local Municipality to
address capacity challenges or constraints in the municipality. This
capacity-building programme should be implemented within a month
after the adoption of this report.

The MEC for the Department of Co-operative Governance, Human
Settlements and Traditional Affairs, together with the provincial
Treasury in Limpopo, should also conduct a workshop with the
Thabazimbi Local Municipality’s officials on compliance on issues of
financial management. This should incorporate the compensation of
employees, tariff structures and supply chain management.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 11 of 37

The Department of Co-operative Governance, Human Settlements and
Traditional Affairs in Limpopo should table a progress report on the
adjustment of salaries to bring it in line with the National
Treasury Guidelines in Thabazimbi Local Municipality. The progress
report should be submitted to the NCOP within 30 days of the
adoption of this report.

The Department of Co-operative Governance, Human Settlements and
Traditional Affairs should table quarterly reports, as well as a
termination of intervention report to the NCOP and the Limpopo
Provincial Legislature.

The termination of intervention report by the Department of Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs
should include the forensic investigation report, as approved by the
provincial executive council.

After the 2016 local government election, the Select Committee on
Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs should facilitate a
workshop on the constitutional, procedural and substantive matters
related to section 139 constitutional interventions with all
municipalities in our country. This is what we recommend,
Chairperson. I thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 12 of 37

Question put: That the Report be adopted.

IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal,
Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the
Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE
NOMINATION OF THE CANDIDATES TO SERVE AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PUBLIC
ON THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, AS PER SECTION
83(2)(H) OF THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ACT 111 OF 1998

Mr D L XIMBI: Chairperson, hon members and the Chief Whip of the
Council. In term of Section 83 of Correctional Services Act 111 of
1998, the Minister must appoint a National Council for Correctional
Services, NCCS. The primary function of the NCCS is to advise the
Minister in developing policy with regard to the correctional system
and the sentencing process.

Certain members of the NCCS also sit in the Correctional Supervision
and Parole Review Boards to review the decisions of the parole board
as and when referred. In the advert placed by the department in
April 2016, the Minister stated that he was particularly interested
in identifying candidates with expertise in either one or more of
the following fields: representatives of the nongovernmental

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 13 of 37

organisations working within the field of correctional services,
experts in clinical psychology, academics with expertise in criminal
law, criminology, penology, or restorative justice and experts in
community justice system.

Members of the NCCS will be appointed for a period of three years.
The Select Committee on Security and Justice, having considered a
letter dated 25 April 2016 from the Minister of Justice and
Correctional Services, requesting the consideration of the shortlist
of the candidates to the appointed as representatives of the public
on the National Council for Correctional Services in terms of
Section 83(2)(h) of the Correctional Service Act of 1998. Act 111 of
1998 referred to it recommends that the NCOP approve the following
candidates for consideration by the Minister of Justice and
Correctional Services to serve as representatives of the public on
the National Council for Correctional Services:

In category one - experts in clinical psychology: Mr I L de Klerk,
Ms T S Monyamane and Ms L U Z Rataemane. Category two is
representatives of nongovernmental organisations working with the
field of correctional services: Adv K A Mahumani and Rev J P
Clayton. Category three the academics with expertise in criminal
law, criminology, penology and restorative justice: Mr A Vilakazi
and Dr V Chetty. Category four with expertise in community justice
system: Mr M Nkopho.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 14 of 37

The Minister considered increasing that number of candidates with
expertise in the community justice system. The Select Committee on
Security and Justice reports that it has concluded its deliberations
on the NCCS candidates list and recommends that the NCOP approve the
recommendation as tabled. Thank you very much Chairperson.

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Report be adopted.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): In accordance with Rule 71, I
shall first allow provinces an opportunity to make their
declarations of vote if they so wish.

We shall now proceed to the voting on the question. I shall do this
in alphabetical order per province.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Eastern Cape?

AN HON MEMBER (Eastern Cape): Eastern Cape iyayixhasa le ngxelo.
[Supports the report.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Free State?

AN HON MEMBER (Free State): [Inaudible.]

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 15 of 37

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Gauteng?

AN HON MEMBER (Gauteng): Gauteng agrees.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): KwaZulu-Natal?

AN HON MEMBER (KwaZulu-Natal): IKwaZulu-Natal iyayiseka. [KwaZuluNatal supports it.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Limpopo?

AN HON MEMBER (Limpopo): Limpopo votes in favour.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Mpumalanga?

AN HON MEMBER (Mpumalanga): IMpumalanga iyasekela [Mpumalanga
supports].

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Northern Cape?

AN HON MEMBER (Northern Cape): Northen Cape agrees.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): North West?

AN HON MEMBER (North West): Bokone Bophirima ya dumalana. [North
West agrees.]

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 16 of 37

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Western Cape?

AN HON MEMBER (Western Cape): Western Cape supports.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Thank you, nine provinces
voted in favour. I therefore declare the report as agreed to in
terms of Section 65 of the Constitution.

CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE
PROCLAMATIONS MADE IN TERMS OF SECTION 25 OF THE PROTECTION OF
CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY AGAINST TERRORIST AND RELATED ACTIVITIES ACT,
2004 (ACT NO. 33 OF 2004).

Mr D L XIMBI: Chairperson, the United Nations has set up a sanctions
committee which must list individuals and entities who are part of
or linked to Al-Qaida and the Taliban. The Protection of
Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities
Act, 2004 provides for enforcement of these sanctions. The
notifications by the President in respect of entities identified by
the United Nations Security Council, under section 25 of the
Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related
Activities Act, Act No. 33 of 2004 are legislatively ...

Mr G MICHALAKIS: I rise on a point of order. It seems that the
member is busy with the fourth order and not the third one of the
day. He seems to have confused the speech for the third order with

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 17 of 37

the one of the fourth order. The third order for the day is the
Correctional Services Councillor. He is busy with the United Nations
Terrorism Report. On a point of clarity, I am not quite sure if it
is I or him who is confused.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Let me assist you. Now, we
are dealing with the fourth order, so, the hon member the
Chairperson Mr Ximbi is in order. We are dealing with the fourth
order now hon Michalakis. We are done with the third order.

Mr D L XIMBI: As I said the notifications by the President in
respect of entities identified by the United Nations Security
Council, under section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional
Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, Act No. 33
of 2004 are legislatively mandated through a Government Gazette
proclamation.

In the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and
Related Activities Act, Act 33 of 2004 provides for the following:
to provide for measures to prevent and combat terrorist and related
activities; to provide for an offence of terrorism and other
offences associated or connected with terrorist activities; to
provide for convention offences; to give effect to international
instruments dealing with terrorist and related activities; to
provide for a mechanism to comply with United Nations Security
Council Resolutions, which are binding on member states, in respect

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 18 of 37

of terrorist and related activities; to provide for measures to
prevent and combat the financing of terrorist and related
activities; to provide for investigative measures in respect of
terrorist and related activities; and to provide for matters
connected within.

According to section 26 Parliamentary Supervision, every
proclamation issued under section 25 shall be tabled in Parliament
for its consideration and decision and Parliament may thereupon take
such steps as it may consider necessary. The Select Committee on
Security and Justice received a briefing on the Proclamations made
in terms of section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy
against Terrorist and Related Activities Act, Act No. 33 of 2004
tabled in Parliament on 18 November 2015 and 11 May 2016.05.25.

In terms of the briefing, it has become imperative to ensure that
Al-Qaida and the Taliban and related terrorist groups are denied the
most important facilities required in order to commit terrorist
acts, namely funding, access to weapons and the ability to travel
freely. The United Nations Security Council has set up a sanctions
Committee, which must list individuals and entities who are part of
or which are linked to Al-Qaida and the Taliban. Member States of
the United Nations are obliged in terms of Chapter VII of the UN
Charter to give effect to the following in respect of individuals
and entities so listed, by means of enforcing in respect of such

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 19 of 37

individuals’ groups or entities which are assets freeze arms embargo
and travel ban.

The Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and
Related Activities Act provides for the enforcement of these
sanctions, publication in the Gazette of the Proclamations made by
the President as well as Parliamentary oversight, and the Security
Council has appointed an Ombudsperson to investigate submission for
delisting.

The Select Committee on Security and Justice reported that it has
concluded its deliberations on the Proclamations made in terms of
section 25 of the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against
Terrorist and Related Activities Act, Act 33 of 2004 and recommends
that the National Council of Provinces approve the said
proclamations. I thank you.

Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Hon Chair, I rise on a point of order and act on a
point of privilege. I request from the Chair that I withdraw the
vote the Western Cape on the previous order. I was [Interjections.]
can I just ...

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): No, allow her, ... order ...
sorry hon Labuschagne. Order members! Let us allow hon Labuschagne
to say what she wants to raise.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 20 of 37

Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: I will just explain. In the programme the orders
were changed and so I was busy and have not looked at it. As a
result I voted on the previous constitutional one incorrectly. I
therefore withdraw the vote of the Western Cape for the previous
one. Can I do so please? I will not do a declaration but I will
submit the declaration in writing. Thank you.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Hon Labuschagne, were you
referring to the third order?

Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Yes Chair.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Is there any other province
that intends to do the same? Hon members I am dealing with heads of
delegation. Western Cape has admitted that they have made a mistake.
[Interjections.] No, you cannot speak on behalf of the Western Cape
not unless you want to do something on behalf of Mpumalanga. Do you
intend to withdraw on behalf of Mpumalanga or you have made a
mistake? [Interjections.]

Mr J W W JULIUS: I rise on a pint of order Chairperson. It shows
that these provinces do not have the mandate to if they can talk and
change here. They do not have a mandate. Western Cape made a mistake
with that mandate. If only other provinces can change ...
[Interjections.]

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 21 of 37

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): No, hon Julius take your
seat. Let me make a ruling. Take your seat hon Thobejane. Let me
make a ruling.

In view of or in the light of the correction that has been made by
the Western Cape, let me say eight provinces voted in favour. I
therefore, declare the report as agreed to in terms of section 65 of
the Constitution. Nothing is changing. Thank you, members.

Mr S G THOBEJANE: Chairperson, my point of order is in terms of
procedure. Yu ask the House towards voting on the fourth item on the
programme. Instead of finishing that business something comes in
between. If I were to say to you can you allow us to finish the
fourth order on your programme and if there is anything you want to
entertain with the Western Cape let it be entertained at that
appropriate time. Can we finish this business on the fourth item?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Unfortunately hon Thobejane I
have already made the ruling. I have disposed order number three.
Now, we are dealing with the fourth order.

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Report be adopted.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 22 of 37

IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal,
Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.

Report accordingly adopted in accordance with section 65 of the
Constitution

FINANCIAL INTELLIGENCE CENTRE AMENDMENT BILL

(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

Mr C J DE BEER: Hon Chairperson, the Financial Intelligence Centre
Amendment Bill updates South Africa’s anti-money-laundering and
combating of terrorism financing legislation so that it aligns with
best practices and standards as set by the OECD Financial Action
Task Force and the United Nations.

The Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill also closes gaps
identified by the FATF mutual evaluation on South Africa, conducted
in 2009. Further, the Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill
enables South Africa to effectively implement the United Nations
Security Council resolutions relating to the freezing of assets and
give effects to the Constitutional Court decision requiring that the
Financial Intelligence Centre, the FIC, obtains a search warrant for
nonroutine inspections.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 23 of 37

The Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill also has the
following objectives: to establish a stronger anti-money-laundering
and combating of terrorism financing regulatory framework; to
provide for the adoption of a risk-based approach to consumer due
diligence; to align the country with international anti-moneylaundering and the combating of the financing of terrorism
standards, called the CFT; to enhance customers to the diligence of
financial institution, especially concerning domestic and foreign
influential persons and beneficial owners; to provide for the
implementation of the United Nations Security council resolutions
relating to the freezing of assets of persons suspected of financial
crimes; to dissolve the Money-Laundering Advisory Council by
repealing and deleting Chapter 2 of the principal Act; to enhance
the supervisory powers of the FIC; and to enhance administrative and
enforcement mechanisms within the centre and other related
institutions.

Through amendments, the Bill has extended the objectives of the
Financial Intelligence Centre Act by adding that the FIC should make
information collected by it available to the following
organisations: The National Prosecuting Authority and Intelligence
Service; the SA Revenue Service; the Independent Police
Investigative Directorate; the Intelligence Division of the SA
National Defence Force; a Special Investigation Unit, the Office of
the Public Protector; and an investigative division in an organ of
state or a supervisory body.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 24 of 37

A number of subsections were inserted into the original Act. The
Bill will result in institutions, especially within the financial
sector, increasing their vigilance and implementing risk management
systems that will promote ethical behaviours within the sector.
Parliament has to receive a report at least once a year on the
implementation of the Bill.

The Select Committee on Finance, having examined the Financial
Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill [B 33B- 2015] (National Assembly
– sec 75) as referred to it and classified by the JTM as a sec 75
Bill, reports the Bill without amendments. I so move! [Applause.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: COMMITTEES AND OVERSIGHT (Mr A J Nyambi):
Thank you. That concludes the debate. I shall now put the question.

QUESTION PUT: That the Bill be agreed to. In accordance with Rule
63, I shall first allow political parties to make their declaration
of votes if they so wish. We shall now proceed to the voting on the
question. Members will vote by pressing ‘in favour’, ‘against’, or
‘abstain’ marked buttons.

Voting:
Members can now vote. Have all members voted? If any member has
mistakenly pressed an incorrect button, they should please press the
correct one. Can hon Mohai be ... [Interjections.]

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 25 of 37

Mr W F FABER: [Inaudible.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: COMMITTEES AND OVERSIGHT (Mr A J Nyambi): Do
we have those that are abstaining? I want to be sure if everybody’s
voted.

Let me confirm with hon Khawula and hon Engelbrecht. I don’t want to
assume. The Table Staff indicates that the voting machine reflects
something here. Are you abstaining hon Engelbrecht? Have you voted?
It is showing that you have not voted yet though. Can you ...
[Interjections.] No, you can indicate! In favour! Hon Khawula?
[Interjections.]

Mr M KHAWULA: I have voted!

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: COMMITTEES AND OVERSIGHT (Mr A J Nyambi):
But, can you also indicate, please? [Laughter.] Thank you!

Thirty four members voted in favour; no abstention, and no members
voted against. The majority of members have voted in favour. I
therefore declare the Bill agreed to in terms of sec 75 of the
Constitution. [Applause.]

PERFORMING ANIMALS PROTECTION BILL

(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 26 of 37

Mr O SEFAKO: Hon Chair, hon Chief Whip, hon members, distinguished
guests, I want to say to our learners, the future of South Africa is
in your hands, build it now.

The background to the Report of the Select Committee on Land and
Mineral Resources on the Performing Animals Protection Amendment
Bill B9B of 2015 is that, historically, the protection of animals in
South Africa has been regulated by two Acts: The Animals Protection
Act of 1962 and the Performing Animals Protection Act of 1935. The
general view across the sector is that both pieces of legislation
are old and require revision.

The principle Act has, for many years, been used in conjunction with
the Animals Protection Act. These became the two main pieces of
legislation that have been used in the country for many years to
regulate the treatment performing animals and the prevention of
cruelty to animals.

The administration of these Acts was transferred from the Department
of Justice to the Department of Agriculture in 1994.

In 2012, the World Organisation of Animal Health, also known as OIE,
conducted an oversight visit to South Africa to assess the
performance of veterinary services. At the end of the mission, with
regard to animal welfare, the report indicated that the current

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 27 of 37

legislation is outdated and not harmonised with OIE welfare in the
veterinary services.

With regard to the Constitutional Court ruling on the Performing
Animals Protection Act, the following applications by the National
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to the Gauteng
North High Court in 2012 regarding sections 2 and 3 of the
Performing Animals Protection Act, received an order declaring
sections of the Act unconstitutional to the extent that they require
a magistrate to issue animal training and exhibition licences.

The matter was then referred to the Constitutional Court. At stake
was the principle of separation of powers.

The Constitutional Court on 11 July 2013 declared sections 2 and 3
of the Performing Animals Protection Act unconstitutional. The
Constitutional Court gave Parliament an order to remedy the defects
in the Performing Animals Protection Act within a given time frame.

Sections 2 and 3 provided for delegated powers to magistrates
granting them the authority to issue licences for performing animals
– that is, animals used in circuses, films, dogs for safeguarding of
respective industries and so forth.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 28 of 37

In declaring these sections unconstitutional, the Court’s finding
was that the issuing of licences is an administrative function that
should be performed by the executive and not by the judiciary.

The Constitutional Court judgement also ordered Parliament to remedy
the defects within 18 months, alternatively, by 10 January 2015 from
the date of the judgement.

On 27 November 2014, the Constitutional Court granted an extension
to 12 July 2015 at the request of the Department of Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries.

With regard to the objects of the Amendment Bill, it is against this
background that the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries in early 2015 tabled the Performing Animals Protection
Amendment Bill to Parliament.

The amending Bill is aimed at regulating the exhibitions and
training of performing animals, and the use of dogs for
safeguarding. The amending Bill seeks to amend the Performing
Animals Protection Act of 1935 so as to repeal certain sections, to
provide for the designation of a national licensing officer, to
provide for a procedure for the application for a licence, to
provide for the functions of a national licensing officer and,
lastly, to provide for an appeals process.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 29 of 37

The amending Bill proposes that the functions of issuing licences
previously performed by magistrates are to be delegated to the
provincial state veterinary office or any office of the Department
of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries with animal scientists in the
same magisterial area.

With regard to the future legislative requirements, what the
amending Bill does is to deal with the consequences of the
Constitutional Court judgement, and corrects the violation of
separation of powers as contained in the principle Act.

What this amending Bill does not do is to amend an outdated Act
which is deficient in many aspects. While the existing legislation
can be effective as far as specific cruelty to animals is concerned,
any action is largely dependent on information supplied by members
of the public and, subsequently, the reaction from animal welfare
organisations.

This has reinforced the need for a complete revision of the animal
welfare legislation to create appropriate, modern and enforceable
norms and standards for animal welfare, thereby dealing with the
aforementioned gaps.

The select committee looks forward to new, consolidated and revised
draft legislation dealing comprehensively with animal welfare.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 30 of 37

In processing the amending Bill by the select committee, the select
committee considered the amending Bill on 12 April, 03 May and
10 May. On 12 April, the department briefed the committee and
discussions revolved around the licensing process and compliance,
tagging and the obsolete nature of the principle Act. The department
confirmed that they are in the process of drafting new, consolidated
legislation.

On 03 May, the committee, having advertised for public comments,
received submissions in the form of comments, requests, and the
comments from the following stakeholders: The SA Mohair Growers
Association, SAMGA, the Cruelty to Animals Welfare, Wildlife
Ranching, Beauty Without Cruelty, the National [Inaudible.] Fair and
the SA Institute for Advanced Constitutional ... [Inaudible.]

The resolution of the committee is that the Report on the Amendment
Bill be adopted without any amendments. Thank you. [Applause.]

Debate concluded.

Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.

Declaration(s) of vote:
Mr C F B SMIT (DA): Chairperson, can I stand here or must I stand in
front?

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 31 of 37

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): You can even come here, it’s
fine. [Interjections.]

Mr C F B SMIT (DA): Hon [Inaudible.], I am speaking to the South
African public if you don’t know your responsibility.
[Interjections.]

Hon Chairperson, as the select committee of the NCOP, our minor
responsibility is to ensure that we scrutinise legislation to ensure
that it has the relevant impact and is implementable. This has not
happened with this piece of legislation. It was steamrolled through
the committee in the last 30 minutes of a select committee meeting
without properly considering each and every clause, like it happened
within the NA portfolio committee which I also attended.

The Performing Animals Protection Amendment Bill, also known as the
Papa Bill, is a clear example of lip service by the ANC government.
This Bill in its current form does not in anyway improve the welfare
of animals. It took the department forever to simply make a few
amendments to comply with the judgement of the court. Instead it is
the Performing Animal Protection Act 24 of 1935 that is outdated.
This Bill should be scrapped and redrafted as indicated by the
department as well. This farce of a Bill has amounted to fruitless
and wasteful expenditure as it has to be overdone in any way after
this. The DA opposes this Bill in its current form. I thank you.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 32 of 37

Mr M RAYI (ANC): Hon House Chair, as the ANC we support this Bill.
It is not true that this Bill was steamrolled. It was introduced. We
had a three week period that we dealt with this particular Bill. We
were briefed by the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and
Fisheries. We had a legal representative of Parliament present as
well as legal representatives of the department and the State Law
Advisor. The only thing that the DA questioned was why it was not
tagged as section 76. Everybody else was happy with the
presentation. Nobody opposed. What the hon Smit is saying now, he
never said in the committee. Both of us are in the same committee.

This is as a result of a constitutional decision that the current
Act is unconstitutional in that it was being administered by the
then Department of Justice and therefore it was decided by the
Constitutional Court that this must then go to the executive – it
should not be administered by the courts. There was a timeframe that
was given by the Constitutional Court that we had to meet. We are
out of that timeframe. We had to ask for an extension and an
extension was granted until August. So, it is important ... because
all of us are not going to be here between now and August. It is
important that this House adopts this particular Bill today because
we won’t be in line with the court decision if we don’t adopt it
today. That is why the ANC supports this particular Bill. Thank you.
[Applause.]

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 33 of 37

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): We shall now proceed to the
voting. [Interjection.] Hon Smit? Order, members!

Mr C F B SMIT: Hon Chair, on a point of order. I am sure we are all
familiar with the Rules of this House. This is a section 75 Bill. We
are 54 permanent members within this House so, to conclude a quorum,
we need 27 members plus one. I have counted quickly and I am
currently standing around 26 members in the House. So if you can
just give us clarity on that matter. Thank you.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Order, members! Let me ...
honourable ... Hon Sefako, allow me to make a ruling. There is a
point of order raised by hon Smit. Hon Smit, I am addressing your
point of order. If you go to section 75(2) of the Constitution ... I
will read it for you. If you have a copy ... its section 75(2) ...

When the NCOP votes on a question in terms of this section,
section 65 does not apply, instead –
(a) each delegate in a provincial delegation has one vote;
(b) at least one third of the delegates must be present before a
vote maybe taken on a question.

At least one third, we have 54 members here and one third is 18.
[Applause.] So, I have addressed your point of order.
[Interjection.] Hon Mohapi?

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 34 of 37

Mr M J MOHAPI: Chairperson, on a point of order: Can the hon member
apologise to the House for misleading the House and the public at
large?

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): No, in terms of the ...
[Interjections.] No! Order, members! I am addressing the very
important point that has been raised by hon Mohapi. I have made a
ruling using the Constitution to guide us since he was under the
wrong guidance. So, I have assisted him. Let’s leave it to him and
go to the voting. [Applause.] We shall now proceed to the voting on
the question. Members will vote by pressing in favour, against, or
abstain buttons. [Interjections.] Hon Dikgale?

Ms M C DIKGALE: Chairperson, on a point of order: I just want to
check if whether it is parliamentary for the hon Smit to be
ignorant.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Hon members, once we get to
the voting part, we no longer entertain any points of order. Let’s
get to the voting. Hon members, we are voting now! [Interjections.]
Have all members voted? [Interjections.] We are voting, hon members.
Have all members voted?

Hon members, 25 members voted in favour; 1 against. The majority of
members voted in favour.

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 35 of 37

Bill accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the
Constitution.

Mr M J MOHAPI: Chairperson, can I make a request that hon Smit
should call those members to come back at least. The job is done.
[Laughter.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Hon members ... hon Makue?

Mr E MAKUE: Chair, on a point of clarity, if you have egg on your
face, does it make you red? [Laughter.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): Hon Smit?

Mr C F B SMIT: Hon House Chair, I am greatly offended by the hon
member but, beyond that, I also want to raise a point of clarity
here. In terms of that specific point in the Constitution, does it
apply to the full House because special delegates can also vote
here. So then it should be a third of the full House.
[Interjections.] [Applause.] It should be a third of the full House!
Talk about the egg on the face!

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr A J Nyambi): No. No, hon members, he is
still entitled to seek clarity. Hon Smit, as you have a copy of the
Constitution, you can be assisted to understand it further because

25 MAY 2016

PAGE: 36 of 37

we are not going to subject it to a discussion – we are done with
it.

The Council adjourned at 11:13.
__________

ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS

ANNOUNCEMENTS

National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1.

Bills passed by Houses – to be submitted to President for assent

(1)

Bills passed by National Council of Provinces on 25 May 2016:

(a)

Financial Intelligence Centre Amendment Bill [B 33B – 2015] (National
Assembly – sec 75).

(b)

Performing Animals Protection Amendment Bill [B 9B – 2015] (National
Assembly – sec 75).

2.

Classification of Bills by Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM)

25 MAY 2016
(1)

PAGE: 37 of 37

The JTM in terms of Joint Rule 160(6) classified the Protection, Promotion,
Development and Management of Indigenous Knowledge Systems [B 6 – 2016]
(National Assembly – sec 76), introduced in the National Assembly, as a section 76 Bill
and as a Bill falling within the ambit of section 18(1) of the Traditional Leadership and
Governance Framework Act, 2003 (Act No 41 of 2003).

COMMITTEE REPORTS

National Council of Provinces

Please see pages 2-11 of the ATCs.