Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard
House: National Assembly
Date of Meeting: 25 Jul 2019
No summary available.
THURSDAY, 25 JULY 2019
Watch Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcWiQKgl78Q
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
The House met at 14:00.
The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.
QUESTIONS FOR ORAL REPLY
QUESTIONS TO THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT:
The SPEAKER: Members, if you do wish to ask supplementary questions, you are advised to press your button on talk. I wish to remind hon members that the names of members requesting supplementary questions will be cleared as soon as the hon Deputy President starts answering the fourth supplementary question.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker, hon members, allow me to say, we meet in this Sixth democratic Parliament of the people to once again reaffirm the centrality of this legislative House of our elected representatives in ensuring that the executive is held accountable.
As this is the first Oral Reply of the Leader of Government Business during this term of office, we wish to emphasise the importance of using this platform to foster the unity of our people, social cohesion across all sectors of our society and the elevation of public participation in all government structures and processes. All of us here are duty-bound to make this Assembly a critical instrument in bridging the social distance between the people and ourselves as public representatives.
In response to the question at hand, let us remind ourselves that the primary objective of our delegated responsibility of assisting the President in this important work of revitalising the rural and township economies is to ensure that we transform townships and villages from being labour and consumption reserves into thriving productive investment hubs. This is in realisation that some of the key challenges that are faced by our people in the township and rural economies is that our SMMEs in particular and entrepreneurs in general, lack the necessary economic infrastructure, lack markets, have restricted trading spaces, constraints in terms of their logistics and uneven provision of services.
This is further compounded by a lack of proper regulation and enforcement of bylaws around where people establish and operate their businesses, leading at times to confrontations between local communities and foreign nationals. The biggest challenge we face in our rural and township economies, is the poor enforcement of the bylaws governing our economic activities. In particular, this failure at the local level tends to lead to unnecessary tensions in communities over economic opportunities, more so with foreign nationals.
As a matter of priority, we need to strengthen our institutional capacity to enforce applicable laws and regulations to enhance the ease of doing business, prevent anticompetitive behaviour, and minimise conflict in township and rural economic spaces. Revitalising the rural and township economies requires focus on the twin objectives of investing in economic infrastructure and enterprise development on one hand, and consistent application of and adherence to the regulations as provided for in our laws, on the other hand.
Our government’s interventions in this regard are focused on these two areas in order to build a platform wherein future resources can be applied to increase our impact. Our government, through the Department of Trade and Industry, introduced the Industrial Parks Revitalisation Programme in order to facilitate broad-based economic participation so that we can achieve inclusive growth and facilitate the transformation of our economy.
The purpose of this programme is to revitalise South Africa’s state-owned industrial parks and enable them to serve as catalysts for broader economic and industrial development, with a specific focus on townships and rural areas. This programme seeks to modernise our industrial parks infrastructure with the main objective of accelerating economic development by attracting investment in those areas. The programme also seeks to support job creation in manufacturing and related sectors so as to address underdevelopment and unemployment challenges that lead, in the main, to out-migration into our already-congested cities.
To date, government has already revitalised 10 industrial parks in the first phase of its programme with the next phase targeting an additional five industrial parks with already money spent estimated at R300 million. These industrial parks are in Botshabelo, Seshego, Komani, Isithebe and Vulindlela, to name a few. They have already provided industrial space to over 670 enterprises which in turn, provided direct employment to over 41 000 people primarily from each industrial park’s surrounding townships.
In the next four months, government will launch the township entrepreneurship fund which will assist township entrepreneurs to either scale up their existing projects or provide start-up capital for new projects. In addition to these measures, government will also support township and rural economies through: Implementing a special dispensation or set asides in the awarding of medium and long-term contracts to small businesses, co-operatives, township and village enterprises to allow for a period of incubation and other support to help reduce failure rates; increasing support measures for co- operative enterprises by implementing critical elements of the newly-amended Co-operatives Act, including putting in motion the co-operative development agency and the training academy; and also addressing the dominance of big retail chain stores in our township and rural areas.
These interventions, Madam Speaker, are designed to deliver substantial economic impact in a financially sustainable manner. They also represent the first phase to initiatives that will leverage government procurement and corporate supply chain development programmes. If successfully implemented, all these initiatives will promote job creation and reduce the failure rate of SMMEs. Thank you very much, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
Ms V S SIWELA: Thank you hon Deputy President. Your response gives us hope. [Interjections.] However, hon Speaker, I have a follow-up question in this regard. Hon Deputy President, as we were criss-crossing the country during the election campaign, part of the challenges raised by the small business in the townships and rural communities was the collapse of their local businesses due to foreign nationals taking over the small businesses such as tuck-shops. What is government doing to address this particular challenge? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much for the follow-up question. Well, we have heard the complaints by our SMMEs, small enterprises in our townships and rural areas that foreign nationals are taking what normally should be their jobs and businesses. It is well-placed concern. What we are trying to do here is to ensure that every business that is undertaken in township and rural villages is regulated through our existing bylaws. We want to insist that every business that is being opened should follow the prescripts of the law and whatever is being traded in those businesses, government should check the quality of the products sold. We have been reliably informed that some of the businesses are selling expired goods. Government must ensure that those businesses selling expired goods are closed. Every business that is opened in our township and villages must be registered with our municipalities and provincial government. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Deputy President, yes, indeed there is a lot of talk about job creation, boosting the economy, economic growth, and township economic development. However, we must be realistic with the challenges that our people face on the ground. First of all, Deputy President, one of the problems is the entire budget process. The budget process does not speak to the people on the ground. As a result, it does not address the needs and challenges of the people on the ground. Yes, indeed we talk about foreigners. There is a problem because municipalities are not ensuring that all these businesses are registered and are tax-compliant. As a result, the playing field is not equal. Spatial planning, if you take the City of Cape Town, people travel from townships. How are going to address this, Deputy President? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, hon Speaker, I did not hear the question. What is the question?
MR A M SHAIK EMAM: Deputy President, the spatial planning in a lot of areas like the City of Cape Town does not address the challenges of people living in the townships, in creating jobs in the townships. How are we going to address that problem and ensure that the budget process takes the needs of the people in the community?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. At least it is now clear and I have heard the question. Well, national government is in the process of finalising the spatial integrated framework that will tell us what to do and where in the country. But above all, we are insisting on integrated planning. National and provincial governments as well as municipalities must plan together because we are planning on a space that exists in the municipality. If we are building houses, there should be water, roads, schools and clinics. It is important that all of us plan together. So, we are starting a process where, together with provinces and municipalities, we are going to share our plans so that we deliver services in a co-ordinated fashion. Thank you very much.
Rev K R J MESHOE: Speaker, hon Deputy President, over the past two years there has been much government rhetoric regarding township economy. At least two extra-ordinary summits focusing on township economy were held. But since the summits, nothing concrete or measurable seems to have happened. In one of the summits, Deputy President you said that certain industries need to be ring-fenced and procurement of particular goods and services must come from township economies. That being the case, my question is whether government has a register of service providers in any township from which government can procure goods and services.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Information at our disposal is the number of the number of SMMEs spread throughout the country in each and every municipality, those that are registered and those that are not. The information at hand is that, instead of SMMEs, small businesses dying, we see the number increasing. Of course, I can account for informal businesses, SMMEs that are not registered in the formal system. We can account for formal SMMEs that are registered. But the complaint that we have received is that these SMMEs that are doing business with government are not paid on time. Hence, some of them die. This is one element that we are going to attend to. The three spheres of government must do everything in their power to ensure that, once we enlist or require services from SMMEs, they are paid on time.
Some of the SMMEs are complaining about the infrastructure in their township and rural villages, hence the revitalisation of all these industrial parks that belong to government. I said more or less 670 small businesses have already occupied those industrial parks and we are sure that the number will increase. What is important probably, is to sustain and ensure that the aftercare when an SMME starts getting business, it must be supported in terms of business management. If it does business with government, it must be paid on time. In that way, we think the rate of success will increase. But again, we think government should provide the necessary market for some of the products that are produced by SMMEs because they can’t compete evenly with those big companies. There are SMMEs that are producing bricks and all materials that government uses to build roads, schools and clinics. SMMEs must be prioritised.
Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mrs D B NGWENYA: I’ll take the question for the hon Ntlangwini, Madam Speaker. Deputy President, according to your NDP you have a target to reduce unemployment rate by 14% by 2020. Can you please remind the nation how many jobs did the NDP say should be created in order to reduce this unemployment? And realistically speaking, can you tell this nation how far you are from achieving this goal? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I might not be precise in terms of the number of jobs that we have set ourselves in the NDP as a target. But all what I can say is that we have not done very well in terms of gradually going closer to that target. There are many factors that contributed to that. Definitely, we can only create jobs if we have an economy that is growing gradually. An economy that is growing does not necessarily imply that it will create jobs. There should be an intervention to ensure that as it grows, job opportunities are created by those companies because every company that is trading is looking for profit. They will try in many ways to reduce what goes to payment of employees and capitalise on profit. So, it is important for government to ensure that some of the activities of every business that is opened are labour intensive so that it absorbs people. But, I must confess that as a country, because of the fluctuating economy, going up and down, we were almost in a recession and we have lost jobs.
However, the pace at which we have lost jobs has been complemented by new jobs that were created.
We are very worried about the advent of new technologies that are being employed in our economy. Businesses are seeking better ways to minimise wastages. For instance, you have heard that Standard Bank is closing some of their outlets. In a space of one square kilometre Standard Bank had four to five outlets. They have just realised that they can do with one outlet and service people. Their tradition and thinking was that, in every trading space that is open, they must put a facility. They are changing that notion because people can do their transaction without physically going to the outlet. As a result, we are going to lose jobs. So, as government we must find better ways to retrain those people and channel them into other sectors. Thank you very much.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Madam Speaker, to respond to the question from hon Steenhuisen, the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Cogta, has reported that following the findings of the Auditor-General in the consolidated general Report on the Local Government Audit Outcomes for the 2017-18 financial year, the Auditor-General identified 48 municipalities that require special intervention.
In this regard, the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs will continue to implement support measures to improve leadership and governance in those municipalities, including specific focus on financial sustainability of those municipalities in question. Amongst other key areas, support is provided to ensure that action plans are implemented to reverse the negative audit outcomes. In collaboration with National Treasury and Salga, Cogta is providing targeted support to improve revenue collection, budgeting, accounts reconciliation, debt management and the implementation of financial recovery plans.
Additionally, Cogta is supporting municipalities through post audit action plans, capacity building and strengthening financial and performance management systems in those municipalities. These are also complemented by the already deployed District Technical Support Teams to all those municipalities in question.
Through our Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency, struggling municipalities are supported to accelerate the implementation of infrastructure projects that address the delivery of basic services such as water and sanitation. This is one area where municipalities are greatly challenged. This support also includes procurement, contract management, project management, infrastructure maintenance and the overall institutional capacity to roll out infrastructure projects.
To strengthen government’s support to local government, the President has appointed an Interministerial committee on service delivery at district level to co-ordinate the work of government on the delivery of services in a manner that responds promptly to community concerns.
In the main, this committee will work with Cogta and key service delivery departments to respond in an integrated and co-ordinated fashion to challenges that are raised by our communities. Where appropriate, it will also enlist and mobilize partnerships with the private sector to complement government’s resources in trying to respond to urgent development and service delivery challenges.
We are cognisant that at its briefing to the NCOP’ Select Committee on Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, on 16 July 2019, this year, the department indicated that within the next month it will brief Parliament on a comprehensive five-year strategic framework on how to deal with the challenges that are encountered by our municipalities. This will clearly outline interventions aimed at changing the face of our local municipalities.
We also anticipate that Parliament will engage the department’s strategic framework when it is tabled so that together we can ensure the speedy implementation of our interventions that are aimed at improving the quality of services to our people are delivered. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I am sure the Deputy President would agree with me that part of the service delivery protests happen when promises that are made don’t intersect with the actually or the money set aside for delivery is siphoned off.
Now, one of the key hot spots in South Africa over the last few months has been Alexandra Township, in Johannesburg. I can hear the hon members on the other side saying, well; it is a DA-run municipality and absolutely. I think, Deputy President, we need to look at the origin of this because money was set aside for the Alex renewal project – R160 million in 2001 – announced from the very podium where you are standing by President Mbeki.
Deputy President, the truth of the matter is that money has all been siphoned off. Money to spend on housing, sanitation and community development has all been stolen and as a result, those services have not been rolled out.
Given the fact that the Gauteng MEC of Housing refuses to co- operate with the Human Rights Commission looking into this, would you, Deputy President, announce to us what steps is your government taking to look into what happened to that funding, where were those funds siphoned off by ANC members and steps that you are going to take to ensure that these service delivery crisis that are there are dealt with properly? Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr B A RADEBE: On a point of order, Speaker.
The SPEAKER: A point of order.
Mr B A RADEBE: Yes, Speaker. I am rising on Rule 137. Rule 137 provides that the follow up question must be relevant to the original question. The question asked is a new question altogether. Thank you, Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Can I rule on this. The follow up question is on issues related to townships. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker, the question of Alexandra is obviously an issue that government is concerned about. You
will be aware that the President visited Alexandra. And definitely, we are going to co-operate with the provincial government and the municipality to deal with the Alexandra problem. We are going to work with Mayor Mashaba and Premier Makhura to deal with the problem.
In the process, we will find out what happened because before dealing with the problem, we are going to get the history of that project. We can promise the people of Alexandra that as government, we are going to co-ordinate our efforts regardless of our party affiliation. We are going to work with the DA to build those houses and make Alexandra a better place to live in. [Applause.] [Interjections.] I don’t know. [Laughter.]
Now, if you know someone who has stolen money there, please, report that to the nearest police station as we speak. [Applause.] Thank you very much.
Mr M HLENGWA: Madam Speaker, Mr Deputy President, the audit outcomes reveal, amongst other things, that the financial statements submitted for audit by municipalities are inconsistent with the reporting format. The concern, however, is that of the municipalities that are accused of this; they
then used consultants and spent an amount of R907 million in total to pay those consultants.
The fundamental question becomes, Mr Deputy President, that there is an acknowledgement here that the skills are not there, worse when consultants can’t do the work that they are being paid for, that is a problem.
So, what is it specifically that government is going to do to ensure that the necessary requisite skills are present and live and that people who are fit for purpose are actually employed in municipalities because we are obviously tripping one financial year after the other with the same problem?
Thirty municipalities over the past five years have received adverse or disclaimed findings and not one of them has been given 139 interventions.
So, the issue of consequent management becomes another concern here. I hear all the things you are saying but what are the speedy interventions that you will put in place because come next year, the same problem is going to arise?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I think as government, we realize and are cognisant of the problems that are affecting municipalities as shown by the audit outcomes. As government, we have accepted that we cannot make this a problem of the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs. That’s why the President said that we must have a team of departments – a committee of departments – that would work with Cogta so that we can make a speedy intervention.
Now, we need to deploy people with technical expertise in various sections and programmes of municipalities; whether financial or technical so that we support those areas. Where there are problems of service delivery because of the lack of right personnel and projects are uncompleted, this team will intervene to support the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs.
We acknowledge the fact that there might be a challenge with regard to leadership in all our municipalities; the management of the affairs of municipalities is not at its best hence this team supporting Cogta will come close to that space.
We are aware of the many service delivery protests that have turned violent and it is important that as government we shouldn’t leave these service delivery protests just to go unabated. It is important that this committee must go in and seat down with the people, the municipality, the province and national department together to solve the problem. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr W W WESSELS: Speaker, the people of Mafube Local Municipality are currently suffering as a result of a complete shut down of the municipality. Vehicles and banking accounts of this municipality have been ceased by a court order because of outstanding debts and no service delivery is currently taking place.
Violent protests have followed. This municipality has been under section 139 administration for the last two years already. My question is: Has Mafube been identified as a service delivery hot spot and what will be done by your government to provide immediate relief to the people of Mafube and solve this total shut down as the provincial government has proven that they can’t and that the normal support programmes have failed and will continue to fail? I thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, the municipality in question is part of those municipalities that have been identified by the Auditor-General as having collapsed with regard to providing services. So, definitely, it is going to be one of the priority municipalities that will be visited. Those visits will happen very soon. I can’t, therefore, say what measures are going to be taken. We want to know exactly what the problem is.
If a municipality is put under section 139, of course, the NCOP is also part of that process. We are going to get all the people that are part of the challenges that are there and find an immediate solution.
As much as we are talking about internal problems in the municipality, we must ensure that people aren’t suffering from service delivery because we are still talking. We need to unblock the blockages that are there so that people can get water and electricity while issues inside the municipality are being fixed. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr L M NTSHAYISA: Hon Speaker, Mr Deputy President, my question is: Have you engaged Salga ... [Interjections.] ...
don’t shout at me, please ... on how it can engage accountability in getting institutions such as public accounts committee as to address the flagged and all compliance issues emerging from the Auditor-General’s report?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Well, like we have said, hon Speaker that all issues that have been raised by the Auditor-General are on our radar screen. These are the issues that would be part of our intervention programme.
Firstly, the Auditor-General has raised a number of issues about each and every municipality that are wrong. Instead of going somewhere and find new issues, start with those issues that have already been identified as problematic. So, we are going to do just that. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Order! This question has been put to you by the hon Shivambu, but my instructions are that the hon Ndlozi will take care of the question.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Hon Speaker, section 209(1) of the Constitution of the Republic provides that “Any
intelligence service, other than any intelligence division of the defence force or police service, may be established only by the President, as head of the national executive, and only in terms of national legislation.”
Currently, the National Strategic Intelligence Act, Act 39 of 1994, defines the functions of members of the national intelligence structures. The relevant members of the national intelligence structures provided for in terms of the Act to support government with intelligence services are the following: the Intelligence Division of the National Defence Force, the Intelligence Division of the SA Police Service, the State Security Agency and the service. As things stand, there is no Bill that the executive has considered or processed in respect of establishing intelligence services in any government department or state-owned entity. Thank you very much.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Thank you, Deputy President and Speaker. Deputy President, if there was a unit inside the SA Revenue Service, Sars, which collected intelligence using covert means, would it - according to the answer you have just provided - be illegal, meaning it would be a rogue unit? And, as a result,
would it mean that your government has to take action against the individuals involved, disband it and make sure that it doesn’t happen again? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: The hon member would appreciate the fact that the matter he has been speaking about is, as we speak, before court to determine whether that unit was correctly established or not correctly established. So, it would be really premature or wrong for us to start talking about a matter that is before court. [Applause.] Let’s allow the court to finalise the matter without our talking about it and putting forward our views. Thank you very much.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Point of order, Speaker.
The SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Dr M Q NDLOZI: With the greatest respect, hon Speaker, there is a precedent. The matter of sub judice has been clarified in that indeed we can. This is because there is no court that can suspend - owing to the separation of powers - your government being held accountable about the activities happening under your watch. Essentially, you are saying we can’t do our duty
until a court says so. So, a matter can be commented on. There is a ruling of this House to that effect. Hon Speaker, I plead with you, direct the Deputy President, in line with the Constitution, to answer the question and not say, “No, I don’t want to answer it.” He must be held accountable. [Interjections.] His government must be held accountable. If there was a rogue unit within Sars, established by the hon Jamnadas, isn’t it obvious that your government must take action against him and all those that participated in that unit? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon member. May I rule on this point of order? Order! [Interjections.] Order! Hon members, the hon Ndlozi says we must rule on this matter. The truth of the matter is that this matter is not only before court, it is pending the decision of the court. Secondly, you do have a rule that says when any matter is pending a judicial decision
– it is very specific – that we cannot talk about it. I don’t think that that says we are mum, that we are scared, or that we can’t deal with the matter. I think that the precedent you are referring to is something that I will look at, but for now I will rule that that question, this supplementary, be set
aside until I can get clarity on that. Therefore, Deputy President, your response for today is sufficient. [Applause.]
Hon Ndlozi, I do not want to enter into a question-and-answer session with you. Deputy President, please take your seat.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Speaker, I respect that. Can I address you, Speaker?
The SPEAKER: You will address me.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Thanks. I respect that. But can we get an assurance that you will direct him to write that answer to us? Because you are going to make up your mind as you say, hon Speaker, as to whether you should persuade the Deputy President to answer ... because we submitted a question. This is the follow-up. We are well within our rights. If you arrive at the determination that the Deputy President ... there’s no court order that says we can’t hold him accountable. If you arrive at such a determination, could you please have him put it in writing because our supplementary question was not answered?
The SPEAKER: Thank you very much. The supplementary question was answered. I want to say to all of you, members, that I find it very difficult when you instruct us on how to rule when we are presiding. It is very problematic. I’ve ruled on this matter, and it will stay there. Hon Steenhuisen, you have a matter?
THE CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, may I request that this matter is referred to the Rules Committee, because we have had precedents in the past. There are rulings from the hon Ginwala made in the House before, as well as in the Fifth Parliament. The sub judice rule no longer applies in South African law. The Midi Television case, held in the Constitutional Court, was very clear on that. What we can’t do is discuss the merits of the case. But, frankly, there are other issues that relate to the so-called rogue unit that have been dispensed with already by the Nugent Commission, as well as by Parliament. I think that to rule this type of question out of order severely impedes Members of Parliament’s ability in this. So, may I ask that this ruling is referred to the Rules Committee urgently, otherwise Ministers and the executive are going to hide behind the sub judice continually
in spite of the Midi Television ruling in the courts. Thank you.
The SPEAKER: Hon members, I will refer this to the Rules Committee, but my ruling stands. The supplementary to the Deputy President says he must express an opinion, and that opinion would be out of order as he is not a court. That is why I am ruling it out of order. Could we proceed, please, to the hon Singh?
Mr N SINGH: Speaker, one can only smile at how loaded this question is, but it is the right of any member to ask any question in this House. That aside, gathering information as such is not illegal if done within the confines of the law. Businesses gather information, state-owned entities gather information, and that is commonly referred to as due diligence. I trust, hon Deputy President, that the government is not intending to silence those who enter into a due diligence process. For example, Denel may want to examine what the ground is like when they get an order for arms, and they would look at other suppliers around the world and they would do due diligence. Is it the intention of government to
suppress any state-owned entity from doing due diligence? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Probably, I should refer you to the Act. I am going to read some extracts from the Act to provide clarity for all of us:
Functions of other departments of State with reference to national security intelligence
If any law expressly or by implication requires any department of State, other than the Agency or the Service, to perform any function with regard to the security of the Republic or the combating of any threat to the security of the Republic, such law shall be deemed to empower such department to gather departmental intelligence, and to evaluate, correlate and interpret such intelligence for the purpose of discharging such function: Provided that such department of State-
... shall not gather departmental intelligence within the Republic in a covert manner ...
I could go on and on. [Interjections.] But, but, but ... any department that seeks to gather information should do that through a law, and that law should come through this Parliament. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Thank you, Speaker. Deputy President, let me remind this House that there are legal experts that are saying that this rogue unit is not necessarily illegal even though it hadn’t come via the President. That’s the first thing. But, the intelligence in South Africa, in my view, Deputy President, is ineffective. Had it been effective, then, of course, my friends in red would not have looted the VBS bank, for starters. They would not have evaded Sars and they would have paid their taxes. [Interjections.] Now, what are you going to do, Deputy President, to ensure that intelligence is more effective in South Africa?
The SPEAKER: Hon Emam, have you finished putting your question?
Dr M Q NDLOZI: There is no question. I am rising on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: Can I address him first? Have you finished, sir, putting your question?
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Deputy President, what are you going to do to ensure that we have more effective intelligence to prevent the looting of funds like what happened by my friends in red with the VBS bank and the evasion of taxes in South Africa through Sars? [Applause.] Could you please tell us?
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, you rose on a point of order. What is your point of order?
Dr M Q NDLOZI: The point of order is that the hon member says there are people who are wearing red - and the hon Barbara there is wearing red – who have looted VBS bank. The Chief Whip of the House is wearing red. Has she looted VBS bank? If that is the case, he is impugning the reputation of hon members without a substantive motion. I would rule that you rule him out of order. He must withdraw those comments, because people are wearing red in this House. There is no court of law that has said they have looted any bank. Thank you.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: The point of order, Madam Speaker, is simply this, and the hon Shaik doesn’t have a Whip so it falls on me to do it. There have been plenty of precedents in the House that a member can make any comment about a political party, but can’t make it about individuals. So, even if the hon Shaik had said the EFF had looted from VBS, it would have been within the Rules. If he had identified an individual and said the individual’s name or “Member X” had done it, it would have been outside the Rules. The hon Shaik is well within his rights to say what he did. [Interjections.]
Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker ...
The SPEAKER: Hon Deputy President, please take your seat. Hon Mkhaliphi?
Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, on a point of order: We can’t move on that premise, because if someone stood up here and said, “The DA have stole the land”, that one is going to be a problem. [Interjections.] So, please ask Shaik Emam not to provoke the EFF, because no court of law, or any report for that matter, has found any EFF on that report. So, we must not enter into that debate, especially with this member who has a
fraud case, but we don’t speak about that fraud case here, Speaker. Thank you.
The SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you very much. Hon members, may I rule? [Interjections.] Order! Order! Hon members, it is not unparliamentary to refer to a political party. We have had precedents. If you remember, in 2014, there was a matter taken to court by the EFF and we lost that matter as Parliament, because they referred to the ANC in a particular manner. So, that the hon Shaik Emam went, in a very roundabout way, to pose his question – and referred to members wearing red – is actually not unparliamentary. So, I rule against that. Hon Deputy President, please proceed.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you very much, hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Hon members, please take your seats.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: I differ with the assertion by the hon member who said in the follow-up question that our intelligence structures are not up to scratch. I will differ with that, because, as we stand, we are in a very
secure country. We are out of any threats. We are not threatened as South Africa. Our defence is doing very well. Our police are doing very well. Of course, there might be issues that will crop up from time to time, but that does not mean our intelligence structures are ineffective. There, I beg to differ. They are. The country is stable. There is no threat that you can say: There is foreign invasion; there is this and this. Our intelligence structures are effective. Thank you very much.
The SPEAKER: Thank you, sir. That last supplementary goes to the hon Mkaliphi. Hon Mkaliphi, have you forfeited? [Interjections.] Okay. If she has forfeited ... Have you forfeited? I now recognise the hon Magwanishe.
Mr G MAGWANISHE: Thank you very much, Speaker. The State Security Agency is very critical to our national security, economic stability and the maintenance of our democracy, amongst other things. Improvement in the regulatory mechanism is urgent to split domestic and foreign branches, as promised by the President in his state of the nation address. We also need these regulatory mechanisms to deal with the creation of
the position of Deputy Inspector-General for Intelligence Services. Could you comment on that, Deputy President?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Well, my comment is that I agree with you. I agree with you. Thank you very much. [Laughter.] [Applause.]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Hon
Speaker, our country’s blueprint, the National Development Plan, states clearly that, in order to eliminate poverty and reduce inequality, South Africa has to raise levels of employment, and thereby ensuring that people earn incomes and sustain their livelihoods.
As one of our major public employment initiatives, the Expanded Public Works Programme, EPWP, is our flagship programme which contributes to the National Development Plan’s core objective of achieving a decent standard of living for all South Africans by 2030.
This programme focuses on creating work opportunities that enhance the acquisition of skills across a range of trade
areas such as construction, plumbing, welding, painting, infrastructure maintenance - just to name a few.
In the process, those participating are paid stipends to sustain themselves and their families, thereby impacting and mitigating extreme poverty in our communities.
Central to the objectives of this programme is ensuring that, based on training and skills acquired during training, EPWP beneficiaries can now move into sustainable employment within the labour market. Alternatively, new pathways are created for these EPWP beneficiaries to engage in business venture creation, utilising training and skills acquired in the programme.
Experience from the implementation of this programme indicates that the programme has contributed towards the alleviation of poverty and provision of work experience to the participants. Since phase one of the programme, more than 10 million work opportunities have been created with over R64 billion paid in wages to participants.
Even though the Expanded Public Works Programme offers short- term employment, the income support it provides, in terms of wages to all those who are participating, makes a meaningful contribution towards reducing prevailing levels of poverty.
As it enters its fourth phase, the Expanded Public Works Programme will continue to draw its significant number of the unemployed South Africans, especially our young people, into productive work in a manner that will enable them to gain skills, increase their capacity to earn income, and contribute towards the betterment of our country.
However, to broaden the scale and impact, the increased participation of the private sector and other non-state actors will be critical in the implementation of EPWP phase four. Our experience suggests that, while government has invested in this programme over the past few years, private sector participation has been limited or nonexistent.
One of the major challenges facing the programme in provinces has to do with the placement of EPWP graduates after the end of their contracted periods. Some of the beneficiaries have had to go back home. As an unintended consequence, this has
created an expectation that government has to employ all these EPWP graduates. Such a position is fiscally untenable and unsustainable.
We need an approach that draws in a significant contribution from our private sector partners. Our close collaboration with the private sector will ensure that a placement plan is jointly agreed to, in order to ensure that opportunities are created by companies for the placement of some of the EPWP participants after graduating, depending on the skills they have acquired.
As part of increasing the intake of young people into public employment, government has already removed the requirement of experience as one of the criteria in the recruitment of new graduates.
Going forward, the work of the antipoverty inter-ministerial committee will integrate our Public Employment Programme with other antipoverty initiatives focusing on broad based participation in the productive sectors of our economy.
As we have highlighted in our earlier response, it is critical to prioritise the development of rural and township economies as part of boosting employment prospects in these poverty stricken areas.
Alongside public employment programmes, specific focus will continue to be put on enterprise and skills development initiatives to empower our unemployed young people to participate in all key sectors of our economy. Thank you, hon Speaker.
Ms J TSHABALALA: Madam Speaker, to the Deputy President, the issue of providing EPWP jobs as a shot-term measure to alleviate poverty whilst empowering the beneficiaries of certain skills acquisition ... reality of the situation is that we want young people to turn these jobs and create sustainable employment. Now, the Deputy President mentions the fourth phase and 10 million young people that have been absorbed.
The public sector has done away with the issue of young people required to have experience in the entry level. What are we going to do to ensure that the private sector is tailor made?
What is the monitoring evaluation that we are going to do to say that the private sector is playing an advancement role? We need the private sector to come onboard on the issue. The question is: What are we going to do to ensure the private sector plays the role, and also ensure that the economy also grows to a level where we can create sustainable jobs on this EPWP?
The SPEAKER: Deputy President, you have been given a number of supplementaries in that question. I have identified about three and you are free to respond to one.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Hon
Speaker, I think on the side of government, the shortcoming is that we have not persuaded the private sector enough. The President made an announcement that we are going to eliminate the experience part for new entrants in the public service.
For us, as government, we must persuade the private sector to afford our young people an opportunity to gain experience; remove this requirement of experience in every post that is advertised. So, we must do our part in order to motivate and persuade the private sector to join government so that we deal with this unemployment.
The second part is that this programme, as much as it is offering people short-term employment, it is not aimed at creating permanence but what we recognise is that it deals with poverty at that time and also offers these young people skills that they can use to find employment or create their own small enterprises. So, this programme must be supported. Some of the young people who participated in the EPWP are now running their small enterprises and they are being supported. So, it is a good programme. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Ms S J GRAHAM: Speaker, to the Deputy President, you have waxed lyrical about the public employment programmes and numbers of work opportunities they have provided. But let us be honest here, the EPWP is nothing more than a social security programme. Nowhere is this more evident than in the fact that the EPWP participants are paid at 55% of the minimum wage. Yet, you yourself, Deputy President, have said that the ANC believes that the national minimum wage is not a living wage but a significant milestone towards it. And yet, in an interesting plot twist, former Deputy Minister, Jeremy Cronin, admitted that if EPWP participants were to be paid at minimum wage, the number of people employed in the programme will decline by 50% due to lack of affordability. That is certainly
an interesting justification for noncompliance with your own laws.
So, this then begs the question: In a country where almost
10 million people are unemployed and where the minimum wage is recognised as a barrier to employment and not being implemented, why would government impose a national minimum wage on all other sectors including the private sector?
THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Our
understanding of this programme is that all participants that are there are given a stipend and are also afforded an opportunity to gain skills. They are offered training and that training is money. Government is paying money to train those participants in the different skills that are there, whether construction, plumbing and all that. [Interjections.] We considered this as a stipend as people participate as people try and gain the necessary skills. That is why it is a shot- term programme that takes an individual to a certain point where they can find gainful employment because of the skill in possession or start their own business. Thank you very much.
Mr L M NTSHAYISA: Madam Speaker, to the Deputy President, would you consider the establishment of poverty alleviation fund that will expressly focus on the poverty alleviation projects so as to assist many that are poor – more especially the people that are living in squalor conditions? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Well, I
haven’t thought of a creation of a fund because fighting poverty should be a co-ordinated effort stemming from different role players, departments and spheres of government collaborating to deal with a poverty stricken area.
Poverty is not only about getting food but also the provision of infrastructure, schools, roads, water, everything. So, this needs an integrated effort to those who are charged with certain responsibilities of providing roads and schools. So, creating a fund will defeat this collaborative idea that we are putting forward. Thank you very much.
Mr S N SWART: Speaker, to the Deputy President, the ACDP believes that, in view of the high unemployment rate, as part of a wide employment plan, public employment can, to a certain limited degree, compliment private sector employment. However,
and this is a response to the first question, policy makers agree that thriving SMMEs are a key to job creation in the country.
The NDP, as indicated earlier, predicts 11 million new jobs or needed by 2030, 90% by SMMEs. A key finding in the EPWP phase three review was that partnership should be strengthened with the private sector and it was alluded to in an earlier question and you answered on how that can be strengthened.
Deputy President, would you give us an indication that one of the problems with SMMEs is access to funding? Would you agree that if there is greater funding for SMMEs they will be able to partner with the EPWP phases and create more jobs? Is that something that government will be looking into considering that SMEs are the greatest job creation mechanisms? Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: I agree
with that assertion because in the programme of EPWP as mush as we are intervening in terms of poverty and giving people stipends, what is long-term is that these people come out of the programme with skills. With those skills they can start their own business or they can find employment.
Now, you are saying that as you support EPWP which is the gaining of skills and the training, you must also support SMMEs because the likelihood is that these people are going to be absorbed by these SMMEs and that is what we are doing.
Government has decided to create a Department of Small Business so that we can place focus squarely on growing small enterprises.
We are going to support the Minister of Small Business and work together so that these SMMEs are supported and there is an aftercare programme that they do not fail or relapse so that an opportunity is created to absorb these participants of EPWP. Thank you.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Hon
Speaker, as we have indicated earlier, part of the new responsibilities delegated to us by the President, is to coordinate interventions aimed at stimulating rural and township economies. This work includes facilitation of socioeconomic empowerment models for increased economic inclusion at a local level, championing of high impact tourism empowerment projects for rural and township communities, and
facilitation of linkages to private and public markets and value chains for small, medium and micro enterprises, SMMEs, in special economic zones across the country.
For the benefit of the House, the socioeconomic empowerment models we are referring to here, as per our delegated responsibility, flows from an appreciation that across the country, in every province and every district, there are a number of local economic development initiatives that are working, of course they are fragmented and they are disconnected.
We believe that if these economic activities were to be consolidated and co-ordinated, with a view to alleviate and elevate their potential business and growth potential, a lot of our rural and township enterprises can be uplifted and supported to become sustainable with the capacity to contribute to our local economic development, capacity job creation in these district and local communities.
In the process, the much needed employment to respond to the present youth unemployment challenge could thus be addressed.
We trust that you will agree with us, hon members, that rural and township economies are places where there are vast untapped productive capacities and markets.
Think of how many panel beatings and spray painting operations, how many wheels and tyre operations, how many carpentry, welding, textile and creative industries that are found in many parts of our townships and rural areas. Think of how many women-led small scales, informal enterprises that are there to feed these entrepreneur’s families and educate their children. The potential in our township and rural areas is vast and it’s untapped. These are the real small businesses that must be uplifted and provided with the necessary support whether financial or non financial, so that they can prosper.
Our models should ask what purpose would be development of big malls and big shopping centres which does serve or support local markets and value chains in those townships and rural areas.
For township and rural economies to thrive, localization and ring fencing of certain economic sectors to achieve real
transformation, should be the primary pillars of this programme.
We will not meaningfully address the existing obstacles to sustainable participation of black people, especially those that are operating within township and rural economies, if we do not take bold actions currently, to create the necessary conditions that would deconcentrate economic activity from big players.
Therefore, dealing with this unemployment challenge requires a comprehensive and co-ordinated approach that is targeted and multi-sectoral. This effort requires careful development and co-ordination of relevant opportunities, taking into account the level of know-how of unemployed young persons.
While government does have various interventions and partnerships through national government, provincial government and our agencies, we need to ensure that all these interventions that are targeted to address youth unemployment must be part of a multipronged intervention which includes skills development especially for those young people who are
not in employment, who are not in education facility or training.
Furthermore, we need to direct industrial funding towards our young people to provide the capital for the growth and expansion of their ideas. Four years ago, targets were set for industrial financing to young empowered enterprises over a period of five-year period.
Within one year that is left in this period, the Industrial Development Corporation, IDC, has already exceeded its targets, providing more than R5,1 billion in funding to more than 120 youth-empowered enterprises.
In addition to funding our youth, we have to find ways to open up markets so that new enterprises can complete and compete fairly. Earlier this month, the Competition Amendment Act was promulgated by the President. As key focus of these amendments is on opening markets where concentration and the behaviour of dominant firms is harmful to the creation of jobs and the growth of small and medium businesses in sectors across the economy.
Our response therefore seeks to consolidate various impactful initiatives that are being implemented in a fragmented manner by some provincial governments and national departments.
The interventions will identify, develop and support qualifying SMMEs in order to assist them to become competitive manufacturers and suppliers of building materials where these could be sourced for development of human settlements and paving of municipal roads and pathways.
For our part as government, we will to support SMMEs and Co- operatives through targeted procurement initiatives for government’s infrastructure and human settlements projects.
As we move forward, the Anti-Poverty Inter-Ministerial Committee will prioritise the implementation of economic empowerment models that aggregate government’s procurement spend in key areas to drive the incubation and participation of small businesses in general, and in township and rural areas.
We are pleased that some of the government departments and provinces have started with piloting and implementing some of
these initiatives. For instance, the Department of Small Business Development is implementing the Aggregated Community Produce for School Nutrition Programme while Mpumalanga, where I come from, the province has begun with the implementation of Government Nutrition Programme to stimulate agricultural production and empower farmers to supply fresh produce to government institutions such as hospitals and schools. In KwaZulu-Natal the Radical Agrarian Socio-economic Transformation provides support to small-scale farmers by offering them market access to leverage on government procurement.
There are various economic empowerment models that are being implemented in other provinces, but like we have said our approach is fragmented. Our task, as the centre of government, is to lead, coordinate and consolidate our efforts to expand the scale and the impact.
As we upscale these programmes, we must pay particular attention to the incubation of young people and women owned enterprises to support their meaningful participation in the economy. Thank you very much [Applause.]
Mnu X NGWEZI: Mshengu ngiyabonga ngempendulo onginikeza yona, kodwa ngicabanga ukuthi uzovumelana nami uma ngithi ezinye zezisombululo noma izixazululo ozinikezayo, yizixazululo sesikhathi eside. Into engikhathazayo kakhulu ukuthi abantu baseNingizimu Afrika ikakhulukazi intsha ibukene nokusweleka kwemisebenzi. Esizokudinga izixazululo ezisheshayo ezingaveza amathuba emisebenzi njengamanje. Ngicela ukwazi Sekela Mongameli ukuthi kungabe ihhovisi lakho nohulumeni banazo yini izixazululo eziphuthumayo ezingashesha zidale amathuba emisebenzi? Nokuthi uma esekhona amathuba emisebenzi senza kanjani ukuthi kube ngabantu baseNingizimu Afrika abazuza kuqala kulawo mathuba kunokuba kuzuze abantu abaqhamuka kwamanye amazwe? Ngiyabonga.
USEKELA MONGAMELI WERIPHABHULIKI YASENINGIZIMU AFRIKA:
Kuyazwakala ukuthi isimo esibhekene naso sidinga ukuthi kusheshwe. Kulungiswe lokhu esikubonayo sikwenze futhi masinyane. Kuvamile ukuthi izinto esizenza masinyane singasimami. Kufanele ukuthi esikwenza manje kube yilokhu esakhela kukona esizokwenza ngesikhathi esisayo njengoba uma uqala indlela yemayili eyinkulungwane uzoyiqala ngemayili eyodwa uze ufinyele esiphethweni zenkulungwane.
Manje nanoma isimo sibonakala sisibi kakhulu ngifuna ukusho ukuthi ikhona imizamo eyenzekayo njengalena engiyibalile.
Ngibalile nje ukuthi i-IDC yesekele labantu laba, nalaba kukhona okwenzekayo. Sikwenza sihlukene. Esikucelayo lana ukuthi nalokhu esizokwenza ukuthi sizohlanganisa zonke lezinto esizenza sehlukene ukuze umthelela wethu ube mkhulu - izifundazwe zenza lokhu, uzwelonke naye wenza lokhu nomasipala benza lokhu. Sifuna ukuthi uma sibheka indaba yokuswelakala kwemisebenzi ebantwini abayintsha sihlanhlane siwuzwelonke, izifundazwe nomasipala ngoba ziningi izikhungo ezilekelela ngemali ezakhiwe uhulumeni ngaphandle kweMinyango. Okusele ukuthi sibasize sibalandelele baze baphumelele labantu abancane abaqala amabhizinisi abo. [Ubuwelewele.]
Okunye, kufuneka sikugcizelele ukuthi intsha kufuneka iye esikoleni bathole ikhono lokwenza umsebenzi ukuze baqasheke. Izinhlelo esikhulume ngazo o-EPWP, ukuqeqeshwa kuthe chithi sabalala kodwa sicela ukuthi intsha yakithi iye kulezo zikhungo ithole ukuqeqeshwa, ithole ikhona elithile lokuthi ikwazi ukuqasheka futhi ikwazi nokuthi iqale eyayo inkampani ezosizwa nguhulumeni. Ngifuna ukusho ukuthi indlela le ingabonakala iyinde futhi ibonakale inzima kodwa indlela esilingene thina bantu baseNingizimu Afrika ukuthi siyihambe
nalezinkinga eziphambi kwazo sizixazulule. Akukho ke okungasihlula uma sibambene futhi sigxile kulolo hlelo. Ngiyabonga[Ihlombe.]
The SPEAKER: Ntate Ntshayisa, just hold. Hon members, I follow the system, as you press, you are recorded and follow that list, very religiously. Ntate Ntshayisa, please you have the floor.
Mr L M NTSHAYISA: Well spoken Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I think I am covered by the Deputy President, wait please, you must learn to wait...[Interjection.]
The SPEAKER: You are on the floor; don’t address the members address the Chair.
Mr L M NTSHAYISA: What I wanted to know is that, because the creation of two million jobs in a decade is not something easy. I like the Deputy President to elaborate on this great initiative, how is he going to make it a success, but somehow you have covered in this very response that you have done, but if have more, you can still say more. Thank you
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: No, I
don’t have more [Laughter.] I am done Thank you.
Inkosi R N CEBEKHULU: I am so sorry Speaker I have forfeited my follow up question.
USOMLOMO: Siyabonga baba.
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Thank Madam Speaker, Deputy President would you agree that there is very high unemployment particularly amongst the youth? The TVET Colleges have a pass rate of one in ten. There is a massive skills shortage in the country while there is abundance in other skills. That is a results that of the fact that the skills at TVET Colleges do not speak to the skill’s needs of the country. Now, how are you going address that to ensure that to ensure that – and will give an example, South Africa have a shortage of plumbers, electrician, carpenters and things, at the same time we have millions of people with Bachelor of Commerce, B.Com, degrees that are doing nothing or people that are taking on those things where have skills excess. How are you actually going to deal with this to address that, so that there is co-ordination
between needs of the country, because remember TVET are for large extend funded by government. Thank you.
The SPEAKER: Your question please!
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Thank
you very much, well; I have been assigned the responsibility by the President to chair the Human Resource Development Council, now in that Council, we have got the private sector, we have got civil society and we have got government. This question came a number of times that there is a skills mismatch in the country. We are producing; we are training young people that cannot be absorbed by our private sector.
It’s a matter that is on the table and it’s possible that our training can be tailor made to suit the needs of industry, but of course any skill that is acquired by a young person, that skill is important. We are not only looking at giving young people a skill so that they can be employed. We are giving them a skill so that they can also be employers. So it’s a two pronged process, because there is a programme where government is consistently supporting small enterprises, so that they can grow and be big enterprises.
Any economy that is thriving has its foundation, the small- medium enterprises, that are able to employ one or two, up 100 people. Those SMMEs are important mixture in any economy, for that economy thrive. So what I’m saying, it’s a matter that Council is going to discuss, skill mismatch but whatever skills that are out there, people acquired they put them into best use.
Dr M J CARDO: Deputy President, Statistics South Africa has released data showing that black South Africans aged between
25 and 34 are less skilled than their parents, further more according to former statistician General Palider Hohler, since 1994 in comparison to their white, Indian and coloured counterparts, black youths have:
Lost out in acquiring skills which is the cracks of youth unemployment and a sign of regression.
Deputy President, why has the ANC-led government allowed this regression to take place and what is it doing to develop the skills of all our youth so that they are ready for the fourth industrial revolution? [Applause]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: I partly
agree with that assertion, because I have the labour survey from Stats SA, about the number of young people that are not in training, that are not employed, that are not in any education institution, well it’s a big number, it’s a big number, it’s that as government probably we come down, down below what you call the TVET College.
We must think of a college that will accommodate those of our young people, who don’t have matriculation, who have not passed grade seven - now for TVET College there are certain entry requirements that can exclude some of the young people, so it’s important as government and it’s a matter that we discussing as the Council, to say come up with a community college that would not require any entrance qualification.
Take every one young person, assess that young person, and give this young person a skill, because most of these most young people, because of their conditions where they live, they could not go to school, as much we have made education as ANC-led government, free, children that are attending our primary schools, children that are attending secondary school, they do so free and they get food at school, well, there are
some public governing bodies agree that we can pay money because we can afford, but there is no child that can be excluded on the basis of non-affordability [Applause.]
That is known but there are areas in our rural communities where these young people did not present themselves in any school facility. These are young people that are not in education, that are not in training and that are not employed. What do you do with that? Now, they can’t be admitted in university, they can’t be admitted in a college, now create a facility that will accommodate them but finally give them a skill, train them. So that is the matter that is before our council. It’s a matter that is confronting this government but you know where come from with this matter. It’s a matter of our historical past, which are trying to address and we are not consistently blaming that past. What is before us is to address those challenges but let’s not forget where come from. Thank you very much.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Hon
Speaker, in line with our delegated responsibility to accelerate the Land Reform programme, our government remains
committed to pursuing this programme without disrupting agricultural production. In this regard, our focus will be to ensure the effective coordination of integrated farmer support interventions, including small-scale farmer linkages to market value chains.
In the course of the implementation of this programme, we are mindful of the challenges faced by farmers related to drought, which is exacerbated by climate change, as well as rising input costs that impact negatively on agricultural production, resulting in job losses and closure of agricultural enterprises.
As government, we will not allow our agricultural sector to collapse because farmers are the lifeblood of our economy. That is why as part of our response to these challenges we have set aside a package of financial assistance to affected farmers in various provinces.
I am advised by the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development that various provinces were assisted with drought relief funding. In this regard, the Free State, Northern Cape and Eastern Cape provinces are among provinces
that received drought relief funding during the last quarter of the 2018-19 financial year.
This does not amount to agricultural subsidies, but our efforts as government to alleviate the negative impact that this drought may have had on our farmers and the sustainability of the small enterprises in those provinces.
Allow me to briefly enumerate some of the funding allocated and disbursed to all approved provinces. Funds were disbursed from the then national Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries to various provinces for implementation of projects according to their needs assessments.
In this regard: R20 million was allocated to the Eastern Cape; R13,5 million was allocated to the Free State; R43 million was allocated to the Northern Cape; R10 million was allocated to Limpopo; R10 million was allocated to Mpumalanga; R170 million was allocated to the Western Cape.
Both, the Northern Cape and Eastern Cape Departments of Agriculture provided fodder to the affected farmers, while the Free State Department of Agriculture is currently providing
relief in terms of water infrastructure projects, including boreholes and desalting of dams. The main focus was on subsistence and small holder farmers; however, in provinces like the Western Cape and the Northern Cape, all categories of farmers benefitted in the affected municipalities.
Fodder and water infrastructure were used to support affected livestock in terms of feeding and drinking water. Some farmers have both livestock and crop and would use the water for irrigation as well. The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development in collaboration with the provincial Departments of Agriculture also continuously provide dissemination of early warning information, awareness and drought coping mechanisms/strategies. Provinces are also putting measures in place to assist affected these farmers.
In terms of the processes in cases of drought, municipal and district agricultural offices guide farmers in terms of legislated processes relating to support as outlined in the Disaster Management Act, 2002. This Act stipulates that provinces and municipalities must set aside a percentage or reprioritise their budgets to address the disaster in terms of relief and recovery.
When this percentage has been exhausted, the province or the municipality concerned may access funds from the National Revenue Fund, which is managed by National Treasury through the National Disaster Management Centre housed at the Department Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, to deal with all disaster matters. Thank you very much.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Speaker, ek weet nie of die agb Adjunkpresident Afrikaansmagtig is nie, maar ek sal Engels met hom praat.
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: I am
very poor in Afrikaans.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Baie dankie. In daardie geval, ... [Tussenwerpsels.]
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: I don’t
understand. Yes! I am sorry! I am sorry!
Dr P J GROENEWALD: No, no, sure. I appreciate it. I think the hon Deputy President has mentioned the challenges of the agricultural sector in South Africa. The fact of the matter is that I don’t think people always realise the impact, for instance, of drought. I read an article in a newspaper the other day where business people in Durban, for instance, are very worried about the drought in the Northern Cape because they sell certain food products, like – what do they call it – bunny chows. I don’t eat bunny chows but they eat bunny chows. [Interjections.]
They have the special bunny chows with Karoo lamb, which is very favourable sort of food in Durban. But now, they are affected by the drought and they are losing some of their business.
My follow-up question to the hon Deputy President is about that we acknowledge and the farming communities are also thankful for the fact that the government give certain reliefs. However, my follow up is also concerned with the administration. Let me give you one example: In the Northern Cape, at the start of this year, for instance, the district and local municipalities already declared the area as a state
of drought and as disaster, but because of the red tape to get the money – that is where the problem is – unfortunately the livestock cannot wait another day to say: We will eat tomorrow
The SPEAKER: Hon Groenewald,...
... die tyd is verstreke, meneer!
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Okay! Is hon Deputy President prepared to intervene with that process to speed it up?
THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Hon
Speaker, yes, I am prepared to intervene. You will be aware that I am chairing the IMC on Land Reform. We want to work with farmers and because you have mentioned farmers in the Eastern Cape, the Northern Cape and the Free State, we spoke with the Minister about this matter. I have indicated my interest to visit those farmers so that I can hear from them what the bottlenecks are – what the problems are – because in order to support farmers to ensure that we use our land
productively, we must deal with all the bottlenecks that are between ourselves and the farmers on the ground.
So, we want to set up integrated support at a district level, which will support farmers. That, we will do together with the provinces and those municipalities involved. However in this case, I will be glad if I take the first visit to go and discuss with those farmers and see the conditions of the affected farms and the extent, scope and scale of the drought. Thank you.
Inkosi R N CEBEKHULU: Ngiyathokoza Sihlalo, mhlonishwa Sekela Mongameli, inselelo enkulu umuntu ayibukayo yile yokuthi nxa ngabe uHulumeni, umnyango uzimisele kangakanani ukusiza abalimi nxa behlelwe yilezi zinhlekelele kugcina ufica ukuthi abazisakali. Ngakhoke umbuzo wami ubheke ekutheni mhlonishwa, yonke imali ephumayo iyosiza abalimi, ingxenye yayo ayifiki kubalimi abasuke bedinga ukusizakala. Igcina iphelela ezandleni kwizikhulu nabathile ababasebenzisayo ukuthi lezi zimali ziphume ziye kubona.
Ngabe umnyango wakho mhlonishwa ungakwenza ukuthi uke uphenye, ngikususela la ekutheni eKwaZulu-Natal bekunesomiso, kubatshali bomoba abancane abathintekile, abamapulazi afufusayo amancane, abalimi abziphilisa ngokulima ukudla, abantu bakhalile kuze kube yimanje, kwenziwa imihlangano emikhulu emahholo kodwa azange zifike izimali kubona.
Umhlonishwa angakwazi yini ukusukuma aziphenye lezi zinto ngokomnyango wakhe? Ngiyathokoza.
USEKELA UMONGAMELI WASENINGIZIMU AFRIKA: Sizosebenzisana
noNgqongqoshe uThoko Didiza, sisebenzisane nondunankulu bezifundazwe ezithintekayo, sisebenzisane noNgqongqoshe bezolinmo kulezo zifundazwe, sisebenzisane nezimeya zezindawo. Into esizama ukuyakha lapha ukuthi sonke sihlangane ndawonye, kubeyithi sonke esiletha izinsiza. Undunakulu wendawo kufuneka azi ukuthi umnyango kazwelonke wenzani. Umnyango kazwelonke kufuneka wazi ukuthi undunankulu wenzani. Undunankulu kumele azi ukuthi umasipala wenzani.
Izimali zonke esiyozikhipha ezihlangene nezinsiza esizilethayo sizoziletha zonke, zisukela kwisifunda. Yiyona le indlela esizoyisebenzisa esicabanga ukuthi izosisiza uma sime kusifunda la kunomasipala abaningana kuleyo ndawo.
Sizohlangana sonke kwisifunda ukuthi konke esizokuletha sisiza abalimi kusukele kusifunda. Kodwa-ke uNgqongqoshe ngeke nje avele ashone kwisifunda, uzosebenzisana nondunankulu aphinde asebenzisane noNgqongqoshe. Yileyo-ke into esizoyenza ukuthi imali ephumayo, noma iphuma kuzwelonke noma iphuma kwisifundazwe noma kumasipala, izofika kumlimi. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.]
Ms M M E TLHAPE: House Chair, Deputy President, it is not only drought that is threatening agri-businesses and food security. The sector has recently experienced crop and animal diseases like fall army worm, avian flu in poultry and foot and mouth diseases in the beef industry. How is government going to address these challenges to make sure that no person in South Africa goes hungry as set out by President Ramaphosa during the state of the nation address?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Thank
you, hon member. We want to affirm the view as government that says South Africa has a lot of capacity to produce enough food from the land that we have, to ensure that no person in the country goes hungry. We are going to do that collectively as a country. For instance, we have got the veterinary services in
the Department of Agriculture, which has got programmes that are targeting prevention and the creation of awareness, as well as reacting positively and promptly to any disease outbreak.
Over and above this, the entities of the department, mainly the Agricultural Research Council, the Onderstepoort Biological Products and the Perishable Product Export Control Board are in the forefront through research and innovation of developing smart agricultural technologies that will improve on-farming productivity, that will reduce postharvest loses and increase resilience towards plant pests and animal diseases, especially in the light of the risk induced by climate change.
By right, I am saying as country, as government, the Department of Agriculture will need to increase its capacity to deal with any disease outbreak. The institutions that I have mentioned are capable to increase our capacity as a country to deal with those and to prevent them before occurring. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Deputy President, you may aware that the Northern Cape Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development have compiled a report, and in it, they say very clearly that in the next three months, they are going to require R111,6 million. If rainfall doesn’t happen on the Northern Cape, they are going to require
R612 million by the end of the end. Now, you said farmers are the lifeblood of the country. You said that we can’t leave farmers to fend for themselves.
So, the question I would put to you is: How is this funding going to be made available to the farmers of the Northern Cape; and, will you support the declaration of the Northern Cape as a disaster area? They quite rightly complain than the national government is often not willing to do so. The funding has to follow that declaration. Given the figures that we are talking about: Will you commit to this funding; and, will you support the Northern Cape being declared a disaster area?
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: The
question was raised by the member who asked the original question ... [Laughter.] [Interjections.] ... I mean, by hon Groenewald. In that question, he mentioned the Northern Cape,
the Eastern Cape and the Free State. I have made an undertaking that together with the Minister, I will go to these provinces so that we can ascertain the problems.
I appreciate the fact that you are aware that there is a problem and you have raised it with us. So, it is important that we satisfy ourselves that we engage and talk face-to-face with the farmers because the Northern Cape is very high in terms of agriculture. We are quite aware that some of the products that are produced in the Northern Cape cannot be found anywhere else in the country.
So, it is important to go and support those farmers. We will talk to the Premier and the MEC; we will meet with the farmers on an indoor meeting and hear their problems. [Interjections.] At times, I want to visit their farms – one or two farms – that are highly affected by the drought. [Interjections.] But, I want to raise one element here ... [|Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Deputy President, let me just take the intervention from this member. Why are you rising, hon member?
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Hon House Chairperson, since this is repetition of a question – I don’t know where was hon Steenhuisen when hon Groenewald already asked this question: Can we give a new follow-up question so that we maximise the efficiency of this session of question and oral replies? The question he asked was already asked earlier on!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you, hon Ndlozi. Hon Steenhuisen, why are you rising?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: House Chairperson, it is clearly not a PhD in listen, because the question I’ve asked is a completely different question from the hon Groenewald’s. I asked two specific questions: Will he support it being declared a disaster area; and, will he provide the
R111 million? Hon Groenewald didn’t ask those questions.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): And, the Deputy President is busy replying to that follow-up question. You can now continue, hon Deputy President!
The DEPUTY PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA: Well, I
said: Hon Groenewald, you raised the question; you interacted
with the farmers; and you didn’t read this in the newspaper. I said I am going to visit the Northern Cape. I will interact with the farmers. We will see the extent of the damage caused by the drought and together with the province; we will find a way of supporting those farmers.
I also want to say to our farmers out there: When they do their business – if you enter into any business venture – whether it is farming or anything else, it is important to take insurance because drought or anything can strike at any time. At least there should be something that comes from your insurance and probably government can support. It is important to note that and I am going to tell the farmers that. As much as there would be government support, there should be anticipation that anything can happen to the business, so insure your business. Thank you very much.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you, hon Deputy President. Hon members, this concludes questions to the Deputy President. I wish to thank ... [Interjections.]
Mr J W W JULIUS: Point of order!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order! I wish to thank the hon Deputy President for his replies. Thank you!
Mr J W W JULIUS: Point of order!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Why are you rising, hon member?
Mr J W W JULIUS: I think we were invited today to a ...
... skilpadbraai: Baie dop; min vleis!
The Deputy President said nothing today!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): That’s not a point of order, hon member. Please take your seat. Take your seat! We will now proceed with our business, hon members. The next item on the order Paper is a motion in the name of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party.
MOTION ON THE ORDER PAPER:
UMBHEXESHI OYINTLOKO WEQELA LOMBUTHO ELILAWULAYO: Ndima
nokuphakamisa kule Ndlu into yokuba kwisiGaba sesiHlanu sePalamente ukhona umcimbi ongazange ugqitywe. Silumkisa ngelithi igaba alishiywa entsimini. Ndiphakamisa ukuba kumiselwe ikomiti yethutyana eza kujongana nalo mcimbi utshisa ibunzi womhlaba owathathwa kubaniniwo. Siphakamisa ukuba lo mhlaba ubuyiselwe kubantu bawo kungahlawulwanga zindleko. Loo komiti mayimiliselwe yile Ndlu yoWiso-mthetho kuba phaya kwisahluko sama-25 kuMgaqo-siseko iyabethelelwa into yokuba umhlaba awukwazi ukuba ebesemntwini omnye. Mawubuye umhlaba wabantu bengahlawulanga nembala. [Kwaqhwatywa.]
Siphakamisa ukuba le komiti ibe ne-11 labantu bale mibutho ilandelayo ngolu hlobo ludakancwe apha: ANC bathandathu; DA babini; EFF linye ilungu; eminye imibutho badibane ngabantu ababini. Ngenxa yobuzaza balo mcimbi kwaye ubani nobani ufuna ukusondela kufuphi, mayiphinde ivulwe kongezwe abantu aba-14 abasuka kweminye imibutho kuba kufuneka ugqitywe lo mcimbi womhlaba. Kuza kufuneka ukuba le komiti ibuye ungaphelanga unyaka-mali lo sikuwo ize kunika ingxelo kuba siyalamba kwaye siyahlupheka. Umhlaba wona uyafuneka. [Kwaqhwatywa.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (MR C T Frolick): Hon Chief Whip, will you just add that you move the motion as it appears on the Order Paper please?
UMBHEXESHI OYINTLOKO WEQELA LOMBUTHO ELILAWULAYO: Bendiqale
ngalo nto ndathi ndiphakama, ndiqaphela, ndiphakamisa kananjalo into yokuba iNdlu mayekele.
I so move.
Ukuba kufuneka isiNgesi.
[TAKEN FROM THE MINUTES -
The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the House –
(1) notes that in the Fifth Parliament the report of Constitutional Review Committee on Review of section 25 of the Constitution, 1996 (ATC,15 November 2018, p 4) was
adopted by the Assembly and the Council on 4 and 5 December 2018 respectively, recommending that Parliament
(a) amends section 25 of the Constitution to make explicit that which is implicit in the Constitution, with regards to expropriation of land without compensation, as a legitimate option for land reform, so as to address the historic wrongs caused by the arbitrary dispossession of land, and in so doing ensure equitable access to land and further empower the majority of South Africans to be productive participants in ownership, food security and agricultural reform programs; and
(b) urgently establish a mechanism to effect the necessary amendment to the relevant part of section
25 of the Constitution;
(c) further notes that an ad hoc committee was established to this effect but could not complete its task by the time of dissolution of the Fifth Parliament and that it recommended that the matter
be concluded in the Sixth Parliament (ATC, 15 March 2019, p 92);
(3) establishes an ad hoc committee in terms of Rule 253 to –
(a) initiate and introduce legislation amending section
25 of the Constitution;
(b) have regard to the work done and recommendations as contained in the reports of the Constitutional Review Committee and the previous Ad Hoc Committee on Amendment of section 25 of the Constitution;
(c) consists of 11 voting members of the Assembly, as follows: African National Congress 6, Democratic Alliance 2, Economic Freedom Fighters 1 and other parties 2;
(d) further consists of 14 non-voting members of the Assembly, as follows: African National Congress 2, Democratic Alliance 1, Economic Freedom Fighters 1 and other parties 10; and (e) exercise those powers
as set out in Rule 167 that may assist it in carrying out its task;
(4) sets the deadline by which the Committee is to report as 31 March 2020.]
Mr N SINGH: Thank you for your intervention, hon Chair. I would have liked the Chief Whip to read the resolution as printed on the Order Paper for the records. Could you [Inaudible.] to that?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (MR C T FROLICK): No. hon members, no. the Chief Whip was perfectly in order. It can be moved in any language. Not necessarily in the English written on the Order Paper, and that’s why I asked the Chief Whip to move formally, which she has done. So, it’s in order.
I now put the motion, are there any objections?
HON MEMBERS: No.
HON MEMBERS: Yes.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (MR C T FROLICK): There are objections. I put the question. Those in favour will say Aye.
HON MEMBERS: AYE!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (MR C T FROLICK): Those against will say No.
HON MEMBERS: No!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (MR C T FROLICK): I think the AYEs have it.
Declarations of vote:
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: House Chairperson, the DA will not be supporting the motion on the Order Paper as it appears today. Because what this motion is today, is the greatest hoax perpetuated on the people of South Africa.
Let’s be very, very clear, South Africa suffers desperately from the history of systemic exclusion of black people from land ownership in South Africa through a variety of discriminatory laws. And that is the truth. You can trace it
back, it was legislative dispossession of property and ownership in South Africa.
What this has done is that it has left many, many black South Africans, particularly, without security of tenure, without ownership of land and we fully support efforts to ensure that we have redress and redistribution of land in South Africa. We have to put land in the hands of more previously disadvantaged South Africans.
But the problem with this motion is two fold. First of all it’s premised on a Constitutional Review Committee, which itself is legally, procedurally and constitutionally flawed. You cannot have a consultation process that culminates in a report that ignores over 600 000 written submissions because they weren’t to the liking of what you wanted to achieve. [Applause.] That is not consultation, that is not consultation, that is a farce. It says we have a predetermined outcome, we ask people to give their opinions and we just regarded them anyway.
It completely ignored the overwhelming amount of oral submissions held by the committee here in Parliament where by
far the majority showed very clearly that they were against the amendment of the Constitution.
It ignores the fact that people like Judge L B Sacks have said:
Far from being a barrier to radical land redistribution, the Constitution in fact requires and facilitates extensive and progressive programmes of land reform. It provides for constitutional and judicial control to ensure equitable access and prevent abuse.
And as I said the other day, this cluster that you’re trying to use to fix this problem is a smokescreen to the government failure of the last two decades. It doesn’t address the root causes of how land reform and land restitution in South Africa is not working, and why it does not move at the pace to ensure that we have land at the hands of more previously disadvantaged South Africans.
It will also have serious unintended consequences for our economy. Most agricultural land is bonded and will have impacts on the financial services in South Africa.
There’s also no such thing, including VBS Mutual Bank, it will have an impact on them as well, there’s no such thing as expropriation without compensation because what the government expropriates without compensation will be paid for by the negative effects on the economy.
And if you want to see the end road of what you want to do here today, have a look at Venezuela, biggest human displacement in human history [Applause.] biggest human displacement in human history, go and have look, go and have a look at what happened in Zimbabwe when Robert Mugabe went down the same road, ended up with ... the are actually doing the opposite now in Zimbabwe because they realised the folly of their ways. [Interjections.]
But let’s be serious, let’s get past this hoax, because now you’re going to wait till March next year, which is the rising date of this committee’s reporting date, to actually grapple with this problem. This problem is far more urgent than that. And if this House and this government were really serious about land reform and land restitution, we would be sitting here over the recess period processing the Expropriation Bill. No special majority required, no amendments of the
Constitution, we could do it in three months her, in Parliament. [Interjections.]
If this government was serious about restitution and redistribution we would speed up the hundreds of thousands of land claims that remain unprocessed in South Africa. [Applause.] We could do that easily.
This government could spend the next three months doing a comprehensive land audit on well-placed state-owned land near urban centres where the real pressure for land and opportunity exist in South Africa.
And this government would sit for the next three months and this House should sit for the next three months giving people title in tribal trust land so that they own the land they live and they work. [Applause.] That is what a serious party would do if it was caring about land reform and land redistribution.
This is a hoax and the people of South Africa are going to see through it pretty soon. [Interjections. [Applause.]
Ms H O MKHALIPI: House Chair, one of the guiding lights of the EFF is Frantz Fanon, whose birthday it was on the 20th of this month, once told us that each generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfil it or betray it.
Today once more, Chairperson, we are called upon to forget our petty political differences and to forge a united front to fulfil, not only this generation’s mission, but mission of generations past and generations to come.
The resolution of the land question in South Africa transcends this generation. It is a nation for which many of our forefathers died for and killed brutally. A mission which must be fulfilled for any of those who come after us to prosper on our land. No one has been better placed as we are to for once and all change the constitutional super structure of the country to reflect the pain from where we come form as black people.
And the glory which awaits us, if we are bold enough, brave enough, daring enough and progressive enough.
Section 25 of the Constitution is currently stands, draws a moral equivalence between the rights of the dispossessed and the rights of the dispossessor. It makes the settler equal to the dispossessed native, it brushes out the pain of dispossession, it requires the dispossessed to pay the dispossessor for the land that was acquired brutally.
The Sixth Parliament has rare opportunity to redress all these past wrong to allow the natives who have lost so much to reclaim their dignity back by getting our land back.
As we have led this process before, we will lead it again.
The property clause must and will be amended. And the land will be expropriated without compensation for equal redistribution and use.
No longer shall we have a tiny, tiny circle minority owning the bulk of land in South Africa. No longer shall we be treated as slaves in our own land, never.
The EFF will participate in the ad hoc committee to make sure that the ANC does not even introduce artificial amendments,
because we are here to make sure that we get our land back to the rightful owners, which is the black people. Amandla! [All the power.] [Applause.]
HON MEMBERS: Awethu! [To the people.]
Mr E M BUHTELEZI: Hon Chairperson, from the onset I wish to put it very clear that the IFP supports land reform and redistribution. This is the call that we have championed for so many years. The resolution of land issue carries with it the promise of healing the wounds of the past. Land has social, spiritual and economic values. It has the potential to be the foundation of the renewed economy our country critically need.
Hon Chairperson, section 25 of our Constitution allows for expropriation of land with reasonable compensation where it is deemed fits in the public interests. The IFP remains of the considered opinion that section 25, as it is currently framed in our Constitution, is broad enough to allow for expropriation with no compensation. We need justification to why it is necessary to re-establish the ad hoc committee on this matter. The Constitution had not failed our people. It is
the current policies of this government that is failing our people in redistributing land. Therefore, amending the Constriction is never going to solve the problem of land in our country.
The land that government has already expropriated and redistributed has been severely neglected. The postsettlement programmes to assist communities in working the land have dismally failed. There are many farms that have been given to communities and those communities were never supported and as a result these farms are no longer producing.
Hon Chairperson, we cannot put a plaster on an open wound without diagnosing the cause and the symptoms of our pain and failures. If we look at the current budget of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, it is clearly showing that government does not care or it is not serious in addressing the issue of land. If it was serious the amount allocated to this department could have been substantially more than all the previous years. We cannot continue to pay lip service in a painful issues of land reforms. And we cannot use such a sensitive matter to play politics. Our people have
suffered and that is enough. The IFP does not support the re- establishment of this committee. Thank you.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, it is quite clear that there is a fundamental difference between the EFF and the ANC when it comes to land. The ANC tells people that they want expropriation without compensation so that people have access to land. They also say that there will be strict preconditions before expropriation without compensation takes place.
I think the EFF is more honest than the ANC. For them it is an ideological issue where they say that they want all the land and they want to nationalise it. At least they are honest when it comes to the land issue. If you listen to the EFF and the ANC in Afrikaans we say ...
...dit is soos die katfamilie; jy weet nie of hulle vry of baklei nie.
Sometimes it sounds as if they are fighting and in other times they sound as if they are in love with each other. [Interjections.]
The FF Plus wants to put it quite clear and it is on record from this podium and we say that the process up to now has been flawed. We will ensure that if you want to follow the legal way you must keep within the legal way.
This motion should have a title. The motion should read: How to distract the economy and South Africa’s future. [Interjections.] I am saying it again, and I am saying it quite clear. [Interjections.] If you allow the Constitution to be amended to provide for expropriation without compensation, you put South Africa on the same path as Zimbabwe. [Injections.] Mark my words; I am saying, mark my words.
Daar moet geen onduidelikheid wees nie. Daar is mense wat dink dat as daar oor onteiening sonder vergoeding gepraat word, praat ons van landbougrond. Artikel 25 is baie duidelik, wat sê dat eiendom nie tot grond beperk is nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Dit sluit roerende sowel as intellektuele eiendom in.
Daarom moet die mense van Suid-Afrika verstaan dat hierdie mosie een van die slegste mosies is, veral wat die toekoms van Suid-Afrika betref. Hulle sal hulle misnoeë uit moet spreek.
Die Vryheidsfront Plus verwerp hierdie mosie en sal alles in sy vermoë doen om te voorkom dat die Grondwet gewysig word.
Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the ACDP appreciates that the land issue is a very sensitive and potentially divisive issue given the history of land dispossession in the country particularly following the Land Act of 1913 and the subsequent legislations. While we believe that justice must be done we also strongly believe in reconciliation and nation building.
Biblical justice can be achieved through a process of restitution, and in our view, with compensation. It is for this reason that we support land reform and restitution of land in an orderly and lawful manner.
We appreciate the work that the ad hoc committee in the Fifth Parliament did obtaining expert advice of this issue. It is apparent from this report that experts consulted have advised great caution in this process given that Parliament, for the first time, will be considering amending a clause in the Bill of Rights.
The ANC veteran Mr Valli Moosa cautioned that in amending section 25 the committee must take care not to disposes those who have been dispossessed in the past. We need to be mindful of that. Also, is the significant opinion of the leading constitutional lawyer Advocate Trengrove who said he does not believe that the Constitution require an amendment as a matter of law. And the ACDP agrees.
It is equally important to bear in mind that the Human Rights Commission, who are the guardians of the Constitution, stated in no unequal terms that they are not in favour of an amendment to section 25. Former Constitutional Court judge, Albie Sachs, pointed out that provided for expropriation without compensation in the Constitution will be insufficient to address the failures of land reforms. He referred to the Motlanthe High Level Panel report and the failure to implement its recommendations during public hearings of the Motlanthe High Level Panel which took place over two years. Many spoke scathingly about the role of state officials and politicians in land reforms describing them as vultures who steal the little people have left after decades of oppression and forced removals. How will this be prevented, Deputy President?
The ANC has repeatedly claimed that expropriation with compensation will return the land to the people however the Institute of Race Relations pointed out that this is fundamentally misleading. Land expropriated without compensation will be owned by the state and neither by the individual black South Africans nor will it be transferred to them thereafter. Land acquired will be held by the state as a patronage tool and used to deepen the dependency on and by the ruling party. This is the fraud at the heart of expropriation without compensation.
The ACDP remains committed to find solutions. We cannot support this motion. I thank you.
Mr S N AUGUST: Chairperson, on behalf of Good I would like to declare that we will participate at the ad hoc committee established by Parliament. Our position is that the current section 25 in the Constitution does make provision for expropriation for the public good. Good supports land reform, land tenure, land restitution and land distribution that can deal with apartheid special planning and dispossession.
Our message is clear that public land must be used for public good. The whole debate around expropriation without compensation is causing a lot of policy uncertainty and that impacts on the economic growth. The sooner we conclude the process, the better it will be for the country. Thank you.
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: House Chair, Deputy President, colleagues and the House, yes, indeed, it is true your dignity and your identity come from exactly where you originate. The first question someone asks you today is not even your name, but it is where you live. I think it is very, very important that what has happened pre-1994 where the land was taken away from our people must be returned to the people.
But having said that we must also be mindful of the fact that section 25 does provides for expropriation, and there is no doubt about that. We have unduly delayed the process over the period of time to accelerate land reform in South Africa. Let us be honest about that.
But what we find today is that we are coming here as political parties at the expense of the poorest of the poor, we are grandstanding making this to be a political thing rather than
really addressing the challenges of our people in terms of their land and their dignity. The NFP will support any process that will accelerate land reform in South Africa. But I am also saying that we are not a banana republic where you just go and take land from one person and give it to somebody else. That is not what we must do in South Africa. Let us learn from what is happening in the rest of the world and do the right thing.
While restitution must take place and if there is a need for the ad hoc committee, yes, the NFP will support it. But let us be mindful of food security. Let us be mindful of even the lands we take and gave away. Have they been productive? What is going to happen? Let us look at the economy, and let’s look at the bigger picture. Let us not do it because we want to score points and get votes, but let’s do it because it is the right thing to do. That is what the NFP says.
The Constitution is very clear that the land belongs to everybody who is in this country - it belongs to everyone who lives on it. Whether you are white, whether you are black and whether you are brown the land belongs to everybody. Let us be mindful that two wrongs do not make a right. There is a
perception in South that all whites have been dishonest and they have stolen the land. It is not true. This is causing disunity in South Africa. The NFP says, for the purpose of harmony and calling ourselves the rainbow nation let us work together in the interest of the country and the people we serve. The NFP will support this on condition it is the right thing and we are going to address it in a manner that is not going to disadvantage anybody. Thank you very much.
Mr M NYHONTSO: Chairperson, the PAC supports this. To be landless is to be subjected to endless poverty.
Le into ayifuni buciko ANC! Umhlaba ezandleni zabantu. Mawubuyele kuthi. Enkosi.[Kwaqhwatywa].
Mr L M NTSHANYISA: Hon Chairperson, there is no need for any fear. The amendment of section 25 of the Constitution does not mean any exclusion of any person, but the inclusion of all. It is a lasting peace and mixed equitable access to land. Most of the people will be in a position to produce from the land of their own which is very good indeed. This is going to provide food security for all and an end to poverty, which is a great
challenge that is facing our country now. This cannot be by any regulation or policy but by amending section 25 of the Constitution without any compensation. We hope this is going to be done in a very smart and a systematic manner to the satisfaction of all. Without land there cannot be any agricultural production, there can’t be any human settlement. So this has to be carried out.
The expropriation of land without compensation is not meant to offend anyone but to assist all to gain equitably access to the land. The land belongs to all. The ills of the past could not be addressed in any how but by this approach. We have to use this approach. The AIC supports the motion.
Dr M S MOTSHEKGA: Comrade House Chairperson, Comrade Deputy President, the original sin was committed when the African and Khoisan people were forcibly dispossessed of the land and its natural resources. In 1913 this violent and inhuman act of dispossession was consolidated by the land Act No 27 of 1913, which left the African and Khoisan majority with only 7% of the total surface of South Africa. This 7% was increased to 13% in 1036. The racist Union of South Africa that committed this crime against the African and Khoisan majority divided
this 13% of the land surface into native reserves – into what our people were driven like cattle and goats and kept as labour reservoir for the colonial settlers. These crimes degraded and dehumanized our people. This degradation and dehumanisation of the African and Khoisan people are root causes of the deepening moral degeneration and social ills, including femicide, gender-based violence, abuse of women and children, drug and alcohol abuse, gangsterism, violence in schools and domestic violence. [Interjections.]
In general, the laws of our national value system, all South Africans, black and white, who believe in human and people’s rights in this House, will support the motion tabled by the hon Chief Whip of the Majority Party, Pemmy Majodini. The adoption of this motion is a condition precedent for addressing the injustices of the past and in particular, the recovery of the humanity of our people, both black and white. Our glorious movement, the ANC adopted the first Bill of Rights on the African continent in 1923. In its opening paragraph, it reclaimed the African humanity, ubuntu, botho, and the right of African people to participate in the economy of the country. This Bill of rights was amplified by the Africans’ Claims of 1943 and the Universal Declaration of
1948. Despite this national and international human rights culture, the Nationalist Party ascended to power on a platform of apartheid and adopted a host of racially discriminatory laws to enforce this apartheid system which was declared a crime against humanity. In 1954, South African women, both black and white, adopted the Women’s Charter, followed by the 1955 Freedom Charter, after an extensive consultation with victims of apartheid.
It is remarkable that all South Africans, both black and white adopted the Freedom Charter that stated that South Africa belongs to all who live in it. The Constitution of this country provides for representative and participatory democracy which will empower all South Africans working together to resolve in a peaceful manner, and not through land invasions, all the land questions, all patriots and peace- loving South Africans know that restitution of land to its rightful owners is a prerequisite for the realisation of human and people’s rights for which many men and women in South Africa and the frontline states fought and died for. Without the resolution of the land question, the regeneration of Africa that Pixley ka Isaka Seme called for in 1905 and the nonracial society that President Sefako Mapogo Makgatho,
Kolobe ya Bjatladi bja Mmamorela called for in 1917 will remain a pipe dream.
Ke zwaazweo Bana ba Tšiekgalaka; ke zwaazweo Balodzwi baModjadji wa Mmaleakgobela; tshiwana ankhena moloti, ke lotwa ke mabu a tsela
Re phelele Motlatšamopresidente David Mabuza, re phelele Motlatšasepikara, re phelele Sepikara Mme Thandi Modise - kopano ke maatla! [Tsenoganong.] [Magoswi.].
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon member! Order!
Question put: That the motion as moved by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party be agreed to.
The House divided.
[Take in from minutes.]
Mr X NGWEZI: House Chairperson, that member’s thing there is not working. Please assist him.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Can you just give the name of the member to the Table Staff so that it is recorded.
Mr M N NXUMALO: Hon House Chairperson, can I make a correction, my thing is working very well ... [Laughter.] [Interjections.] ... it is just the gadget that is not working
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): You must tell your colleague. Inform your colleague that he should not say your thing is not working when it’s working. [Interjections.] Order, hon members.
Question agreed to.
Motion accordingly agreed to.
CONSIDERATION OF LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE PROMOTION OF ACCESS TO INFORMATION ACT, 2000 (NO 2 OF 2000) SUBMITTED BY PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES
Mr G MAGWANISHE: Hon House Chair, hon Speaker, hon members, the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services requests the permission of the House in terms of Rule 273(1) for the introduction of the following legislation in the House, mainly the Promotion of Access to Information Amendment Bill of 2019.
The Bill aims to amend the promotion of Access to Information Act No 2 of 2000. This is meant to revise and align its provisions with section 32 of the Constitution. The Bill seeks to regulate the recordal, preservation and availability of information in respect of private funding to political parties and independent candidates.
On 21 June 2018, the Constitutional Court in My Vote Counts NPC versus the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and another, confirmed an order of constitutional invalidity made by the High Court of South Africa, Western Cape Division, which declared that Promotion of Access to Information Act is
invalid to the extent of its inconsistency with the Constitution by failing to provide for the recordal, preservation and reasonable disclosure of information on the private funding of political parties and independent candidates.
The Constitutional Court further ordered Parliament to amend Promotion of Access to Information Act and take any other measure it deems appropriate to provide for the recordal, preservation and facilitation of reasonable access to information on the private funding of political parties and independent candidates within a period of 18 months.
The Bill will address the Constitutional Court’s judgment by inserting a new Chapter 2(a). This chapter will deal with publication and availability of publication and availability of certain records of political parties in order to regulate the recordal, preservation and availability facilitation of information. In respect of private funding of political parties and independent candidates and to provide for matters connected therewith, the Bill creates an obligation for the accounting officer of a political party which is defined to include an independent candidate to create and keep records of
any monies paid or donated by persons or entities to a political party which is more than R100 000.
Any money lent to the political party, any money paid on behalf of the political party, asserts, services or facilities provided to a political party and any sponsorship provided to a political party. The records must be available on social media platforms on quarterly basis. Furthermore, the Bill requires that the records be updated and be made available on social media platforms of the political party concerned two months before the election of the National Assembly, the provincial legislatures and municipal elections or a referendum.
The records must be kept for a period of at least five years after the records were created. The Constitutional Court considered the right to make political choices and the right to vote. Upon deciding whether there was a link between these rights and the disclosure of private funding information, the court found that the constitution envisages an informed right to vote.
This is because in a democracy, government is based on the will of the people which is expressed through elections. The court finds that if voters did not have access to all the necessary information to make an informed decision when voting, this can frustrate the will of the people. We request therefore, that the House approves this request. Thank you very much.
There was no debate.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: House Chair, I move that the House in terms of Rule 273(3), give permission that the legislative proposal be proceeded with. Thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): The motion is that permission accordingly given to the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services to proceed with the legislative proposal. Are there any objections?
HON MEMBERS: No.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No objections. Agreed to. That concludes the business ... [Interjections.]
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Chair.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Yes.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: I would like to make a declaration.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): There’s request for a declaration.
Declaration(s) of vote
Dr M Q NDLOZI: Chairperson, as the EFF, we really welcome the initiatives as directed by our courts. It is important that in the spirit of this particular amendment and legislative process to reiterate our call that President Ramaphosa must take the country into confidence about people and companies that funded his presidential campaign to become the President of the ANC. In the interest of access to information, we have the right as the South Africans to know, who funded the CR17 Campaign and what do they stand to benefit?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members, order.
Dr M Q NDLOZI: This is important and critical particularly for the President whose attitude and promises were based on the fact that he will be a transparent President. It is a fact that he doesn’t deny that he received funding for his presidential campaign. He did not declare it in Parliament.
That is illegal. So, unequivocally, we make the call and we reiterate, President Ramaphosa, reveal who funded you? Reveal their names; reveal also what do they stand to benefit? We are giving him an opportunity, because if he doesn’t do so, we will have to do it on his behalf, or we will have to go and approach our courts to force him to reveal the people that funded him and also what do they stand to benefit. That is in the interest of access to information. Thank you very much.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you. Order; order hon members.
Mr N SINGH: Hon Chair, I am glad that the hon member of the EFF accepts the principle that all parties who receive funding for their campaign need to disclose, and to this end, we support the original action taken by My Vote Counts. They have been at this for a number of years now, and I’m glad that the Apex Court has ruled that we have to bring about the
amendments to our legislation so that we can reveal all donations over R100 000.
But in considering these amendments, hon Chairperson of the Committee, we would like you to note what the Chief Justice said. He said, I quote, “the ongoing law-making process may comfortably run parallel to this judgment without the one being undermined by the other in any way.” Therefore, when considering this amendment, this committee must take note of the Political Party Funding Bill which has been passed into law.
We have set up an ad hoc committee in the Fifth Parliament and the only thing outstanding now is that we understand that there are about 5000 submissions to the regulations that will accompany this Act. We are hoping that on 1 and 2 August these regulations will be made known because that is the day the Independent Electoral Commission, IEC, have set.
The sooner we need to disclose the campaign funding of all parties of all sides of the House, the better. I don’t think we should single any particular party or any individual in this case. Thank you.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION PARTY: House Chairperson, we are not going to speak on this because it really is a technical amendment and we don’t have much choice because the courts have directed to do that. But I certainly it is time that we do start to look at the connection between money and politics because there is annexes there that can be problematic.
We wouldn’t have issues like Bosasa had this been active five years ago. We couldn’t have seen foreign governments like Mr Arafats government handing over briefcases to Mr Dyantyi’s party and I see that he is very finicky about that. But let me just say this, that the good thing about passing the legislation it then applies to all parties equally, and I think we need to start asking ourselves questions:
Who’s funding these parties at fancy houses in Camps Bay? Who’s paying for the business class tickets that are found in the rubbish bins of those parties? Who’s paying for the Moët & Chandon and the Meerlust Rubicon that was found there? Why are politicians meeting with Mr Anton Rupert quietly behind the scenes and keeping this away from their own parties, and more importantly, what interest would a business person have in
paying for somebody’s outstanding tax bill at SA Revenue Service, Sars?
These are the accesses that we got to look at very carefully in politics because it’s not regular it’s properly that politics can really become a terrible place where money displaces the interests of the people of South Africa.
Therefore, we’ve got to look at who the hidden hand is behind many of these particular parties. When you look at the recent attack on people like the hon Pravin Gordhan and others, I think you can follow the moneybag very carefully and it ends up at Mr Mazzoti’s door and Colonette.
You could see Mr Andile Mgxitama that he is opposition to various things; you can trace the money back to the Gupta family. These are the accesses that we got to watch for in politics, to ensure that money doesn’t taint politics in South Africa. So, we will be participating in this, and making sure that it is a responsible amendment because what you also don’t want to do is to stranglehold the situation where only the governing party, to dispensing of tenders and access is able to channel money into their coffers.
So, we looking forward into this new era of transparency and hopefully, it will prevent things like Bosasa and things that we have seen unfolding in our body politics over the cause of the last fortnight. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, the FF Plus started about two years ago with the process where we said that we have to amend where the party political fund are from, which we did. And my question is: Why don’t we start to implement correctly these specific amendments to the Party Political Fund?
The Political Party Funding Act provides firstly that, all people who want to donate money can donate it in a specific account with the Electoral Commission and that there are certain restrictions of say R100 000 which, if you go above that, you have to declare it. We have a period here in South Africa where a taxpayers’ money has been looted because of certain political people and officials in the governing party, not because of someone else from the public, but because it’s a political party who is in government that actually allows these things to happen.
Therefore, the FF Plus says, let’s start with what we already have and ensure that be enforced. You know, the problem with South Africa partly is also that we are some good legislation, but we do not enforce it. That is part of the problem.
Dan vra ek myself die vraag: Hoekom sal ’n bepaalde skenker miljoene rande gee vir ’n bepaalde politieke party, wat die regering van die dag is, as hy nie iets terug wil hê nie? ’n Besigheidspersoon doen dit vir besigheid, nie omdat hy ’n bepaalde ideaal nastreef nie.
Ek ken baie sakemense, wat vir my reguit sê: “Ek stem nie vir die ANC nie, maar ek gee vir hulle geld; hulle dink ek stem vir hulle.” Dit is eintlik niks anders as ’n bedrag wat gegee word om te sê dat hulle ’n dividend op dit kry nie
Laastens, wat die agb President en die verslag teen hom betref, die versoek van die Vryheidsfront Plus aan die President is, neem die publiek van Suid-Afrika in jou vertroue. Ongeag van die verslag, gaan voort. Ek is op rekord toe ek gesê het: Doen die hersiening, maar neem die mense van
Suid-Afrika in jou vertoue en sê watter geld daar vir jou gegee is.
Hon Chair, to receive millions of rands only for a campaign to ensure that you are elected, creates more questions because, why would you give millions to a President to become a President? I thank you. [Time expired.]
Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the ACDP supports this motion and again as the other speakers has indicated; it must be read with the Political Party Funding Act that has been signed into law; that is not yet not operational. Why is that? It is because of outstanding regulations. Now, there is a whole question as to why that Act is not applied because we’ve passed it; it’s signed into law but the IEC is not implementing it correctly. That is a separate issue.
I fully agree with the sentiment expressed by other speakers about the need for the disclosure of party funding and that is why we supported the Political Party Funding Act. What we’ve got here is interesting because it is the access to that information. We as the ACDP, have raised it continually, I
have also raised my concerns in the Justice Committee that the Constitutional Court strikes down pieces of legislation that are passed by this Parliament.
The executive then delays in bringing their amendments, and then we are sitting at the last minute, the National Assembly and the NCOP, to effect those changes. Recently, in the Justice Committee we raised that again and thankfully this now is a Committee Bill that is brought by the committee.
Therefore, I want to commend the chairperson for that initiative because we need in future, we need to ensure that it happens.
The Constitutional Court instructs Parliament to amend the legislation when it strikes it down. We cannot wait to the last minute. There’s already more than a year passed since this legislation has been passed. So we need to be vigilant and in future pass more of these Committee Bills when the Constitutional Court strikes down our legislation. The ACDP as I have indicated will support this motion. I thank you.
The House adjourned at 17:00.