Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard
House: National Assembly
Date of Meeting: 23 Jun 2015
Summary
No summary available.
Minutes
UNREVISED HANSARD
TUESDAY, 23 JUNE 2015
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY
The House met at 14:00.
House Chairperson Ms M G Boroto took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers and meditation.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS – see col 000.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Mr T J BRAUTESETH: Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the fraudulent use of funds received by National Treasury since 2003 in terms of the plastic bag levy.
[Interjections.]
Solwazi N M KHUBISA: Sihlalo, ekuhlaleni kwaleNdlu okulandelayo ngizosukuma egameni le-NFP ngiphakamise ukuba leNdlu ithi ukubhunga:
ngodaba lokubola, ukugqwala, nokukhutha kwamapayipi amanzi esithola ukuthi yenye yezinhlekelele esibhekene nomasipala weTheku okusekuphazamise umnotho kulo masipala njengoba nenkampani i-Rainbow Chickens ikhala ezimathonsi nje.
(Translation of isiZulu notice of motion follows.)
[Prof N M KHUBISA: Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the issue of worn out, rusty, and mouldy water pipes which were found to be one of the disasters faced by the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality, and this is hampering the economy of this municipality because even the Rainbow poultry company is complaining about this.]
Mr S G MMUSI: Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates efforts to ensure relevant and accessible skills development programmes for the people with disabilities coupled with equal opportunities for their productive and gainful employment.
Ms S R VAN SCHALKWYK: Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates ways to create a more reliable and affordable public transport system and better co-ordination between various modes of transport.
Ms S J NKOMO: Madam Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the current alleged ability of financial institutions to collude at a premium cost to bulk buyers of our South African currency, the manner in which such practices are conducted, the financial institutions implicated in this issue, and the manner and means available to prevent such collusive activity in the future.
Ms N I TARABELLA MARCHESI: Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates how women’s empowerment can effectively combat poverty and stimulate development that is truly sustainable.
Mr C D MATSEPE: Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the tragic death of several patients at the Letaba Hospital in Limpopo due to load shedding and ways of ensuring that patients across the country are safe from such incidences.
Ms L L VAN DER MERWE: Hon House Chair, I hereby give notice that I shall move on behalf of the IFP that:
The House debates the need for an immediate review of the medical parole of convicted fraudster Schabir Shaik as his alleged recent utterances and behaviour point to the fact that he seemingly is no longer ill.
Mr M S MBATHA: Hon House Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the claim that government’s Operation Fiela is a state-sponsored xenophobic attack against African nationals.
Ms S T XEGO: Hon House Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates incentives and programmes to shift jobs and investments towards the dense townships on the urban edge.
Mr M HLENGWA: Hon House Chair, noting that education department officials investigating matric exam cheating in KwaZulu-Natal have been attacked during violent protests by pupils, I give notice that I shall move that at its next sitting:
The House debates the need to fast-track this investigation into the 2014 group cheating allegations to curb further violence and to bring this matter to a logical conclusion.
I thank you.
Rev K R J MESHOE: House Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the results of the Global Peace Index that reveal that violent crime and protests have increased, resulting in South Africa sliding down 14 places on the index of 162 countries, from 122 in 2014 to 136 this year.
I thank you.
Mr T E MULAUDZI: Hon House Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates strengthening the security of rural inhabitants to ensure that women are not easily chased off the land when their husbands die, and to ensure that rural people who do not have titles to land can access government support when they want to farm.
Prof N M KHUBISA: Chairperson, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the lack of service delivery at Mount Fletcher, particularly in Tsitsani where there is no water, electricity, bridges, or roads.
Mrs C DUDLEY: Chair, on behalf of the ACDP, I give notice that I shall move that:
The House debates the successes and failures of provision of early childhood development in South Africa.
Ms D G MAHLANGU: Hon House Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates creating incentives that encourage a culture of individual saving for risk and loss of income due to old age, illness, injury, or loss of work for workers in both the formal and informal sectors.
Mr K P SITHOLE: Hon House Chair, on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move that:
The House debates the generally poor state of roads in South Africa that, due to its state of disrepair, leads to a high frequency of fatal accidents, and the immediate steps that can be taken to ensure greater safety of road users in general in South Africa.
Ms D P MANANA: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC that:
The House debates ways to sustain campaigns against racism, sexism, homophobia, and xenophobia.
Ms M R SHINN: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:
That the House-
(1) debates the need for a coherent cyber security strategy to be developed through collaboration between state entities, commercial and industrial stakeholders, human
rights activists and other interested citizen-based organisations; and
(2) further debates the need for public participation in drafting and processing all legislation and national and international agreements designed to protect the online rights of citizens to privacy, freedom of speech, and association, and to protect government, the private sector, and all citizens from cyberattacks and surveillance.
Ms P NTOBONGWANA: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the EFF that:
The House debates the provision of mobile clinics fully resourced with accessible and affordable medication to all villages in South Africa that will function 24 hours per day and seven days per week.
Ms S J NKOMO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the IFP that:
The House debates the progress made and challenges still to be met in ensuring that all our hospitals have access to
clean water, sanitation and energy, thus doing everything possible to stem the tide of preventable deaths.
Thank you.
Mr M H REDELINGHUYS: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA that:
The House debates the role of restorative justice with particular focus on social justice as a constitutional imperative for achieving redress and reconciliation and realising a society of freedom, fairness, and opportunity for all.
Mr N L S KWANKWA: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the UDM that:
The House debates improved co-ordination and management of small business development initiatives in South Africa.
Thank you.
CHURCH MEMBERS GUNNED DOWN IN SOUTH CAROLINA
(Draft Resolution)
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes that on the evening of 17 June 2015, a lone gunman opened fire on people in the Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston, South Carolina, a state in the United States of America;
(2) further notes that the church is one of the United States’ oldest black churches and has long been a site for community organisation around civil rights;
(3) also notes that nine people were killed including the senior pastor, Clementa C Pinckney, who was also a state senator;
(4) acknowledges that the suspect, 21-year-old Dylann Roof, has been arrested;
(5) further acknowledges that the US Department of Justice is investigating the possibility that the shooting was a racially inspired hate crime;
(6) calls upon this House to convey its condolences to the grieving families of the people in Charleston who were gunned down in cold blood; and
(7) conveys its condolences to the government of the United States of America on the loss of its senator.
Ms H H MALGAS: Chair, I would like to add to the motion by the NFF because we have a similar motion. [Laughter.]
Prof N M KHUBISA: Chairperson, on a point of order ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Let me first listen to the point of order.
Prof N M KHUBISA: Hawu, nakhu konakala lapha emuva, umhlonishwa akalibizanga kahle igama le-NFP. Umhlonishwa lapha ngaphesheya bekufanele athi NFP. [Uhleko.] [Wow! There’s a problem here at the back. The hon member did not pronounce the NFP name correctly. The hon member over there was supposed to say NFP. [Laughter.]]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon members, by agreement in this Parliament, motions that have not been circulated may not be read in the House. I have a list of motions here, and that motion is not on the list. So I am not
going to put the question. Because I am not sure which motions you will be raising, I will allow you to read them but, if it’s not on the list, I won’t put the question. Can we agree on that? Thank you very much. So, I am not putting the question to that motion.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order, Madam House Chair: The Rules and the conventions say that it is a guideline to circulate. So, if a motion has been read in the House, you have to put the question. If the ANC wants to object to it, they can object to it and then move their motion, but if a motion is read in the House, a question must be put.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): So we don’t regard the conventions in this House? [Interjections.] It’s fine. I will deal with it as it comes. Thank you very much.
Let me put the motion. Hon Khubisa! Is that a point of order, or are you coming with a motion? I want to resolve this problem of ...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: I thought you said you will put the question.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, I was saying that, according to the convention of the House, we cannot put the
question for motions that have not been circulated. Now there is a point of order by the hon Steenhuisen saying that when a motion has not been circulated but is read, the question must be put, and then those who object can do so. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chair, the agreements we have reached collectively on this matter before prescribed that we circulate. What would be the point of the agreement if you no longer circulate, if it is optional? We had a huge struggle with the EFF on the same matter, and the agreement was that every one of us must circulate. Now, how can the hon Chief Whip of the Opposition suggest that we wipe out the agreement and start a new process, simply because they prefer that route? It cannot be right. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: That is not what he said!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I think I have to make a ruling on this before we continue. Hon members, the agreement was made in the House on 24 October 2014. Motions that have not been submitted for circulation may not be read in the House.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: But you let him read it!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon members, that is the agreement that was made in this House, and as we continue
... [Interjections.] No, I mean, I did not know what she was going to read. That’s why I allowed it. So, now, what I am saying is that the Table staff will assist me with the motions that were not circulated. I will call for you because I don’t know which one you are going to raise, whether it was circulated or not, but the last thing I will do is put the question if the motion was not circulated. I won’t put the question. Thank you very much. Let’s continue. I am sorry; I lost track of the hands that were up. I had the NFP. I have the EFF, and then the DA follows. EFF, it is your chance.
Ms A STEYN: On a point of order, Chair: I need to get clarity. What happens then if people read the motion? It can’t just fall away because you said it wasn’t read. Someone then has to stand up. Chair, I need to get clarity on this.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): It’s going to fall away, madam.
Ms A STEYN: Are you just going to say from the Chair that it is going to fall away?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I am not even going to put the question. I will just inform you that that motion was not circulated, with the result that I won’t put the question.
SHOOTING AT EMANUEL AFRICAN METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN CHARLESTON
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes the racist massacre of the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church members in Charleston, South Carolina in the United States of America;
(2) further notes that the EFF sends its revolutionary condolences to families and friends of the African Americans who have been massacred in what should be unequivocally described as an anti-black, racist killing;
(3) also notes that the African American community in the United States of America has been under racist attack
by the policing system that continues to treat them as subcitizens without full protection of the law;
(4) further notes that black people under the US criminal system, purely because of the colour of their skin, are permanent crime suspects whom the police harass and kill with impunity;
(5) condemns US law enforcement for failing to protect its citizens, in particular African Americans because of the colour of their skin;
(6) reaffirms the call for the unconditional removal of apartheid and colonial statues because, like the South African apartheid flag, which the killer was wearing, they continue to inspire white supremacy; and
(7) calls that all statues celebrating colonialist and apartheid leaders be removed by the end of July 2015 because these symbols provide the basis for white people all over the world to continue to think that they are superior and untouchable.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): That motion unfortunately was not circulated. This is the list I have.
It’s not there. Perhaps I should be advised whether something changed because the agreement on these documents I have is that the motions should be circulated by midday.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, we have circulated all our motions today, including the Charleston shooting motion. We have circulated it. Please, can the Table staff get their act together because we have circulated it?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): This is becoming worse. I am told by the Table staff that they did not receive even one motion from the EFF. [Interjections.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, we have circulated it. We can demonstrate it. We have circulated all our motions.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Can we be honest, people, so that we move on?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: We have circulated it, hon Chairperson. Can the Whips please attest to this because we have circulated these motions, all of them?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I would like the Table staff to go and check and inform me because, according to this document, no motions for circulation were received from the
EFF. As they are checking on that, I will allow the EFF to read their motions, although I will use the same principle and not put the question. Thank you.
AFGHAN PARLIAMENT ATTACKED BY SUICIDE BOMBER WHILE IN SESSION
(Draft Resolution)
Ms S V KALYAN: House Chairperson, on behalf of the DA, I hereby move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes that yesterday, 22 June 2015, a suicide bomber attacked the Afghan parliament in Kabul whilst the house was sitting;
(2) further notes that as members of the house were frantically running for safety, several gunmen opened fire on the parliamentary building;
(3) acknowledges that a spokesperson of the Taliban, Zabiullah Mujahid, was quick to claim responsibility for the vicious attack;
(4) further acknowledges that reports suggest that at least
19 people were severely injured in the attack;
(5) vehemently condemns any and all forms of terrorism, violence, and barbaric attacks on any innocent person or institution of democracy; and
(6) conveys its sincere condolences and a message of unwavering support during this difficult time to the Speaker of the Afghan parliament, Mr Mohammad Younis Qanooni.
Agreed to.
KILLING OF NINE PEOPLE BY WHITE GUNMAN AT HISTORICAL AFRICAN AMERICAN CHURCH
(Draft Resolution)
Ms H H MALGAS: Hon Chairperson, on behalf of the ANC, I hereby move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes with great shock the killing of nine people by a white gunman at a historic African American church in
Charleston, South Carolina, in the United States, on Wednesday, 17 June 2015;
(2) further notes that the fatal attack in the church in Charleston, South Carolina, is characterised as a hate crime, which the United States Department of Justice defines as the “violence of intolerance and bigotry, intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability”;
(3) recalls that the shooting is a reminder of the 1963 bombing of an African American church in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed four girls and galvanised the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s;
(4) further recalls that the attack also follows the April shooting of an unarmed black man in neighbouring North Charleston by a white police officer, one of a number of deaths of unarmed black men in encounters with police that have raised racial tensions in the United States;
(5) believes that hate crime should be condemned by all people of the world and that all people should in
unison unite in action to combat this crime in communities under threat of this crime;
(6) commends the United States law enforcement agencies for swiftly apprehending the suspect who committed this horrendous crime to bring him to book; and
(7) conveys its condolences to the families of the deceased, the people of South Carolina, and the United States.
Agreed to.
TRAFFICKED MPUMALANGA SIBLINGS TO BE REUNITED WITH GRANDMOTHER
(Draft Resolution)
Ms C N MAJEKE: House Chairperson, on behalf of the UDM, I hereby move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes that two Mpumalanga siblings who were trafficked to Malawi more than a year ago are expected to be reunited with their grandmother this week, ending their terrible ordeal;
(2) further notes that the siblings, a girl aged 14 and her brother aged 20, were taken from their home in Komatipoort in July last year by a woman posing as a teacher who promised them a better education and better life in the United Kingdom;
(3) commends Interpol and a specialist team from the Department of Social Development’s international social services for their efforts in bringing the children back home; and
(4) condemns human trafficking, as innocent children are being physically abused and exploited.
Agreed to.
FIRST INTERNATIONAL DAY OF YOGA
(Draft Resolution)
Mr N SINGH: House Chairperson, on behalf of the IFP, I hereby move without notice:
That the House—
(1) recognises that Sunday, 21 June 2015 marked the first International Day of Yoga;
(2) acknowledges that the United Nations declared 21 June as the International Day of Yoga after adopting a resolution proposed by the government of India;
(3) further acknowledges that yoga is a compendium of postures aimed at providing practitioners with the substantive benefits of health, fitness, and peace of mind;
(4) applauds the fine example and leadership set by Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi MP, Mr Loganathan Naidoo eThekwini municipal speaker, and many other leaders, in acknowledging the importance and benefits of a healthy body and healthy mind, and for participating in one of this worldwide event’s mass yoga sessions, which was held at North Beach, Durban; and
(5) calls upon all members of Parliament, as well as party and support staff, to engage and participate in exercise and health-related activities in the interest of being better able to serve the people of South Africa.
Agreed to.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, before we proceed, I’m hoping that there has been a correction about the earlier misunderstanding so that then, procedurally, our motion can be put as the House dictates.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I was just waiting for the report.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: All right.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon members, I got the report on the circulation of motions. The understanding is that they were sent to a staff member instead of being sent to the different parties. I have been advised that to allow for smooth sailing in the House, I should put the motion. Please rectify that mistake – all parties. It is not only the EFF. All parties have made a mistake. Thank you very much.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order, House Chair, then you are going to have to give the NFP an opportunity to put their motion again.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Yes, I will do that. All those that I did not put to the House, I will do that.
Mrs C DUDLEY: House Chair, we will have to hear those motions again because, thinking that they will not go through, we didn’t necessarily object.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I will do that.
Mr N SINGH: House Chairperson, we trust that this is an exception rather than the rule.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Yes, of course it is.
ELECTION OF EFF EASTERN CAPE REGIONAL LEADERS
(Draft Resolution)
Ms H O MAXON: House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes that the EFF in the Eastern Cape is intensifying its efforts to ensure that this revolutionary movement is grounded and is driven by the will of the people;
(2) further notes that, over the past weekend, the EFF had regional people’s assemblies in four regions – in Buffalo City, O R Tambo, Joe Gqabi, and Alfred Nzo –
attended by hundreds of elected branch members who went on to elect regional leaders who will ensure the further growth and development of the EFF;
(3) acknowledges that there is no force alive today that can stop this incoming revolution in the Eastern Cape, and that the EFF will be launching two further regions in Cacadu and Amathole, followed by a provincial people’s assembly that will collectively elect a leadership to take over the reins of power from the ANC in the next provincial and national elections;
(4) further acknowledges that the people of the Eastern Cape finally have an alternative that will free them from the tentacles ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order! Hon Maxon, can we allow the hon Ollis to raise his point of order?
Mr I M OLLIS: Chairperson, on a point of order: Can you please clarify whether we are now doing statements. That clearly is a statement. [Interjections.]
Ms H O MAXON: This is not a statement; this is a motion without notice. Let me just conclude, Chair. I move that the House—
(4) further acknowledges that the people of the Eastern Cape finally have an alternative that will free them from the tentacles of the ANC’s corruption and marginalisation, as the new regional leaders will ensure that corrupt mayors such as Zukiswa Ncitha of Buffalo City who was quietly removed by the ANC, when a tender box was a source of conflict between the mayor and the municipal manager, are ousted;
(5) congratulates the new leadership of the Buffalo City and O R Tambo regions;
(6) wishes the Cacadu and Amathole regions very successful launches; and
(7) further congratulates the visionary leadership of the commander-in-chief Julius Malema, who has worked tirelessly to inspire hundreds of thousands of people who had lost hope to find a reason to hope for a better tomorrow that will be ushered in by the EFF.
Mr I M OLLIS: Chairperson, on a point of order: That is not a motion. A motion is a matter for debate. That is a long statement about a party’s programme of action.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson, let me address you quickly. In the Chief Whips’ Forum, we agreed in principle that there is no Member of Parliament who is going to try and edit the contents of our motions without notice. If they object to that, they can stand up and object to that particular process. So, the disruptions of this gentleman are not necessary. He must sit down. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Your point is made. No, no, hon Shivambu, your point is made. So, please sit. Hon Ollis, these are motions without notice. So, allow the parties to make motions without notice. Thank you very much. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT: On a point of
order, Chair: I am here ... here in the ANC. The point of order remains a point of order because that is not a motion. It is a statement. If we have to do the same and make statements, which are not according to the Rules, let us also know that that is how we are supposed to operate. That is not a motion.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon members ... [Interjections.] Before you respond ... thank you ...
Mr J S MALEMA: No, hon Chair, just before you make a ruling. You have made a ruling on this matter, and they are supposed to be the people who help you to run this House. Yet, she comes and challenges you, thereby setting a precedent which she will not sustain. So, I think that we must go with the ruling that you have made and ignore what she has just said, please.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you very much. Hon members, I think there may be a problem distinguishing between statements and motions without notice. That is not a problem we can solve now in this House. We cannot start a workshop on that. I am going to allow motions without notice, but let’s bear in mind that the motion without notice cannot be as long as a statement that is made in the House. That’s the only thing I can say at this stage.
Are there any objections to the motion?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, we object to that statement.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): In light of the objection, the motion may not be proceeded with. The motion without notice will become a notice of motion on the Order Paper.
CONDOLENCES ON DEATH OF CONSTABLE SELLO MACHETE
(Draft Resolution)
Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon House Chair, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes with sadness the death of Const Sello Machete, a member of the Special Protection Unit, who was shot and killed during a robbery in Gauteng on Friday,
19 June 2015;
(2) further notes that 36-year-old Machete, a member of the police’s very important person, VIP, protection unit assigned to protect Minister Pravin Gordhan, was shot multiple times while sitting in his unmarked police vehicle in Stinkwater near Hammanskraal;
(3) acknowledges that Machete’s service pistol was stolen, and that his Toyota Corolla was taken but recovered a few kilometers away;
(4) remembers that he joined the police in July 2005 and had worked for the Minister since June last year;
(5) recognises that he was a diligent officer who understood his responsibilities as a protector and knew how to link them with his orders;
(6) believes that the killing of policemen in general is robbing the citizens of South Africa from getting the services that they deserve;
(7) conveys its deepest condolences to Machete’s wife Gloria and his two young sons, as well as all the family members and friends of Sello; and
(8) calls on police officers not to rest and to pull out all the stops until those criminals are caught and put behind bars.
Agreed to.
MASS EXODUS OF TEACHERS FROM PROFESSION
(Draft Resolution)
Rev K R J MESHOE: House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes with great concern reports about the mass exodus of teachers who resign early from the profession;
(2) further notes that the Government Pensions Administration Agency revealed that last year
4 600 teachers resigned from the service, with almost
1 000 of them from Gauteng;
(3) also notes that the most common reasons for their resignations are poor working conditions and low salaries that leave many teachers with serious financial difficulties;
(4) recognises that the resignations have resulted in a nationwide shortage of teachers, particularly in mathematics and science;
(5) further recognises that the 2014 Basic Education annual report reveals that the number of teachers entering the profession was declining, and that in 2013 a total of
8 227 teachers were absorbed while in 2014 the number dropped to 6 762; and
(6) supports the call by the Gauteng Education MEC to review teachers’ salaries and intensify programmes aimed at celebrating the positive contributions of
teachers in order to strengthen the profile of the teaching profession.
Agreed to.
CALLS FOR TOUGHER ACTION AGAINST NEGLIGENT DRIVERS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M L W FILTANE: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that five people were killed and another two seriously injured after two cars collided in Polokwane on Friday morning, 19 June 2015;
(2) further notes that the accident took place at the corners of Thabo Mbeki and Landdros Mare Streets and though it is unclear what happened, it is assumed that one of the cars might have ignored a red traffic light while the other car was crossing;
(3) condemns negligent drivers who do not obey the rules of the road; and
(4) calls on the Department of Transport to act tough against drivers who neglect the rules of the road.
Agreed to.
CONVICTION AND SENTENCING OF NIGERIAN-BORN DRUG LORD JOHN JEKWU CHIGBU
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M L SHELEMBE: Hon Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that the Durban Magistrate’s Court convicted a Durban drug lord, John Jekwu Chigbu, on various charges of racketeering, money laundering, and dealing in cocaine and ecstasy;
(2) also notes that the Nigerian-born Chigbu was sentenced to a total of 70 years in prison, but that his sentences will run concurrently, which effectively means that he will be in prison for 25 years;
(3) acknowledges that Mr Chigbu’s South African wife, who is alleged to be an accomplice, is on the run and evading arrest;
(4) further notes this arrest and conviction was the outcome of sterling work done by the National Drug Task Team of Lt Gen Vinesh Moonoo and investigating officer Luke Tancrel;
(5) calls upon this House to express its appreciation for the heavy sentence imposed by the court, in the hope that such sentences will act as a deterrent to drug dealers and runners; and
(6) conveys its congratulations to the National Drug Task Team for their sterling effort to combat the untold misery caused by drugs in our communities all over the country.
Agreed to.
BAFANA BAFANA VICTORY IN AFRICAN NATIONS CHAMPIONSHIP QUALIFIER
(Draft Resolution)
Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon Chair, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that South Africa’s soccer team, Bafana Bafana, beat Mauritius 3-0 during the African Nations Championship qualifier at the Dobsonville Stadium on Saturday, 20 June 2015;
(2) acknowledges that the Bafana Bafana coach and the South African Football Association had to scramble to get players for this match after several Premier Soccer League sides withdrew their players for the preseason preparations;
(3) recognises that Bafana Bafana came into this tie on the back of a 2-1 win over Angola in an international friendly at the Cape Town Stadium;
(4) believes that the South African team is highly motivated by the two recent wins against Angola and Mauritius; and
(5) congratulates Bafana Bafana on this deserving victory and wishes them well in their next encounter.
Agreed to.
CHURCH MEMBERS GUNNED DOWN IN SOUTH CAROLINA
(Draft Resolution)
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Hon Chair, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that on the evening of 17 June 2015, a lone gunman opened fire on worshippers in the Emanuel African Methodist Church in Charleston, South Carolina, a state of the United States of America.
(2) further notes that the church is one of the United States’ oldest black churches and has long been a site for community organisation around civil rights;
(3) further notes that nine people were killed, including the senior pastor, Clementa C Pinckney, who was also a state senator;
(4) also notes that the suspect, 21-year-old Dylann Roof, has been arrested;
(5) notes that the United States Department of Justice is investigating the possibility that the shooting was a racially inspired hate crime;
(6) calls upon this august House to convey its condolences to the grieving families of the people who were gunned down in cold blood in Charleston; and
(7) conveys its condolences to the government of the United States of America on the loss of a senator.
Agreed to.
INCREASE IN BULLYING IN SOUTH AFRICAN SCHOOLS
(Draft Resolution)
Ms L L VAN DER MERWE: Hon House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that reports of bullying at South African schools are on the rise, with more parents and pupils reporting incidences of bullying;
(2) further notes that, recently, a Gauteng learner was violently beaten by another pupil in front of his teacher;
(3) acknowledges that in 2013 a survey by consumer insights company Pondering Panda found that 36% of South African school pupils describe bullying as one of the biggest problems at school;
(4) further acknowledges that being bullied at school leaves a lasting mark on a young person’s body and mind;
(5) calls on teachers and pupils or principals to do more to ensure that every South African child is able to receive his or her education in a safe environment; and
(6) further calls upon the Department of Basic Education to put mechanisms in place to deal with bullying at schools, for example by including an antibullying course as part of our life orientation subjects.
Agreed to.
Mr N L S KWANKWA: House Chair ...
...besicela ukuphinda nathi kuba kusenokwenzeka ukuba uProfesa Khubisa ufuna ukuchasa kwesa siphakamiso sethu. Besicela ukuphinda sisiphakamise ukuze abantu basive kakuhle, mhlawumbi abasivanga. [... we would like to put forth our motion again because it may happen that Prof Khubisa wants to object to our motion. We would like to put forth our motion again so that people could properly understand us. Perhaps they didn’t get our point.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No ...
... eyakho ayizange ilahlwe baba, hlala phansi; iqhubekile yaqedelwa. [... yours did not fall away, sir. Take your seat. It was debated and concluded.]
CONGRATULATIONS TO KEVIN ANDERSON ON REACHING FINAL OF QUEEN’S CLUB TOURNAMENT
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M S MALATSI: House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House–
(1) notes that South African tennis player Kevin Anderson made our country proud by reaching the Queen’s Club final on Sunday;
(2) further notes that Anderson faced third seeded British resident Andy Murray in the grand finale;
(3) acknowledges that Anderson’s exceptional performance during the season has taken his international rankings to 14th in the world;
(4) further acknowledges his role in encouraging young South Africans to play the sport and promoting the sport throughout the country; and
(5) congratulates Kevin Anderson for his remarkable achievement and wishes him well as he prepares to take on the world.
Agreed to.
CALLS FOR DEPARTMENT OF BASIC EDUCATION TO PROVIDE BETTER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR SCHOOLS IN EASTERN CAPE
(Draft Resolution)
Ms C N MAJEKE: House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that Ngcobo Primary School, a school situated in Peddie in the Eastern Cape, has three blocks of classrooms that have not been finished over the past nine months, due to building contract termination;
(2) further notes that the reasons why the contract has been terminated are not very clear, leaving a school that teaches Grade R to Grade 7 and serves four surrounding villages with just one old block of classrooms;
(3) acknowledges that the Eastern Cape province has not been doing very well over the past few years on matric results, something that could be attributed to a lack of adequate infrastructure at primary-school level; and
(4) calls on the Department of Basic Education to investigate the matter because the right to basic education is compromised.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Are there any objections to the motion?
Ms H H MALGAS: The ANC objects to this motion.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): In light of the objection, the motion may not be proceeded with. The motion without notice will become a notice of motion on the Order Paper.
WORLD REFUGEE DAY
(Draft Resolution)
Mr W HORN: House Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House-
(1) notes that World Refugee Day was celebrated this past Saturday, 20 June 2015 as an important date on the international Human Rights calendar;
(2) further notes that World Refugee Day was recognised as such by the United Nations in 2000, after Africa Refugee Day was celebrated by many African countries for a number of years on 20 June each year;
(3) acknowledges that according to the UN Refugee Agency
50 million people worldwide live as refugees, of which more than 15 million live as refugees in Africa;
(4) further acknowledges that approximately 2,5 million of these African refugees are of Sudanese origin;
(5) expresses its solidarity with refugees all over the world and associates itself with the words of UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon, who said on the last World Refugee Day that refugees are people like anyone else, like you and me, that they lived ordinary lives before becoming displaced, and that their biggest dream is to be able to live normally again; and
(6) recalls our common humanity, celebrate tolerance and diversity, and open our hearts to refugees everywhere on this World Refugee Day.
Agreed to.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Without further indication of hands, I will go back to the NFP motion ... [Interjections.] No, the one that we discussed often. The question was not put in regard to that motion – the first one.
Please, can you read that motion again? [Interjections.] Oh, you have done that already?
An HON MEMBER: Yes!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you very much. Then we have come to the end of motions without notice. I will now go to the first item on the Order Paper. The motion is in the name of the Chief Whip of the Majority Party.
SADC PARLIAMENTARY FORUM
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move the draft resolution printed in my name on the Order Paper, as follows:
That the House-
(1) notes that in the establishment of the SADC Parliamentary Forum, SADC PF, in September 1997, the SADC Summit of Heads of State and Government envisaged constituting a parliamentary consultative assembly, its ultimate goal being the establishment of a
regional parliamentary framework for dialogue on issues of regional interest and concern;
(2) further notes that a meeting of the SADC Parliamentary Forum will take place in Durban, KwaZulu-Natal, from
5 to 11 July 2015;
(3) also notes that SADC Speakers recently met with President Ian Khama of Botswana, incoming Chairperson of SADC, to engage him on the transformation of the SADC PF into a regional parliament;
(4) acknowledges that the SADC PF continues to operate as a regional parliamentary body that is widely accepted and consulted, not only regionally, but also on the rest of the continent and internationally;
(5) recognises the efforts of the SADC PF in improving the capacity of member parliaments, particularly in the areas of election observation and management, as well as the advancement of gender equality in the region;
(6) further acknowledges that the SADC PF, though not yet formally transformed into a regional parliament as originally envisaged, has made great strides towards achieving this objective, among others in its format
by operating in accordance with agreed rules of procedure and practice at its most recent plenary assemblies in Mauritius and at Victoria Falls; and
(7) expresses its support for the transformation of the SADC PF into a regional parliament and the lobbying efforts of the leadership of the forum to present to the SADC Heads of State and Government, Council of Ministers and SADC Secretariat the case for such transformation that will, inter alia–
(a) facilitate the effective implementation of SADC policies and projects, including SADC protocols and other legal instruments;
(b) promote the principles of human rights, gender equality and democracy within the region;
(c) encourage good governance, transparency and accountability in the region and in the operation of SADC institutions;
(d) facilitate the ratification and harmonisation of policies and laws, while recognising the sovereignty of member states; and
(e) provide a forum for discussion on matters of common interest to SADC countries.
Agreed to.
MAINTENANCE AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Madam Chairperson, maintenance, especially child maintenance, is one of the major priorities of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. This is evidenced by the number of initiatives that the department continues to undertake in order to improve the maintenance system. I would like to mention a few of those initiatives. We have launched a turnaround strategy in all the nine provinces aimed at reducing the turnaround times in the maintenance system in order to improve the preorder maintenance services. This ensures that the maintenance system is faster, more accessible, and effective.
We have also introduced an electronic funds transfer system, or EFT payments, and the total amount of money transferred to beneficiaries in the last financial year was R162 663 925 paid to 226 596 beneficiaries. Where beneficiaries want it, we have also introduced a direct payment system. We are also instituting an integrated case management system in 208 courts in the country to provide for the automation and tracking of business processes to ensure speedy delivery of maintenance services.
There is a longer term revision of the Maintenance Act being conducted by the South African Law Reform Commission, and the Bill which is before the House for the Second Reading is an interim measure of some amendments to improve the system of maintenance.
I wish to highlight a few of them. Firstly, a beneficiary will be able to claim maintenance where they work and not only where they live, which is the current situation. So, it will make it easier for beneficiaries to go to a maintenance court during working hours. If the person that the maintenance is sought from cannot be traced, the court can grant an order directing the electronic communications service providers or cellphone service providers to give the court the contact information of the person who may be affected by an order of maintenance. This direction may only be used if the court is satisfied that all reasonable efforts to locate the person in question have failed.
Then there is a duty being put into the Bill on maintenance courts to complete their inquiries as speedily as possible, and what’s of particular importance is that there is provision for interim orders for maintenance pending the finalisation of matter. A further provision is that the views of the person who is obliged to pay maintenance must be sought.
A major one, which received quite a bit of publicity, is that if a person is in default of paying maintenance, their personal details must be submitted to a credit bureau, and this effectively prevents maintenance defaulters from continuing to receive credit while they owe maintenance. This, we believe, sends out a clear message to maintenance defaulters that their failure to support their dependants is indefensible. So, hopefully, the House will support the Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Dr M S MOTSHEKGA: Hon House Chairperson, I rise on behalf of the ANC to support the Bill. I want to say that our committee unanimously accepted the Bill but had very interesting discussions, especially with regard to whether or not defaulters should be blacklisted. There was a view that blacklisting would limit the creditworthiness of defaulters and therefore further disenable them from paying their maintenance. As a result, it was agreed that we must get the department to investigate other options to blacklisting. When we considered the alternatives, we found no viable alternatives, and therefore we unanimously agreed that blacklisting should continue. Of course, other people prematurely attempted to mount a campaign that was fruitless because the matter was still before the committee for deliberation. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon members!
Dr M S MOTSHEKGA: We are therefore calling on members of committees to engage inside committees rather than in the street ... [Interjections.] ... because Parliament is their platform to do parliamentary work, and they must leave extraparliamentary work to extraparliamentary organisations. [Interjections.]
Another interesting point for discussion was whether or not complainants should pay the service providers for providing information to the courts. The view was that if we accept that position, it would mean that the poorest of the poor, who are women, would not be able to access these services. Therefore, it was finally agreed that in such cases where persons cannot afford, the state should actually pay and recover the costs from the defaulters themselves. We think that the department did its best in the circumstances, and the presentations and submissions made by the public were given a full hearing.
Therefore, we support the piece of legislation which we have no doubt enjoys the approval of the people of South Africa as a whole. The ANC unreservedly supports the Bill. Thank you very much.
WELCOMING OF DELEGATION FROM KENYAN PARLIAMENTARY SERVICE COMMISSION
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon members, before we call on the hon Horn, I wish to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of a delegation of the Kenyan Parliamentary Service Commission’s committee on information, communication, and technology. I welcome you to our Parliament. [Applause.] Thank you very much, hon members. Hon Horn?
Mnr W HORN: Huisvoorsitter, die meeste jong mense van Suid- Afrika het heelwat steil bulte om te klim ten einde hul potensiaal te ontsluit. Ongelukkig is een van hierdie bulte die feit dat twee uit elke drie kinders in Suid-Afrika in ’n huis bly saam met slegs een van hul ouers. Op een of ander stadium gaan hierdie kinders en ouers waarskynlik staatmaak op die funksionaliteit van ons land se onderhoudstelsel ten einde die nodige bydrae vir onderhoud uit die ouer te kry by wie die kind normaalweg nie woon nie. As agtergrond tot die konsepwysigingswet moet ons vir mekaar die volgende oor enige onderhoudstelsel sê. Eerstens, geen onderhoudstelsel in die wêreld kan suksesvol wees as die houding en gedrag van ouers teenoor die onderhoud van hul kinders nie reg is nie. In Suid-Afrika is daar ongelukkig ’n probleem hiermee. Solank as wat daar sommige ouers is wie, wanneer hul verhouding skipbreuk ly, nie die regte houding en gedrag teenoor hul kinders en hul verantwoordelikheid teenoor hul kinders het nie, en glo dat die verantwoordelikheid van die ander ouer by wie die kinders bly groter is, sal die onderhoudsisteem sukkel om aan kinders die nodige sekuriteit te bied.
Daarom behoort een van die doelwitte van regeringsprogramme soos die morele herlewingsprogram te wees om ’n houdingsverandering te bewerkstellig in terme waarvan die eerste prioriteite van ouers wie se verhoudings verbrokkel, moet wees om ’n werkbare ooreenkoms te sluit waartoe beide ouers hul onherroeplik verbind en wat eerstens en primêr op die beste belang van hul kinders fokus. Uiteindelik is dit ’n droom wat ons almal behoort te deel – ’n droom van ’n samelewing waar ouers, ten alle koste en te alle tye, hul verpligtinge teenoor hul kinders nakom.
Tweedens, die sukses of mislukking van enige onderhoudsisteem hang, naas die wetlike raamwerk, ook af van die implementering van die sisteem. Op hierdie gebied is dit ongelukkig so dat daar ook heelwat leemtes in Suid-Afrika is. Enige van u wie al die moeite gedoen het om met diegene in die rye by onderhoudshowe regoor Suid-Afrika te gesels, sal weet van klagtes oor lang wagtye, en sake wat gedurig uitgestel word en maande neem om afgehandel te word.
Laat ons duidelik stel dat ons volle begrip het vir die uitdagings wat die departement in die gesig staar, en ons is bewus van die feit dat die departement oor die vorige vier jaar 247 addisionele aanstellings in onderhoudsverwante poste gemaak het. Die feit dat daar kwartaalliks 44 000 nuwe onderhoudsklagtes by ons howe geregistreer word, illustreer baie mooi dat daar altyd groeiende druk op die stelsel is.
Natuurlik is daar baie onderhoudsbeamptes en landdroste wie met ywer en toesig diens doen en die stelsel van dag tot dag maak werk. Ongelukkig is daar net te veel Suid-Afrikaners met ontevrede verhale oor die onderhoudstelsel wat getuig van amptenare wie nie toewyding het nie, swak tydsbestuur by onderhoudshowe, en administratiewe rompslomp. Daarom, ten spyte van die omdraaistrategie van die departement, is ’n stelsel van kwaliteitbeheer ten aansien van amptenare uiteindelik nodig. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Mr W HORN: House Chairperson, most of the youth in South Africa have to climb very steep hills to reach their potential. Unfortunately, one such hill is the fact that two out of every three children in South Africa live in a house with only one parent. At one point or another, these children and parents will probably rely on the functionality of our country’s maintenance system in order to get the necessary contribution for maintenance from the parent with whom the child does not live primarily. As background to the draft Amendment Act, we have to tell each other the following about any maintenance system.
Firstly, no maintenance system in the world can be successful if parents do not have the right attitude and behaviour towards the maintenance of their children. Unfortunately, we have a problem with this in South Africa. As long as there are some parents who, when their relationship ends, do not exhibit the right attitude and behaviour towards their children and responsibilities towards their children, parents who believe the responsibility of the other parent, with whom the children live, is bigger, the maintenance system will struggle to provide children with the necessary security.
This is why one of the goals of government programmes like the moral regeneration programme should be to bring about a change in attitude in terms of what the first priority of parents whose relationship ends should be to reach a workable agreement whereby both parents commit themselves irrevocably
to focus firstly and primarily on the best interest of their children.
Ultimately it is a dream that all of us ought to share - a dream of a society where parents, at all cost and at all times, meet their obligations to their children.
Secondly, the success or failure of any maintenance system also depends, apart from the legal framework, on the implementation of the system. Unfortunately, it is so that there are many gaps in this regard in South Africa. Any of us who have made the effort to talk to those in the queues at maintenance courts across South Africa will know of complaints about long waiting times and cases that are constantly being postponed and take months to be finalised.
Let us make it clear that we fully understand the challenges that the department faces and that we are aware of the fact that the department has made 247 additional appointments in maintenance-related positions over the past four years. The fact that 44 000 new maintenance complaints are registered at our courts every term illustrates clearly that the pressure on the system is always increasing.
Of course, there are many maintenance officers and magistrates who work with diligence and supervision and who make the system work from day to day. Unfortunately, there are just too many South Africans with tales of dissatisfaction about the maintenance system that attest to officials not being dedicated, poor time management by maintenance courts, and administrative red tape. This is why, despite the department’s turnaround strategy, a system of quality control with regard to officials is ultimately needed.]
In turning to the Bill under discussion, a possible pitfall is to lose focus of the very real impact it will have on the lives of ordinary South Africans. Over the last months, I have been in contact with many parents who are struggling to get joy from the maintenance system. The good news is that the provisions of this Bill may assist some of them.
Mrs A, for example, is a mother of three. The father of her children owns a fleet of five taxis but is now in arrears to the total of nine months’ worth of maintenance payments because he, all of a sudden, cut her maintenance in half, apparently because he chose to save for a deposit to replace one of his taxis, rather than pay his monthly maintenance instalments.
Mrs B has been unable to track down the father of her two children for more than a year. His family is unwilling to assist her and has only told her that he is apparently now working at a mine somewhere in Gauteng. He has blocked all calls from her cellphone to his.
The good news is that the Bill under discussion, once it becomes law, could perhaps assist both Mrs A and Mrs B. Mrs A could be assisted in that this Bill will enable the so-called blacklisting of her former husband with credit bureaus and prevent him from taking up the credit to buy the fifth taxi before maintaining his children. This Bill, once it becomes law, could also assist Mrs B in that she will be able to apply to one of the cellular networks to obtain the newest address of the father of her children, thereby enabling the processing of her maintenance complaint.
The DA is obviously very proud of the retention of clause 11 in this Bill, which provides for the civil blacklisting of absconding parents. Our pride does not merely stem from the fact that we convinced the ANC members on the portfolio committee to ultimately give their unwilling support to this clause, but, rather, stems from the fact that this clause may just help to force a number of parents who are able but unwilling to meet their obligations towards their children. It must be said, however, that the unwillingness or inability of the hon members of the ANC on the committee to appreciate the fact that parents should not be allowed to prioritise either their own expenses or the expenses of children who stay with them under their roofs above those who are not living with them clearly illustrates the moral degeneration on this issue in South Africa and specifically within the ANC.
This Bill will also strengthen the maintenance system in a number of other ways. For example, agreements on maintenance reached outside of the system can now also be made orders of the court. Unfortunately, this Bill will still not assist Mrs C, the ex-wife of a wealthy businessman who insists that he is merely an employee of his company, even producing a pay slip reflecting a measly salary at the maintenance court, despite the fact that the two family trusts – of which he is a beneficiary – own the company.
Therefore, our plea to the Deputy Minister is that while a complete revamp of the maintenance system is planned for the near future, this new system must also make provision for lifestyle audits of parents and orders to remove the veil of protection granted to unwilling parents by complicated networks of business interests aimed at avoiding, amongst other things, the payment of maintenance.
Ultimately, every vote in favour of this Bill is a message that we stand with hardworking South Africans who believe that parents should take responsibility for the upbringing of their children. The DA is proud of the fact that we could convince the ANC, on behalf of those hardworking South Africans, to reluctantly support this Bill in its entirety, even though we had to drag them here kicking and screaming. I thank you.
{Interjections.] [Applause.]
Ms H O MAXON: Chairperson, the EFF strongly believes that the child’s rights to parental care, basic nutrition, shelter, and basic healthcare services are of utmost importance, and both parents are equally responsible to ensure the realisation of these rights.
In South Africa, currently, over 48% of children are raised by single parents, and over 90% of child maintenance defaulters are male. As much as the effort to protect women against the heavy burden of having to care for children by themselves is appreciated, it is of utmost importance that we acknowledge how issues regarding child maintenance in this country do not exclusively lie with the defaulter, but with South Africa’s magistrates’ courts as well.
The amending Bill primarily focuses on the legislative framework and little focus is placed on the structural framework that should ensure the implementation of policy and legislation. Magistrates’ courts are characterised by huge backlogs of maintenance cases, shortage of staff, staff incompetence, lack of information within the system, and the inability to hold parents accountable for their children’s wellbeing. This means that even with the best legislation and resources at hand, victims of child maintenance defaults will still endure the same challenges experienced before the amending Bill.
The EFF also opposes the proposal to blacklist defaulters. Not only does this disadvantage the person that is unable to pay maintenance but it further disadvantages the child and other dependants. The amending Bill must also prescribe a standardised formula-based system for determining child support instead of leaving everything to the discretion of maintenance officers. The discretionary system not only makes maintenance officers vulnerable to bribes but creates situations where complainants are emotionally blackmailed to file for less money than they should file for.
In most magistrates’ courts, boy children get higher maintenance than girl children, which further perpetuates the gender stereotypes this Bill aims to eradicate. This is another reason why child maintenance must be standardised, equally taking into account the socioeconomic status of the complainant and the defendant.
The EFF says that we must not punish the wrong people. Let us fix the system, which is failing our children. We reject this Bill. Thank you.
Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon Chair, this Bill seeks to ensure greater protection for children in families separated by divorce, by ensuring that their financial needs are met timeously in respect of court-ordered maintenance payments.
The Bill amends the Maintenance Act, Act 99 of 1998 in order to bring greater improvement and strength to our current system of maintenance through improved and enhanced amendments such as increasing penalties relating to certain offences contained in the principal Act, ensuring greater regulation around investigation of maintenance complaints, having further regulation around the conversion of criminal proceedings into maintenance enquiries, and making provision for the granting of urgent relief by allowing our courts to issue interim maintenance orders.
Maintenance defaulters will now have to contemplate periods of up to three years in jail in the event of a default on payments, and third parties who effect payments via emoluments attachment orders now face up to two years’ imprisonment for noncompliance with such court orders.
The Bill also makes use of current technological advances by empowering our courts to order that maintenance payment evaders’ locations be tracked using their cellular telephone service providers. This will greatly assist in ensuring that our Police Service and sheriffs are able to track, trace, and ensure service of and compliance with maintenance court orders. The clause allowing the blacklisting by credit bureaus of maintenance defaulters is necessary, and we are pleased to see that it has now been included and carries broad support in this amending Bill.
In conclusion, this Bill represents a great step forward in narrowing down the loopholes of the 1998 Maintenance Act through greater regulation, stiffer penalties for contravention, and greater use of current technology in order to enforce its provisions – all in the interest of the greater welfare of our children. The IFP supports this Bill. I thank you.
Mr S C MNCWABE: Hon Chairperson and members, the NFP supports and welcomes the Maintenance Amendment Bill. South Africa has an unacceptably high rate of maintenance default, which leaves children and former partners destitute and clogs up the court system.
We believe that the amendments to the Maintenance Act are progressive and long overdue. In particular, the NFP welcomes the measures to compel maintenance defaulters to meet their obligations by putting their creditworthiness at risk and to empower the maintenance court to order institutions such as cellphone service providers and Telkom to provide traceable contact details of maintenance defaulters.
The NFP also welcomes the proposal that, where a divorce is done by agreement which adequately sets out the respective maintenance obligations, the requirement for the parties to appear before the maintenance court is dispensed with. We believe that this amendment will reduce the workload of the maintenance court and expedite divorce proceedings.
We also welcome the provision, which allows maintenance courts to make interim maintenance orders, pending the finalisation of maintenance enquiries. This amendment is of great importance to address the frustrating situation where persons who clearly have maintenance obligations try and delay the granting of a maintenance order against them, as far as possible. Such delays are to the detriment of the women and children and should not be excusable.
The net effect of the amendments, as set out in the Bill, is to make the maintenance system more effective and, more
importantly, to streamline the processes relating to investigations by maintenance officers and investigators. For far too long maintenance defaulters have avoided their obligations almost with impunity. Now the longer arm of the law will reach further, and justice will be dispensed far more effectively than before.
The NFP submits that, should the Maintenance Amendment Bill be adopted, women and children will benefit and, in particular, the constitutional imperative of the best interest of the child will be served. We support this Bill. I thank you.
Mr W M MADISHA: Chairperson, the maintenance of children in our country is very important. The Maintenance Amendment Bill will amend the Maintenance Act, Act 99 of 1998. It gives maintenance courts sharper and bigger teeth. Once the Bill is signed into law, a maintenance officer can institute an enquiry to substitute or discharge a maintenance obligation that was never made an order of court.
Henceforth, it will also not matter whether a maintenance beneficiary lives or works in the area of jurisdiction of the court. Either of those conditions will be acceptable for the court. The Bill thus expands the jurisdiction of the court.
This Bill will also empower a court to ask phone companies to furnish the contact information of a person affected by an order of the maintenance court. The court will decide who pays the cost of this service, depending on conduct and behaviour.
Where a person who is paying maintenance seeks a reduction or discharge of the maintenance order, the maintenance officer will have the power to subpoena the beneficiary of a maintenance order as well as to make a determination. The Bill, importantly, places a duty on the maintenance court to conclude maintenance enquiries speedily. Failing that, for reasons beyond its control, it can make an interim order for maintenance.
This is definitely an improvement. The Bill takes note of judgments in the High Court. Before a court orders a person’s earnings to be attached, the employer will have an opportunity to comment on the feasibility of such an order. This makes sense.
Defaulters or beneficiaries who cannot attend court but who consent in writing to an agreement before a maintenance officer at an enquiry will allow a maintenance court to make an order in the absence of either party or both parties.
Where a person ignores a subpoena ... Cope supports the Bill. [Time expired.]
Adv A D W ALBERTS: Chairperson, this Bill that serves to bring justice to maintenance matters pending the finalisation of the South African Law Reform Commission’s review is a welcome change to the current maintenance system.
Daar is geen twyfel dat die onderhoudstelsel soos dit tans daar uitsien, gebrekkig is nie. Geskeide persone, veral vrouens wat dikwels die kinders uit die vorige huwelik moet versorg, staar geweldige ontberings in die gesig, indien onderhoud nie betaal word nie. Hierdie mense is magteloos in die aangesig van ’n vorige gade wat bloot net nie sy of haar onderhoudsverpligtinge nakom nie. Hierdie mense het dan ook gewoonlik nie die vermoë om ’n prokureur te nader vir regshulp nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[There is no doubt that the current maintenance system is lacking. Divorced persons, especially women who often have to care for children from a previous marriage, face enormous challenges should maintenance not be paid. These people are powerless against former spouses who simply do not comply with their maintenance obligations. These people then often do not have the resources to approach a lawyer for legal aid.]
The result of nonpayment of maintenance is, in effect, a double tragedy for the children. Not only are they witness to the breakup of the family structure with all of its ill effects, but they must now face the prospect of a lack of income and further animosity and strife between their parents. As the state sanctions the institution of marriage and is tasked with protecting the interests of children by virtue of its human rights obligations in terms of the Constitution, it is also incumbent upon the state to create an effective and equitable legal system whereby the broken family’s interests can be protected.
Alhoewel die meeste van die wetswysigings tegnies van aard is om effektiwiteit te verhoog, is daar wel een wysiging wat probleme kan skep. Dit handel oor die moontlikheid wat geskep word om ’n wanbetaler te swartlys. Daar is nie probleme met die beginsel om iemand op dié wyse te dwing om sy of haar verantwoordelikheid na te kom nie, maar dit kan wel onbedoelde gevolge hê. Byvoorbeeld, die wanbetaler kan probeer aansoek doen om ’n klererekening vir sy kinders en geweier word of aansoek doen om ’n lening vir skuldkonsolidasie om sodoende sy finansiële verpligtinge na te kom, maar geweier word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Although most of the amendments to the Act are of a technical nature in order to increase efficiency, one amendment could create problems. It deals with the possibility created to blacklist a defaulter. There are no problems with the principle of forcing someone to comply with his or her
obligations in this way, but it might indeed have unintended consequences. The defaulter might, for instance, apply for a clothing account for his or her children but be turned down or apply for a loan to consolidate debt in order to meet his or her financial obligations but be denied.]
It would therefore be prudent to allow for a system whereby the defaulter can apply to have his name removed from the blacklist if any accounts are opened or debt created that would be to the advantage of the ex-spouse and children. It is our hope that the SA Law Reform Commission will relook this matter.
Dit is duidelik dat die wetsontwerp poog om ’n billike balans te handhaaf tussen die belange van die aansoeker om onderhoud en die ander partye betrokke, soos die werkgewer van die onderhoudsbetaler asook die onherhoudsbetaler self. Dit is insiggewend dat ’n verstekvonnis net gegee kan word, indien daar duidelik aangetoon kan word dat die ander party werklik bewus was van die verrigtinge en willens en wetens dit nie bygewoon het nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[It is clear the Bill seeks to strike a fair balance between the interests of the person applying for maintenance and the other parties involved, such as the employer of the person
paying maintenance and the person responsible for payment. It is worth noting that a default judgment can only be given if it can be shown conclusively that the other party had, in truth, been aware of the proceedings, yet intentionally failed to attend.]
It is not every day that one can debate a relatively noncontentious Bill in Parliament. We wish to thank all of the Members of Parliament who worked on this Bill and look forward to a renewed and even better version after the SA Law Reform Commission’s final report. I thank you.
Mr S N SWART: Hon Chairperson, the ACDP has always believed that healthy families form the bedrock of healthy societies. Regrettably, however, we have many dysfunctional families, with absent fathers being a particular problem. Many millions of South African children grow up in single-parent households and, in thousands of cases, absent fathers do not pay the much-needed maintenance for their children.
Now, I have to ask the hon members the following: What was the record in 2013? The record amount owed by a maintenance defaulter was R223 848. Thankfully he was brought to book by the department. He had two children aged 11 and 14. So, we see that this is a continual problem.
The Maintenance Act, whilst it is being comprehensively reviewed by the SA Law Reform Commission, has been amended with these interim measures which are to improve access to and the obtaining of court orders. It also implements certain High Court decisions that affect maintenance matters.
One of the only contentious issues was whether maintenance defaulters should have their names blacklisted. Surely this makes sense. Why should a maintenance defaulter be able to purchase an expensive car, home, or electronic items on credit for himself when he has reneged on his maintenance payments?
Whilst, on the other hand, it was argued that this may result in fathers not being able to access credit to pay maintenance, the possibility of blacklisting, surely, may urge more defaulters to pay. That is why the ACDP supports the insertion of that particular clause.
The ACDP also supports the department’s initiative to name and shame errant fathers who do not pay maintenance. Fathers often deny paternity and, when the tests come out positive, they are still reluctant to care for their children. This, in our view, is shameful. It is also important that maintenance defaulters are effectively and speedily traced to ensure that those court orders are complied with.
There can be no doubt that this amending Bill is a step in the right direction whilst we are having this comprehensive review of the maintenance issue. It relates directly to the poor and vulnerable in our society. The ACDP will support the Bill. I thank you.
Mrs M R M MOTHAPO: Chairperson, our children are our greatest treasure. The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child recognises that the child occupies a unique and privileged position in African society and calls on parents to secure, within their abilities and financial capacities, the conditions necessary for the child’s development.
Key to that development, when relationships between parents break down so does access to maintenance. The primary responsibility or duty for the support of a child rests with the parents. This responsibility continues whether or not the relationship between the parties survives. However, maintenance is about more than parental obligations. It is also a fundamental children’s rights issue. Ultimately, the protection of children’s rights is a collective responsibility.
Section 28(2) of the Constitution, hon Hlengiwe Maxon, specifies that the best interests of the child “are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child”.
This constitutional commitment is echoed in the Children’s Act, Act 38 of 2005. The Act provides that parents must care for, maintain contact with, and contribute to the maintenance of their children. This includes the provision of the basic necessities of life such as shelter, food and clothing, medical care, and education.
Access to maintenance is not just about a duty of support. It is also about poverty alleviation. Despite overall poverty being much lower than in 1993, poverty still has a racial and gender aspect to it that must be overcome. More than seven million children – 39% of all children – live with their mothers but not with their fathers. Halala mbokodo! [Hail the women!]
In South African society, it is still predominantly women who care for children. Statistics indicates that households headed by women are between 38% and more than 100% poorer than households headed by men. Ninety per cent of maintenance defaulters are fathers.
Ba goka magotlo ba re go bona mesela ba a tšhaba. [Tšhwahlelo.] [They make children but then dodge the responsibility of supporting and raising them. [Interjections.]]
This means, for many women, a well-functioning maintenance system is an essential tool in alleviating economic hardship. In 1994, South Africa was confronted with an inefficient, ineffective, fragmented and racially divided maintenance system that required urgent attention. Shortly after the ANC was voted into power, the Maintenance Act, Act 99 of 1998 was introduced to address some of these systemic challenges and give effect to section 28 of the Constitution.
This resulted in significant improvements to the existing system. The overall turnaround time for maintenance cases has decreased, and there has been an improvement in service, especially through the increased use of electronic payments. Hon Horn ...
... go a šongwa, bagešo. [... people are working.]
However, 17 years later, this Act is due for a significant overhaul. This process will be led by the South African Law Reform Commission.
My colleagues have already alluded to three key amendments contained in the Bill. Firstly, it provides for the granting of interim maintenance orders. The amendment places a duty on the maintenance court to conclude maintenance enquiries as speedily as possible. However, should the court have to
postpone a maintenance enquiry, it can now make an interim order for maintenance pending the finalisation of the matter.
Secondly, tracing evasive maintenance defaulters, if a court is satisfied that all reasonable efforts to locate a defaulter have failed, the court may now order one or more of the electronic communication service providers to furnish the court with a defaulter’s contact information. You know that in terms of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, you provide your details so that you can be properly traced. So ...
... ga go na mo le tla tšhabelago. Le tla lla sa mmawee. [... even if you can go and hide somewhere, you will still be traced and, once found, you will regret your actions.]
Thirdly, regulating the reporting of a maintenance defaulter to a credit bureau, when a court grants an order because a defaulter has failed to pay maintenance, that person’s personal details must now be submitted to a credit bureau for blacklisting. Maybe that is why the hon member from the EFF is totally opposed to this Bill.
However, it is not true that the ANC was not in support of this third amendment; we were still busy engaging, hon Horn. Unfortunately, you mobilised DA members to come and dance here
- I don’t know whether it was a toyi-toyi or another kind of
dance. Unfortunately for you, the ANC, a very progressive organisation that understands the policies of this country, then came back and advised the department to find other options and, as the department couldn’t find anything, we then had to agree to this. However, this was not because we were pushed; we were never pushed. We were never pushed, and we shall never be pushed. Why should we subject ourselves to your policies? Never!
Ga go kgonagale! [That is impossible!]
The ANC fully supports this very progressive Amendment Bill. Thank you. [Interjections.]
Mr L M NTSHAYISA: Hon House Chair, the work that has been done by the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services needs to be applauded. It has been easy for the culprits or the maintenance defaulters to run away from the rule of law owing to certain loopholes in the Act. However, it is not always the case that the plaintiff is correct.
We accept the fact that a thorough investigation has to be made now because there are always two sides of the coin. What is important is that men should learn to maintain their kids so that we do not have street kids or gangsters.
It is good that maintenance enquiries are to be speedily concluded in future so that complainants do not give up. Section 6(1) of the Act, that talks about investigation, has been amended. It is also good that now a verbal or a written agreement has to be recognised.
According to section 6(2) of the Act, thorough efforts are to be made to locate those affected by the maintenance order, and other means must be used to contact defaulters.
Another relevant amendment to section 6(3) of the Act is that both the respondent and the beneficiary – not only the respondent – may be subpoenaed to appear before the maintenance court to give evidence of their financial position. However, I think wives at home should also support their men so that they support the children outside of the marriage. This is because it is always a problem that when a man is willing to give support, the wife is reluctant to allow the husband to support the children outside the marriage.
Therefore, the wives should also be responsible.
The AIC supports this Bill because it seems now that it is a form of service delivery to our people. Beneficiaries will gain a lot. We will no longer have the problems that always affect our children. I am still looking for two young men who caused havoc in my house. That is why I support this Bill
because these young men have to be monitored thoroughly so that they don’t do this. They should learn to support. A man has to be held responsible for his evil deeds. If you don’t support or maintain your child, something in your mind is not working. So I do support the Bill, and the AIC does support the Bill because it constitutes good progress. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Ms M C C PILANE-MAJAKE: Hon House Chairperson, the Bill has been drawn up in the best interests of the child and any other person whose livelihood is dependent on a maintenance order in order to continue to support and adhere the principles of a developmental stated, guided by the ANC.
The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Maintenance Act, Act
99 of 1998 so as to further regulate the lodging of complaints relating to maintenance and the jurisdiction of maintenance courts; to regulate maintenance enquiries in order to make provision for the granting of interim maintenance orders; to regulate the making of maintenance orders and by consent; to regulate the circumstances in which maintenance orders may be granted by default; to further regulate the granting of cost orders; to regulate the transfer of maintenance orders; to regulate the reporting of maintenance defaulters to any business which has, as its object, the granting of credit or is involved in the credit rating of persons; to further
regulate the attachment of emoluments; to increase the penalties for certain offences; to create certain new offences; and to further regulate the conversion of criminal proceedings into maintenance enquiries.
The main focus of the Bill is to provide an interim order where there is no final order to prevent undue hardships on the part of children or persons to be maintained, pending finalisation of the matter. Previously, what used to happen was that if there was a process taking place that could end up with a maintenance order, you would find that the children and people depending on the outcome of the process would suffer in the meantime. Therefore, with this arrangement, it means that there will not be a process in which there is a divorce proceeding taking place while, on the other hand, the children are suffering.
Electronic service providers may be used to provide information on defaulters who should, in turn, pay costs for such services. The state is to pay costs recoverable from the defaulters if the complainant is unable by a means test to pay the costs.
After the evidence, either in writing or orally from the employer of the person in question who is a defaulter, an order may be made for the attachment of emoluments at present
or in future accruing to the person. This is very important in that what used to happen is that you would find mostly fathers defaulting when they could actually afford the maintenance.
This clause will therefore take care of people who can afford maintenance but end up having too many reasons that make it impossible for them to continue to support the children. You should always bear in mind the fact that all the arrangements about maintenance can actually work both sides, in that either the mother provides support or the father does.
Any person who fails to make any particular payment in accordance with a maintenance order shall be guilty of an offence and liable, upon conviction, to a fine or to imprisonment without the option of a fine. This really becomes a deterrent. The intention is not to punish but to say that we have provisions that would actually take care of a situation in which maintenance is not adhered to. The Bill also looks at the transfer of High Court orders to magistrates’ courts to help facilitate the whole process of maintenance.
It is quite encouraging to see the number of political parties that have actually supported the Bill. To the EFF, we wonder why you continue to not support provisions, Bills and arrangements that are also going to benefit the people you so dearly care for as a political party. Hon Maxon, the legislative framework is there, and then you worry about the
structural arrangements. Today, we are actually looking at the Bill, which is just the legislative framework. Of course, the departments are there to worry about the logistical arrangements around this. If possible, where there is a need, they will have enabling regulations to take care of anything that might be something you think may not have been covered properly.
The ANC continues to support clause 11, which is about the submission of the names of defaulters to the credit bureau. We have never ever relegated this responsibility. When the DA really made a lot of noise about this, it was because it was a committee process. Whilst talking about it, debating it, and discussing it, we paused and said that we would meet the next day. The next day you find that the DA has already managed to identify something that they can actually manage to utilise for political point-scoring. [Interjections.] It shouldn’t happen like that. The ANC supports the Bill. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): House Chairperson, my thanks go to the members and the parties in the House that supported the Bill. This Bill will make a big difference to the thousands of maintenance beneficiaries in South Africa.
It is a pity, though, with a Bill of such importance to so many people that there was some politicking from the DA’s side. I know that you use maintenance as a campaign issue, but regarding your comment, hon Horn, about the moral degeneration of the ANC, this Bill came from an ANC-led Ministry, from an ANC-led Cabinet. So, don’t separate the ANC into the executive and the legislature. [Interjections.] Also, the portfolio committee wanted to consider all the options. [Interjections.]
As far as the other issue from the EFF is concerned, it’s a pity that the hon Maxon couldn’t attend any of the portfolio committee meetings where she could have raised the issues with officials. You want standardisation, but the amount of maintenance that’s paid depends on the circumstances of the person: how much they are earning and how many dependants they have. When it comes to the other parent, it should also be asked how much they are earning, if anything. If a person is not working and does not have a salary, then they cannot pay maintenance. So, your concern that you reject the blacklisting because it will affect people unable to pay maintenance is actually not true. This is because if a person has had a maintenance order against them and they then lose their job, they must go back to court and inform the court of the change in their circumstances. Therefore, it won’t affect anybody who cannot pay maintenance. It will affect those people who would
rather pay for their DStv subscription than support their child.
To the hon Horn, there are maintenance enquiries. We can look at whether we can tighten up the provisions, but if there is evidence that the father, let’s say, is getting money from a trust, then evidence should be led of that. There are maintenance investigators to assist in the matter. In KwaZulu- Natal, for example, the regional offices bought cameras for the investigators to look for parents that are employed in the informal sector, to go and take photographs of their businesses or their operations, and to go and give that to the court.
As far as the complaints from people in the system are concerned, that is something we are continually trying to work with. As the hon Horn said, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of applications. There has been an increase in the staff, but we are continually trying to improve the service. We do have complaints numbers in each of the provinces where people can complain if they feel the service wasn’t adequate.
Generally, again, I appreciate the support of all the parties with one exception – and hopefully they will read the Bill. I thank you, House Chairperson. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.
AGRÉMENT SOUTH AFRICA BILL
(Second Reading debate)
Mr B A D MARTINS: House Chairperson and hon Members of Parliament, the Agrément South Africa Bill seeks to establish Agrément South Africa as a juristic person and to make the Public Finance Management Act, Act 1 of 1999 as a mandate applicable to it.
The objects of the Agrément South Africa as contained in clause 4 of the Bill are the following: to provide assurance to specifiers and users of the fitness for purpose of nonstandardised construction-related products or systems; to support and promote the process of integrated socioeconomic development in the Republic as it relates to the construction industry; to support and promote the introduction and use of certified nonstandardised construction-related products or systems in the local or international market; to support policymakers to minimise the risk associated with the use of a nonstandardised construction-related product or system; and to be an impartial and internationally acknowledged South African
centre for the assessment and confirmation or fitness for purpose of nonstandardised construction-related products and systems.
In conclusion, the main function of the Agrément South Africa Bill is the assessment and certification of nonstandardised construction-related products or systems. I request the House to support and adopt the Bill. I thank you.
Debate concluded.
Declarations of vote:
Mr S J MASANGO: Chairperson, Agrément South Africa is an institution that reports to the Department of Public Works. It has all along operated under the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, CSIR, and from its offices. The purpose of this Bill is clearly to establish a juristic person, and there are other reasons. However, its most important mandate is to certify every new product that is not approved by the SA Bureau of Standards, SABS, to ensure that it is fit for purpose, as the chairperson said.
I think it is also important that we actually understand who the innovator is, other than testing for fit for purpose. So far, Agrément South Africa has actually certified some products on the market. The certificate is valid for three
years, and it must be renewed after every three years. Annually, Agrément South Africa was able to present its strategic plan and its annual achievements but not the financial statement, which is crucial to the committee.
With the approval of the Bill, we can now hold Agrément South Africa accountable for its financial report as well as ensure that they actually comply with the Public Finance Management Act. This is one of the reasons why we support the Bill – it is not controversial. The Bill was thoroughly interrogated with the department, as well as the state law advisers. The DA will now monitor its implementation after it has been signed as an Act by the President to ensure that they really do their job. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M M DLAMINI: Chair, the third pillar of the EFF’s founding manifesto refers to the state building its own capacity for the construction and maintenance of infrastructure such as roads, railways, and dams, as well as other specific basic services such as schools, houses, and hospitals.
Currently, this Bill opens up opportunities for the certification of nonstandardised construction products across the board and does not specify the need for locally produced products. This means that the country can, in the near future, expect a flood of nonstandardised construction products from
other countries, which would then be certified by Agrément South Africa. This will be the death of innovation research and development in our own country, as was the case with the textile industry, which died when the doors of our borders opened for cheap imports from China. The cement industry is already in trouble; countries such as Vietnam and Pakistan already have 7% market share of the country’s cement. They have been accused of dumping substandard cement on our shores.
The EFF therefore submits that the Agrément South Africa has the potential to be transformed into a developmental agency to focus primarily on building up the capacity of our own innovators in the construction industry. With strong government intervention and support, and equivocal protection of our construction-manufacturing sector, we can be in a position to produce many products needed for our construction needs.
Agrément South Africa therefore should not be limited to just being a certification body of our products, most of which will be originating outside the country. It must be utilised as a vehicle for inward-looking development and industrialisation. This can then be supported in the long term by creating a state-owned construction company to ensure that all locally produced construction materials are procured and utilised by the state. As it currently stands, the Agrément South Africa
Bill falls far too short on these requirements. So, the EFF will not support this Bill.
Mr K P SITHOLE: House Chairperson, the IFP supports and welcomes the establishment of Agrément South Africa as a juristic entity, as well as the applicability of the Public Finance Management Act to this entity. This able body supports the promotion of the process of integrated socioeconomic development in South Africa as related to the construction industry. It is crucial and must be done through the introduction, application, and utilisation of satisfactory innovations and technology development, in a manner that will add value to the process.
Agrément South Africa’s position is its internationally acknowledged objective of being the “South African centre for the assessment and certification of innovative non- standardised construction products” and systems, materials, components and processes which are not fully covered by the SA Bureau of Standards or code of practice. It must be supported. The only thing that we ask the Minister and Deputy Minister to look at is the name “Agrément” because it doesn’t actually reflect the South African names; sometimes we don’t know what language “Agrément” is. Thank you very much.
Bill read a second time (Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON CO-OPERATIVE GOVERNANCE AND TRADITIONAL AFFAIRS – DISASTER MANAGEMENT BILL
There was no debate.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move that the Report be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
DISASTER MANAGEMENT AMENDMENT BILL
(Second Reading debate)
Mr M R MDAKANE: The hon presiding officer, hon Ministers, hon Deputy Ministers, and hon members, the Disaster Management Act, Act 57 of 2002 was promulgated in 2003. A number of challenges were experienced in various spheres of governance in implementing all aspects of the legislation effectively.
During 2010, practitioners and stakeholders in the field of disaster management, as well as research undertaken by the
SA Local Government Association, Salga, and the African Centre for Disaster Studies amongst others, highlighted some areas which were identified either as gaps in the principal Act or as issues which are impending on hampering the effective implementation of the Act.
Given the views expressed by practitioners, academics, and other members of the communities who were participating, after consultation we had further discussions with them. We then agreed that the Bill needs to be strengthened, that it needs the representation of traditional leaders, that we need to deal with the question of management structures, and that we need to incorporate the obligations set out in the Framework of Actions adopted by the United Nations in 2005 to have a national platform for disaster risk reduction.
We have also discussed the issue of the roles and responsibilities of organs of state in disaster management and emphasised the need for organs of state to assist the disaster management structures in the event of a disaster or a potential disaster. We also clarified the specific information and reporting requirements to municipal and provincial intergovernmental forums and the content of the disaster management plans by organs of state, and made the applicable
information available to relevant disaster management centres. We reaffirm the role of municipalities to establish capacity for the development and co-ordination of a multisector disaster management plan and implementation of disaster management functions for the municipalities.
There are key issues that were raised by various stakeholders during the consultation process and in a meeting that we held with them. They raised issues. The committee met with them and had discussions with professors, with practitioners, and with members of communities who were able to come to Cape Town and have a discussion on the main issue of the Disaster Management Amendment Bill. This is not a principal Bill. It is an amendment. One of the issues was terminology, and one other area was a technical area that dealt with language that had to be in line with national and international conventions.
We met with Salga and had a discussion with them. They raised some of the issues stating that, in their view, it is an addition to the functions given to them. We sought legal opinion and engaged with them, and they agreed that it is not a new function assigned to them. They always have a role to play in disaster management, and Salga is happy with this report.
The committee – all members of the committee – accepted the amendment as presented. Today, we think members of this House will accept the Amendment Bill. The principal Act is still in existence. We are just amending the principal Act, and then we also think that the members of this House will accept the amendment and work to ensure that all our structures set up disaster management centres in all spheres of government but also in major entities or government structures. Thank you, hon Chairperson. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Declarations of vote:
Mr K J MILEHAM: House Chair, while the DA will support this Bill, we do have a number of concerns. Perhaps before we get there, we need to have a look at what this Bill does for the country. It establishes a National Disaster Management Advisory Forum to service South Africa’s platform for disaster risk reduction in terms of its international obligations, the Hyogo Framework for Action adopted by the United Nations in 2005. Here, we are aligning our legislation with international agreements and obligations.
It also sets aside the National Disaster Management Centre as a component of government in terms of the Public Service Act. This is a good thing because it allows the assignment of the
function of disaster management to be moved from one Ministry to another as per the decisions of the President. The head of the National Disaster Management Centre will then report to the Minister.
It brings in various amendments that allow for the disaster management centre to call on other organs of state like the SA National Defence Force and the SA Police Service to assist it. It also requires that local government undertakes certain disaster risk reduction and disaster management planning activities.
Now, it is this area where we have some concerns because this is an item that Salga raised and, contrary to what the chairperson of the committee said, I do not believe that Salga actually agreed at the end of the day with the assessment that this was not a new assignment. So, the problem then is how do you fund this assignment? This then becomes the real issue. It is our belief that we are imposing a mandate on local government that will then require them to submit plans - disaster risk reduction plans and disaster management plans – where they do not have the capacity to perform that function in-house. They are then going to go to consultants and incur costs. This is then an unfunded mandate. It is this concern that we are raising. We are not saying no to the Bill, but we
are saying it is an area that we are going to monitor and watch and see how it develops over time.
We have to commend the department on one other aspect, and that is the bringing of the Disaster Management Act, through this amendment, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction that was signed in March 2015. So, the department must be commended in that regard. The DA will support this Bill. [Applause.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, the poor in this country, particularly black people, have to live – as a result not only of natural disasters but also the infrastructural impediments of the town planning of apartheid – in a permanent state of disaster. The Disaster Management Act and the National Disaster Management Framework of 2005, as overarching policy and legislative frameworks, are quite explicit on the various institutional arrangements needed for effective Disaster Risk Management. However, these structures are not in place and, when they are, they are mostly not functioning.
This amending Bill is not focused on giving any significant substance to the need for strengthening institutional structures. It still does not clarify the role of local municipalities for disaster risk management and still confines
the role of disaster risk management to districts and metropolitan municipalities.
While the content of the amending Bill makes the bold and long overdue commitment to expanding the focus of the Act to disaster risk management, the title of the Bill still reflects the long-standing resistance to including proactive risk management mechanisms instead of reactive management of disasters after they happen.
The name should ideally change to “Disaster Risk Management Act” to reflect international best practice and our commitment to decisively address the risks and socioeconomic vulnerabilities that expose our people to preventable disasters.
This amending Bill does not deal at all with the most fundamental aspects of disaster risk management – the socioeconomic realities that subject poor people to preventable disasters. A prime example is the conditions of informal settlements in Cape Town. Every year in winter, our people, the poor in particular, experience the same challenges of having their informal settlement houses flooded by the winter rains in Cape Town. This amending Bill does not provide any legislative solutions to the problem of this nature and has no mechanism of holding to account metropolitan councils
like the DA-led City of Cape Town which has no desire to trouble itself with the wellbeing of the poor and the blacks in the informal settlements. [Interjections.]
While this amending Bill is well intended, it does not go far enough to effect the kind of changes we would want to see. So, the EFF is not going to support it until you are serious about making proper changes. Thank you very much.
Mr M HLENGWA: Hon House Chairperson, it has already been indicated that certain amendments had to be made to the principal Act and, amongst other things, of course, is the discussion around disaster management and disaster reduction. The committee was given the assurance by the department that when we refer to disaster management, disaster reduction is included in that. We have incorporated in our committee discussions the areas that had been raised by the experts in the field of disaster management. We are pretty comfortable that, moving forward, in order for this Bill to actually make any meaningful sense to the people, these things must be taken care of. Of course, we do not expect the Act to be specific, but it should provide a framework upon which municipalities can submit their frameworks and to ensure that the frameworks are responsive to the realities on the ground as opposed to imposing a national direction.
We do want to emphasise that Salga had raised serious concerns about the issues of this being a new mandate and the issue of funding on top of that. The legal conclusion, or rather the advice we were given, was that this was not a new mandate, but what is important is that National Treasury has given the assurance. It is upon this basis that the IFP will support this Bill, on the basis that funding will be made available, because we believe that funds must follow function, and so it would have been unfair to impose on municipalities the type of things that are given to it now in terms of what it should do in the absence of provided funding.
So, the assurance and commitment given to us by the National Treasury is by and large the basis upon which we are able to move forward to ensure that municipalities are not set up for failure by being given mandates that are unfunded and outside their jurisdiction because it would be a futile exercise anyway to give municipalities mandates that they are unable to execute or a mandate that is not going to be beneficial to them. So, we do expect National Treasury to live up to its commitments and ensure that funding is made available.
We also want to emphasise that municipalities must not be viewed as junior partners of government because there is a tendency to look upon municipalities as the small boys in the scheme of things when it comes to the development of the
country. It is that resistance and that unhealthy working relationship between local government and other spheres of government causing the resistance. That issue has to be addressed because we cannot afford stumbling blocks being relational every time in terms of how we are moving forward. So, in supporting this Bill, the IFP wants to really emphasise that the important thing is that funding must be made available to ensure that disaster management is carried out in a manner which serves the collective interests of our people. I thank you. [Applause.]
Prof N M KHUBISA: Chairperson, the assignment of disaster management functions to all municipalities is supported. We do however share Salga’s reservation with regard to the process followed. We also have reservations regarding the funding provision for the newly imposed obligations for municipalities. We need to make sure that we avoid the creation of an unfunded mandate, since the equitable share does not include any component for disaster management.
The NFP believes that it is important for transparency purposes that disaster management should be well standardised so that all role-players are on par as to what constitutes a disaster, what criteria are to be used to determine its nature and extent, how funding is to be regulated, and who the intended beneficiaries are.
However, the most important issue is that a standardised and integrated disaster management system should have the minimum bureaucratic red tape for disaster relief. People who bear the brunt of a disaster are more often in the biggest need immediately after such a disaster occurred. That is the point where relief management will have to be flexible to provide much-needed support as soon as possible. Red tape could seriously dilute the effectiveness of disaster management.
However, despite our reservations, the NFP supports the Disaster Management Amendment Bill. Thank you.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Voorsitter, die VF Plus sal hierdie wysingingswetsontwerp ondersteun. In hierdie wetsontwerp word daar baie aandag aan die nasionale sentrum vir rampbestuur geskenk. Ek wil egter vandag vir ons mense sê dat as ’n ramp plaasvind, is die belangrikste komponent van eerste optrede die plaaslike vlak van regering. Ek het dit fisies in Stilfontein in 2005 beleef met ’n aardbewing waar die plaaslike rampbestuur nie in staat was, of bevoeg was, om die situasie te hanteer nie. Hulle moes die plaaslike Klerksdorp- kommando inroep om die ramp te bestuur. Die feit van die saak is dat daar nie meer iets soos kommando’s bestaan nie, en ek wil vandag vir u sê dat as ons effektiewe rampbestuur in Suid- Afrika wil verseker dan moet daar toegesien word ... Ek wil ’n beroep op die agb Minister doen om toe te sien dat elke plaaslike regering die nodige toerusting en die nodige
mannekrag het om die behoorlike uitvoering van hul pligte te kan nakom in terme van rampbestuur. As ons dit nie het nie, dan kan ek u verseker dat die gevolge van die ramp net groter gaan wees. Ons weet dat effektiewe rampbestuur juis daar is om die nadele of die slegte gevolge van ’n ramp so ver as moontlik te beperk.
Daarom sal ons dit ondersteun, maar ek doen ’n ernstige beroep op die Minister om te verseker dat die eerste vlak van optrede in rampbestuur behoorlik toegerus is en behoorlik opgelei is om dit te kan doen. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Dr P J GROENEWALD: Hon Chair, the FF Plus will support this Bill. This Bill pays a lot of attention to the National Disaster Management Centre. However, today I would like to inform our people that, if a disaster happens, the most important component of action lies at the local level of government.
I experienced this first hand in Stilfontein in 2015 when an earthquake occurred, and local disaster management was not able, or capable, to manage the situation. They had to call in the local Klerksdorp commando to manage the disaster. The fact of the matter is that things like commandos don’t exist any longer, and I would like to say to you today that should we
like to ensure effective disaster management in South Africa, then care should be taken ... and I would like to call on the hon Minister to see to it that all local governments have the necessary equipment and the manpower to perform their duties properly in terms of disaster management. If we do not have this, then I can assure you that the disaster will only be worse. We know that effective disaster management exists precisely to limit the consequences of a disaster as far as possible.
Therefore, we will support it, but I appeal urgently to the Minister to ensure that the first level of action regarding disaster management requires proper equipment and proper training in order to deliver. I thank you.]
Mr W M MADISHA: Chairperson, our country has to align itself with the Hyogo Framework for Action adopted by the UN in 2005 to achieve national disaster risk reduction. Risk reduction is more important than risk mitigation. The Bill provides for the establishment of a national disaster management centre as a government component in terms of the Public Service Act. When that happens, the proposed national disaster management centre will be competent to call on the Defence Force, on the police, or any other organ of state to assist in the disaster management structures when required.
The proposed national disaster management centre is also empowered in the Bill to interact with the relevant provincial disaster management centre to avert a disaster or to manage it. All relevant organs of state will have to participate in an extended reporting system to the national disaster management centre on the progress made in implementing measures in this Bill that relate to them. They need to prepare on how to respond swiftly and correctly.
What happened, for example, in Nepal should serve as a warning to us as South Africans. After a disaster, the government must have a plan and the capacity to implement post-disaster recovery and rehabilitation measures. All parties must report on the kind of specific problems experienced by any organ of state in dealing with a disaster. This is important to record: Areas overlooked are financial control in the post-disaster and rebuilding period, and the inclusion of persons and nongovernmental organisations, NGOs, with disaster management expertise.
The Minister must, at an early stage, provide this House with details of how organs of state are preparing for climate change impacts. Cope will support this Bill, but the early mapping of risks, potential disaster areas, and endangered ecosystems have to be looked at. We also want to look at a thorough mapping of communities and households that are
vulnerable to physical and human-induced threats. What the Minister has to do is to ... [Time expired.]
Mr M P MAPULANE: House Chair, the ANC would like to thank parties and express its appreciation for supporting this amending Bill. We just want to clarify two aspects. Before I clarify those two aspects, I want to say that the committee has received two opinions: one from the state law advisers and one from the legal division of Parliament. Both opinions agree that this amending Bill does not introduce a new assignment to local government. It re-emphasises the functions that local governments have had in terms of disaster management, so there is no issue about the new assignment.
With regard to the Salga discussion, the body has been accommodated sufficiently. The views raised by Salga have been accommodated sufficiently in the amending Bill. We think that, as part of the implementation of the Bill, we will continue to engage with Salga to identify those difficulties that might exist during the process of implementation.
For us, the issue of disaster risk reduction versus disaster management is a matter of semantics, because the Bill sufficiently identifies and lists the activities that constitute risk reduction. Therefore, the ANC would like to submit that the Bill assists in terms of making sure that the
necessary structures are created for us to respond to disaster management. Thank you.
Bill read a second time (Economic Freedom Fighters dissenting).
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION OF CANDIDATES TO FILL VACANCIES ON COUNCIL OF INDEPENDENT COMMUNICATIONS AUTHORITY OF SOUTH AFRICA, ICASA
Ms D R TSOTETSI: Chairperson, this is the report of the Portfolio Committee on Communications on the filling of the five council vacancies of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, Icasa.
The Portfolio Committee on Communications considered two letters from the Minister of Communications informing the Assembly that the terms of office of Independent Communications Authority of South Africa councillors Mr William Currie and Mr Joseph Lebooa would expire on
30 September and the terms of office of Mr William Stucke and Ms Ntombizodwa Ndlovu on 31 October 2014. These letters also informed the Assembly that she accepted the resignation of Dr Marcia Socikwa, a councillor of the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa, with effect from 31 January 2015.
The committee advertised the call for nominations for persons to serve on the Icasa council. A total of 85 nominations were received and considered by the committee. On 17 March 2015, the committee adopted the following names as a subcommittee to shortlist and recommend appointments: the hon J C Moloi- Moropa, chairperson and ANC member, the hon G Davis from the DA, the hon M Ndlozi from the EFF, the hon Tsotetsi from the ANC, the hon Tseli from the ANC, the hon Kekana from the ANC, and the hon Madisha from Cope. The hon G Davis was subsequently replaced by the hon Van Dyk, also from the DA.
On 5 May 2015, the subcommittee recommended to the portfolio committee that the following 12 candidates be shortlisted for the interview process: Mr Diratsagae Maoke, Mr Keabetswe Modimoeng, Mr Lance Rothschild, Mr Lumko Mtimde, Mr Paris Mashile, Mr Peter Hlapolosa, Mr Peter Zimri, Mr Sello Molefe, Mr Thamsanqa Ntenteni, Mr Yengwayo Kutta, Ms Botlenyana Mokhele, and Adv Dimakatso Qocha. On 2 June 2015, the subcommittee interviewed the abovementioned candidates, with the exception of Mr Sello Molefe and Mr Lance Rothchild who withdrew from the process.
The committee recommends to the House that the following eight names be sent to the Minister in order to fill five vacancies on the Icasa council: Ms Botlenyana Mokhele, Adv Dimakatso Qocha, Mr Lumko Mtimde, Mr Yengwayo Kutta, Mr Thamsanqa
Ntenteni, Mr Peter Zimri, Mr Keabetswe Modimoeng, and Mr Paris Mashile.
The committee notes the objection of the DA’s hon Van Dyk to the nominations of Mr Lumko Mtimde and Mr Thamsanqa Ntenteni. I thank you, Chairperson.
Debate concluded.
Declarations of vote:
Mr L W GREYLING: Chair, the DA objects to two of the eight names to be recommended to Minister Muthambi for appointment to the Icasa council. The first is Mr Lumko Mtimde who is openly and unapologetically supportive of the media appeals tribunal, first proposed by the ANC back in 2007. We object to his appointment on the grounds that the Icasa needs councillors whose instincts are to promote media freedom and not to curtail it.
The second candidate we object to is Mr Thami Ntenteni who we believe is ineligible for the council on account of a criminal record. Reports in the public domain indicate that, in 1998, the BMW Mr Ntenteni was driving on the Ben Schoeman highway in Gauteng crashed into a Volkswagen Passat from behind at high speed. One woman was killed, and another three people were injured. The courts found Mr Ntenteni guilty of driving under
the influence of alcohol and of culpable homicide. [Interjections.]
It is understood that he was sentenced to at least three years in prison, which would explain the gap on his curriculum vitae between 1998 and 2001. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: Great choice, guys! Well done!
Mr L W GREYLING: The Independent Communications Authority of South Africa Act states that a person may not be appointed to the council if he or she has been sentenced to a period of imprisonment exceeding one year without the option of a fine. It is therefore highly unlikely that Mr Ntenteni is eligible to serve on the Icasa council.
Hon Chairperson, I raised this matter with the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Communications over a week ago. She told me yesterday that Mr Ntenteni had been vetted by the State Security Agency, and that no trace of a criminal record could be found. [Interjections.] This is difficult to believe given reports in the public domain as well as Mr Ntenteni’s own admission in this week’s Sunday Times that he did, in fact, commit this crime. The DA cannot support Mr Ntenteni’s appointment until we have answers to all the questions relating to his criminal record. I thank you.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Chair, the EFF also wishes to object to some of these names, but fundamentally we want to register that there has to be a process of strengthening this institution to really reflect the Chapter 9 institution that the independent regulator is called to be by the Constitution. Until such an amendment is there, it is going to be very difficult to think about an independent Icasa board. We are seeing a crisis of ministerial interference, particularly by the Minister of Communications in state institutions like the SABC. This institution faces similar challenges to what is demonstrated in the department with regard to the SABC.
The compiled list of candidates presented by the Portfolio Committee on Communications in March this year and the process that was followed to select candidates to fill Icasa council vacancies leave a bitter taste, as four council members were dismissed by the Minister of Communications without a clear explanation and before they completed their duties.
The candidates’ list which had names of controversial figures, some accused of soliciting sexual favours from employees and some with cases of culpable homicide, drunk driving and other irresponsible behaviour, was a clear indication that this exercise was not to appoint a reliable council but to consolidate a collection of potential lapdogs. So, again, these appointments reflect not a proper engagement on the part
of the committee independently, but the imposition – as always happens with the work of this committee – of Luthuli House candidates. Therefore, the EFF objects.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Are there any further declarations? May I ask those parties who wish to make declarations to just move to the waiting bench to save us time, please?
Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Hon Chairperson and members of this august House, the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa has not performed very well since it has been placed under the new Department of Communications, a move which has led to diminished independence as a Chapter 9 institution. It is also severely underfunded in resources. A lacuna that had been created in the council when Minister Muthambi gave four councillors their marching orders last year has, in our view, severely compromised the effectiveness of the council.
The NFP wishes to raise its concern about the lengthy delay in filling four of the vacancies that have been left unattended since September 2014. We suggest that in time the prescribed appointment procedures be reviewed to accelerate the filling of any unplanned and unforeseen vacancies that may arise from time to time. We support the inclusion of all candidates shortlisted with the exception of Mr Lumko Mtimde and Mr
Ntenteni. [Interjections.] The NFP notes that, of the eight candidates shortlisted, only two are women. We would have hoped that the shortlist would have been more reflective of South Africa’s gender demographics. I thank you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon members, the question before the House is that the following list of candidates be submitted to the Minister of Communications for consideration for appointment as councillors to Icasa: Ms Botlenyana Mokhele, Adv Dimakatso Qocha, Mr Lumko Mtimde, Mr Thamsanqa Ntenteni, Mr Yengwayo Kutta, Mr Peter Zimri, Mr Keabetswe Modimoeng, and Mr Paris Mashile. Are there any objections?
HON MEMBERS: Yes!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): There are objections, so I will 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.
Division demanded.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Please be seated. Hon members, we are aware that a division has been called, but there have been discussions amongst the Chief Whips. I now recognise the Chief Whip of the Majority Party.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, we move for the postponement of this item, and we will bring it back when it has been dealt with. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): The item will thus be dealt with once it has been processed by the different political parties.
Fifth Order stood over.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! We will now take Orders 6 to 13 together as they appear on the Order Paper. These are the reports of the Committee on Public Accounts.
CONSIDERATION OF FIRST REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE OF THE PRESIDENCY
CONSIDERATION OF SECOND REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE OF DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
CONSIDERATION OF THIRD REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE OF DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND INDUSTRY
CONSIDERATION OF FOURTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– UNAUTHORISED EXPENDITURE OF DEPARTMENT OF WOMEN, CHILDREN AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
CONSIDERATION OF FIFTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– REPORT OF AUDITOR-GENERAL ON ANNUAL REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE FOR 2013-14 FINANCIAL YEAR
CONSIDERATION OF SIXTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– REPORT OF AUDITOR-GENERAL ON ANNUAL REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND CO-
OPERATION FOR 2013-14 FINANCIAL YEAR
CONSIDERATION OF SEVENTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS – REPORT OF AUDITOR-GENERAL ON ANNUAL REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY VETERANS FOR 2013-14 FINANCIAL YEAR
CONSIDERATION OF EIGHTH REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
– REPORT OF AUDITOR-GENERAL ON ANNUAL REPORT AND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT TRADING ENTITY FOR 2013-14
FINANCIAL YEAR
Mr N T GODI: Hon House Chair, comrades and hon members, I stand to present on behalf of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts its eight reports which comprise four unauthorised expenditure reports and four annual reports. Let me start by thanking members of the committee for their diligence and solidarity. We have thus far maintained the committee’s tradition of working as a team, never taking our eyes off the ball. As the protector of the public purse, we have a collective national responsibility to ensure compliance with the Public Finance Management Act and Treasury Regulations in the main.
We call upon portfolio committees to close ranks with us, to work collaboratively in ensuring full accountability by the executive to Parliament and to our people. We also want to extend our appreciation to the committee staff for the work they do to keep us going. Unauthorised expenditure is when expenditure occurs beyond the budget allocation. The House deals with unauthorised expenditure as per the provisions of sections 34 and 38 of the Public Finance Management Act.
When unauthorised expenditure is incurred, the affected departments write a detailed explanation to National Treasury which, in turn, sends an explanatory note to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, Scopa, with its recommendations. Scopa then calls National Treasury and the affected departments to appear before it for thorough discussions. It is only then that we prepare a report for this House to adopt. The reports in front of you, comrades and hon members, are a product of that thorough process. We are putting before this House for approval the unauthorised expenditure of the Presidency, the Department of Social Development, the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities as a direct charge against ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Godi, just take your seat. Hon members, there is too much noise in the House, and there are members sitting in the passages. Please take your allocated seats. Thank you. Continue, hon member.
Mr N T GODI: Having said that, the committee would like to stress that departments should stick to their budget allocations and manage expenditure prudently. There is no money lying around to bail them out. They must do more with a little, cut down on nonessentials, and prevent fruitless and wasteful expenditure as well as irregular expenditure.
Chair, comrades and hon members, we also present our reports on the 2013-14 annual reports of the Departments of Defence, International Relations and Co-operation, Military Veterans, and the Property Management Trading Entity of the Department of Public Works.
On the Department of International Relations and Co-operation, there are issues with supply chain management, human resources, and IT. We are particularly appalled by the mismanagement of the African Renaissance and International Co- operation Fund, our financial instrument of Pan-African Solidarity. The director-general is weak on consequence management. We call on the Minister to ensure that the director-general does his work of taking firm action against officials who do not adhere to the prescripts of the law.
Although the Department of Defence has a qualification due to intangible asset management, we are impressed by the attitude of the Secretary for Defence. We hope that the department can, for the first time, get an unqualified audit opinion. We appreciate the establishment of the internal audit unit, the audit committee, and the acquisition of a building to house the internal audit unit. If Defence can get it right, surely there can be no excuse for other departments.
The committee wants the amounts used for consultants and outsourcing to be reduced instead of going up – R3,3 billion is a lot of money. The Property Management Trading Entity, even though it has only a qualified audit opinion, has serious issues that require urgent attention. The issues of lease management, accruals, and investigations need a speedy resolution.
The Department of Military Veterans is in a sorry state. With a disclaimer of opinion, we are calling on the department to submit a turnaround strategy within six days from today to address root causes of noncompliance, weak internal controls, misconduct, as well as action taken. The National Development Plan, NDP, calls for the building of a capable state. Every public servant must answer the question of what their contribution is in this regard. The executive has responsibilities in terms of the Public Finance Management Act. They also must ensure that there is leadership stability in departments so that the correct culture of compliance with laws and regulations can be built and sustained.
On behalf of the committee, I present these reports to the House for adoption. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Declarations of vote:
Mr R A LEES: Hon Chair, the DA supports six of the eight reports. Two we cannot support. It is inconceivable that R37,4 million of the Department of Trade and Industry’s unauthorised expenditure can simply be written off – some of it on the basis that the recovery of money would cause undue hardship to an ex-employee who owes that money. We are also being asked to write off other monies owed by ex-employees because it is uneconomical to recover these. So, the message
to state employees is that you can take the money that you are not entitled to, and you will not be forced to repay the money as long as it is not too much. Where are the consequences that the ANC keeps pontificating about?
Then, hon Chair, we have the Presidency.
UMongameli uZuma ufika la eNdlini bese enza amahlaya, eyahleka. Uthi ayikho inkinga ngendlu yakhe eyakhiwe ngemali yabantu bethu. Kule sonto elidlule laphaya e-Greytown nomngane wakhe uMavundla kade bevula inxanxathela yezitolo, usichazele ukuthi uzokwakha inxanxathela yakhe yezitolo eNkandla. Kodwa uthi nina aninayo imali yokuthenga impahla kulezo zitolo.
Hawu! Ucabanga ukuthi siyizilima yini? [Uhleko.] Ngempela abantu bethu bahlakaniphile, bayayibona le nto yokuthi udlala ngathi. Bazobona ngempela ukuthi umosa imali yethu. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[President Zuma comes to this House, makes jokes, and laughs. He says there is no problem about his house being built with our people’s money. In the past week, he and his friend Mavundla opened a shopping complex in Greytown, and he told us that he is going to build his own shopping complex in Nkandla. However, he says you do not have money to buy stuff from those shops. Geez! What does he take us for? [Laughter.] Our people are really smart; they can see that he is playing us for fools. They will really see that he is wasting our money. [Applause.]]
Hon Chair, Parliament is being asked to write off
R45,5 million of unauthorised expenditure from the Presidency. Some of that relates to the President’s mediation attempts in Zimbabwe, and we all know how that turned out. Just ask the millions of Zimbabweans who go hungry every day. That money was well spent. Clearly, President Zuma enjoys all the benefits of freedom and opportunity, but it is surely at the expense of our people who, by this write-off of unauthorised expenditure, are being robbed of their freedom and opportunity to be able to find a job and live in dignity.
There is no fairness in condoning this unauthorised expenditure. The DA ...
... ngeke ikusekele lokho. [Ihlombe.] [... will not support that. [Applause.]]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Chair, the EFF objects to this report with the contempt it deserves and will not support recommendations to condone unauthorised expenditure to be paid by taxpayers’ money. You are asking us to condone a parasitic, kleptocratic culture that basically promotes gluttony in many instances. We cannot be asked to come here and condone the waste of
R100 million by President Zuma and his Ministers. Parliament is not the rubber stamp of the ANC. This has happened under the watch of many opposition parties since 1994, including under the DA that pretends to be holding government accountable.
The EFF is not going to be party to this criminal conduct by the ANC. You should be ashamed to have the audacity to request Parliament to condone this waste. The Constitution requires National Treasury to ensure that there are adequate expenditure controls in government. Minister Nhlanhla Nene and his predecessors have failed dismally in ensuring that government has adequate internal control measures in place. By your own admission, National Treasury says government has no systems in place to ensure that the department does not overspend on its budget. Minister Nhlanhla Nene comes to stand here every year to dish out money for his ANC comrades to just
eat. How can you, after 21 years in government, not have adequate control systems in place unless it is not in your interest to have such systems in place? By doing nothing, National Treasury is colluding with these departments to allow their ANC deployees to steal taxpayers’ money without any fear of accountability. To place the burden on taxpayers’ money when they contribute most to towards tax revenue, face sickening electricity tariffs, e-tolls, and increasing costs is criminal.
Scopa is the only committee we expect not to function in accordance with the instructions of Gwede Mantashe, but it has failed the public. It is obvious that the chairperson is too comfortable and too close to Luthuli House. We are told there are even money bags circulating in his home. He has overstayed his welcome, and it is time for the EFF to chair that committee because we will make sure that President Jacob Zuma pays back the money. The committee has condoned unauthorised expenditure in millions without any criminal or disciplinary measures instituted against those who have wasted taxpayers’ funds.
No money is recovered. With R100 million, we would have built
1 000 decent houses, would have sent about 500 students to university for full three-year degrees including paying for accommodation and food, and would have paid for an additional
300 grade-one nurses for rural clinics and hospitals. With the current budgetary constraints, this is a lot of money. Unauthorised expenditure in the Presidency could have been prevented, but President Zuma and his family think that government money is their personal purse like the chickens and cattle in their kraal. We will never support this, and we make yet another demand that he must pay back the money.
Mr M HLENGWA: Hon Chairperson, the IFP will be supporting seven of the eight reports. Having gone through the process in the committee of dealing with these matters, we are in a comfortable position to say that the committee has done its work diligently, except on the issue of the Presidency. If we do not have consequences, and we do not hold people accountable, this kind of behaviour is going to continue. The fact that, up to now, there hasn’t been a portfolio committee to oversee the work of the Presidency has landed us in this mess whereby two events for the National Orders are held in one year and all sorts of other junkets across the world and expeditions and excursions and visits and so on. However, it is the taxpayer that must fund all of this.
Secondly, the failure of the committee in this regard to have the details of the legal costs which the Presidency is involved in and to present it to the committee is a major indictment. We demanded from all other departments that they
present to us line items in terms of how much had been spent on what, and so on. When it comes to the Presidency, there’s this protection, and it’s being placed in a cocoon where nobody can touch it. On that basis, we cannot possibly in the collective interest of saving taxpayers’ money agree that the unauthorised expenditure of the Presidency is endorsed by this House. There needs to be stronger accountability and oversight on the Presidency to ensure that the money spent is spent in accordance with the annual performance plans and the programmes that the Presidency has presented. However, if they don’t present them to anybody, how can we possibly hold them accountable and expect that, at the very end, they will take corrective action.
Thirdly, I want to applaud the intervention of the committee in ensuring that we do not punish the Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities. What had happened was that National Treasury called on us to deduct the unauthorised expenditure from their current budget and, as a committee, we arrived at the conclusion that it would be unfair for us to do that. I’m glad that we arrived at that working conclusion because it was the previous Minister who ran this department into the ground, and we have to now resurrect and resuscitate it to ensure that it moves forward.
I want to say despite the other challenges Scopa might face, the committee is well on track in cleaning up the mess in government departments. We will hold people accountable because we want to make sure that consequences are followed through. People who are guilty of transgressions and dereliction of duty must be punished. It can’t go on as business as usual when the masses of our people find themselves in poverty every day and there are people in government departments wasting the money of our people without any consequences. Therefore, we will walk the talk. Thank you. [Time expired.]
Ms N P KHUNOU: Chairperson, I am really disappointed with the way the hon Lees dramatised the whole thing. The unauthorised expenditure in the Presidency for 2008-09 comprises the following economic classifications: R2,73 million was incurred from National Orders which were brought forward, with the result that it had to be funded from a financial year in which it was not initially budgeted for. Most of the litigation and the monies that were incurred were because nobody could predict the time and the length of those legal proceedings. I want to emphasise the annual reports and what we agreed, on as the ANC. We support all the reports presented by the chairperson here. During its annual 8 January celebrations last year, the ANC emphasised dealing with and rooting out corruption through President Jacob Zuma. We are committed as a
committee to deal with corruption. [Interjections.] As a committee, I think if anybody had to scrutinise our processes, they would be able to tell that we are indeed committed to protecting the fiscus of the country. The Public Finance Management Act was passed 15 years ago and, as we celebrate it, we have to make sure that everyone is committed to making sure that we comply with all that is set out in the Public Finance Management Act and Treasury Regulations.
However, we do have officials who are not committed to doing their work. Most of the departments have actually improved from disclaimers to qualified audits because of the work Scopa does. Most of the departments come to Parliament and make commitments through their strategic plans. Through those strategic plans, they set out specific goals to achieve. Most of the departments have achieved their specific targets. For those that have not, you will find it is because most of their officials do not adhere to Treasury Regulations. The problem that we have found in most of the departments that we are dealing with today is that you find if an official has defrauded the state, they are simply recycled from one department to another. As a result, there are no consequences. As Scopa, and especially as ANC members, we are going to make sure that those officials are dealt with. We are going to work with the Public Service Commission to make sure that we name and shame all these officials. There are other officials who
are also doing business with the state and, as Scopa, we will make sure that we root out corruption. Thank you. [Time expired.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move that the Reports be adopted.
Division demanded.
House divided.
During division:
Mr N SINGH: Hon Chairperson, I think during the declarations of vote, some of the speakers indicated that they will be supporting some of the reports and not the others. I don’t know how you are going to deal with that because now you’re putting all the reports together for voting. Thank you.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: House Chair, the DA is opposed to only the sixth and eighth reports. So, if we go ahead with the EFF’s suggestion, we are going to have to divide on every single report now.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Hon Chairperson, the five minutes have gone by. Can we please vote?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Please be patient.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No, but we can’t be held to ransom ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): There’s a clock here in front. We are following the clock.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We are checking on our clock as well, and the five minutes have elapsed.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Order!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We can’t be held to ransom ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Just relax; just relax.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Can we please vote?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon members, will you please take up your allocated seats? Just after the hon Ndlozi called for the division, the hon Singh raised a point of order, and it is sustained because it is correct. While the
debate can be dealt with as one, we will have to deal with each of the reports separately in terms of the question. So, we will put each of the reports, and then we will take a decision on them.
Question put: That the First Report of Committee on Public Accounts on unauthorised expenditure of the Presidency be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 191: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; Bam-Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Davies, R H; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dunjwa, M L; Faku, Z C; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Jafta, S M; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kekana, M D; Kekana, H B; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khunou, N P; Koornhof, N J J v R; Landers, L T;
Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, J L; Mahlangu, D G; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mbalula, F A; Mchunu, S; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Molebatsi, M A; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpumlwana, L K B; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, M N; Oliphant, G G; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, J T; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Scheepers, M A; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande,
M P; Sisulu, L N; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Williams, A J; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 105: America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Cardo, M J; Chance, R W T; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Figg, M J; Gana, S M; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Hadebe, T Z; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hlengwa, M; Holomisa, B H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; James, L V; James, W G; Jongbloed, Z; Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Khubisa, N M; Kohler, D; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Kwankwa, N L S; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Mahumapelo, J M K; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Malatsi, M S; Malema, J S; Marais, S J F; Masango, S J; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mncwango, M A; Mokgalapa, S; Motau, S C; Mpontshane, A M; Msimang, C T; Mulaudzi, T E; Mulder, P W A; Ndlozi, M Q; Nkomo, S J; Ntobongwana, P; Ollis, I M; Plouamma, M A; Rabotapi, M W; Redelinghuys, M H;
Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Shelembe, M L; Shinn, M R; Shivambu, N F; Singh, N; Sithole, K P; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Twala, D L; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Wilson, E R.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Second Report of Committee on Public Accounts on unauthorised expenditure of Department of Social Development be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 283: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T;
Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini- Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hadebe, T Z; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hlengwa, M; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, L V; James, W G; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, M D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, J L; Mahlangu, D G; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela,
E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, P W A; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya- Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, M N; Oliphant, G G; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shinn, M R;
Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N;
Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R;
Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 15: Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Lekota, M G P; Mahumapelo, J M K; Malema, J S; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Plouamma, M A; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
ABSTAIN - 1: Groenewald, P J.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Third Report of Committee on Public Accounts on unauthorised expenditure of Department of Trade and Industry be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 211: Abrahams, B L; Adams, P E; Adams, F; Bam-Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hlengwa, M; Jafta, S M; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khunou, N P; Koornhof, N J J v R; Landers, L T; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa- Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H;
Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mbalula, F A; Mchunu, S; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane- Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, J T; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Scheepers, M A; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Swart, S N; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van der Merwe, L L; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Williams, A J; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 91: America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Cardo, M J; Chance, R W T; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Figg, M J; Filtane, M L W; Gana, S M; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Hadebe, T Z; Hill- Lewis, G G; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; James, L V; James, W G; Jongbloed, Z; Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Khubisa, N M; Kohler, D; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Mahumapelo, J M K; Majola, T R; Malatsi, M S; Malema, J S; Marais, S J F; Masango, S J; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mokgalapa, S; Motau, S C; Mulaudzi, T E; Mulder, P W A; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Ollis, I M; Plouamma, M A; Rabotapi, M W; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Shinn, M R; Shivambu, N F; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Twala, D L; Van Damme, P T; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Wilson, E R.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Fourth Report of Committee on Public Accounts on unauthorised expenditure of Department of Women, Children and People with Disabilities be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 288: Abrahams, B L; Adams, P E; Adams, F; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hadebe, T Z; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hlengwa, M; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, L V; James, W G;
Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Mahumapelo, J M K; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; McLoughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga- Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A;
Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, P W A; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane- Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shinn, M R; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 14: Filtane, M L W; Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Lekota, M G P; Malema, J S; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Fifth Report of Committee on Public Accounts on Report of Auditor-General on annual report and financial statements of Department of Defence for 2013-14 financial year be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 286: Abrahams, B L; Adams, P E; Adams, F; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M;
Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hadebe, T Z; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hlengwa, M; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, L V; James, W G; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, P S; Kekana, H B; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Majola, T R; Makhubela- Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L;
Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; McLoughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, C P; Mulder, P W A; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya- Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shinn, M R;
Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N;
Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R;
Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 15: Filtane, M L W; Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Mahumapelo, J M K; Malema, J S; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Plouamma, M A; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Sixth Report of Committee on Public Accounts on Report of Auditor-General on annual report and financial statements of Department of International Relations and Co-operation for 2013-14 financial year be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 288: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Filtane, M L W; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hlengwa, M; Holomisa, B H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, W G; James, L V; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Krumbock, G R; Kwankwa, N L S; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C;
Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Mahumapelo, J M K; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; McLoughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya- Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E
D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 12: Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Lekota, M G P; Malema, J S; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Seventh Report of Committee on Public Accounts on Report of Auditor-General on annual report and financial statements of Department of Military Veterans for 2013-14 financial year be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 291: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Filtane, M L W; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hadebe, T Z; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G;
Hlengwa, M; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, L V; James, W G; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, P S; Kekana, H B; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Kwankwa, N L S; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Mahumapelo, J M K; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; McLoughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B
E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shinn, M R; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R;
Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 12: Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Malema, J S; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
ABSTAIN - 1: Lekota, M G P.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
Question put: That the Eighth Report of Committee on Public Accounts on Report of Auditor-General on annual report and financial statements of Property Management Trading Entity for 2013-14 financial year be adopted.
Division demanded.
The House divided.
AYES - 288: Abrahams, B L; Adams, P E; Adams, F; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Bam- Mugwanya, V; Basson, L J; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Bergman, D; Beukman, F; Bhanga, B M; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Boroto, M G; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Cardo, M J; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chance, R W T; Chikunga, L
S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; Didiza, A T; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini- Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Dunjwa, M L; Ebrahim, E S; Edwards, J; Esau, S; Esterhuizen, J A; Faku, Z C; Figg, M J; Filtane, M L W; Fubbs, J L; Gamede, D D; Gana, S M; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gordhan, P J; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Gumede, D M; Hadebe, T Z; Hanekom, D A; Hill-Lewis, G G; Holomisa, B H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jafta, S M; James, W G; James, L V; Jeffery, J H; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Jongbloed, Z; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, M D; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kohler, D; Koornhof, N J J v R; Kopane, S P; Krumbock, G R; Kwankwa, N L S; Landers, L T; Lees, R A; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Lotriet, A; Lovemore, A T; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Mahumapelo, J M K; Maila, M S A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malatsi, M S; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mandela, Z M D; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N;
Mapulane, M P; Marais, S J F; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masango, S J; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashile, B L; Masuku, M B; Maswanganyi, M J; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsepe, C D; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbalula, F A; Mbhele, Z N; McGluwa, J J; Mchunu, S; McLoughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mjobo, L N; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga-Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokgalapa, S; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Motau, S C; Mothapo, M R M; Motshekga, M S; Motsoaledi, P A; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, N; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Mulder, C P; Mulder, P W A; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndongeni, N; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya- Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Nqakula, C; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oliphant, M N; Ollis, I M; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Rabotapi, M W; Radebe, G S; Radebe, J T; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Scheepers, M A; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shabangu, S; Shaik Emam, A M; Shelembe, M L; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Singh, N; Sisulu, L N;
Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Sotyu, M M; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steyn, A; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Thabethe, E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; Van Damme, P T; Van der Merwe, L L; Van der Walt, D; Van der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Volmink, H C; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Williams, A J; Wilson, E R;
Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S; Zulu, L D.
NOES - 12: Ketabahle, V; Khawula, M S; Malema, J S; Mashabela, N R; Matlhoko, A M; Maxon, H O; Mbatha, M S; Mulaudzi, T E; Ndlozi, M Q; Ntobongwana, P; Shivambu, N F; Twala, D L.
ABSTAIN - 1: Lekota, M G P.
Question agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING - 2013-2014 ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL SKILLS FUND AND NATIONAL SKILLS AUTHORITY
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING - 2013-2014 ANNUAL REPORT OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT SECTOR EDUCATION AND TRAINING AUTHORITY AND SERVICES SECTOR EDUCATION AND TRAINING AUTHORITY
Mrs Y N PHOSA: Hon Chair, I rise to table the National Skills Fund, NSF, and the National Skills Authority, NSA, reports on behalf of the committee. On 29 October 2014, the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training met with the NSF and NSA entities to assess their financial and nonfinancial performance for the 2013-14 financial year. The findings were as follows. As per section 27 of the Skills Development Act, Act 97 of 1998, the mandate of the National Skills Fund is to find and identify projects in the National Skills Development Strategy as national priorities and to fund projects related to the achievement of the purpose of the Act.
The report acknowledges that progress has been made with regard to the entity in the last financial year. Concerns have been raised that relate to several issues, such as the high vacancy rate which could have an impact on project monitoring and evaluation, inaccuracies that were found in the annual report 2013-14 that relate to its financial statements, as well as unreliable and vague targets and underachievement of targets for the 2013-14 period.
Concerns were raised about the inadequate record and information management system for financial and performance
reporting. Strides have been made in funding the national skills development priorities as identified in the National Skills Development Strategy III, New Growth Path, NGP, Industrial Policy Action Plan, Ipap, and Medium-Term Strategic Framework, MTSF, 2009-14. Funding of the infrastructure development for the postschool education and training institutions to expand access and success to education and training was commended. Unspent Sector Education Training Authority, Seta, surplus funding was transferred to the National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, to be used on other priorities.
Therefore, it was recommended that the delinking of the NSF from the Department of Higher Education and Training should be accelerated. The filling of vacant posts should be prioritised. Clear performance indicators would be developed to monitor the performance of the funded learners.
The committee found that the mandate of the National Skills Authority is to review the skills development legislative framework to mobilise business, government, and labour and help the community take ownership of the National Skills Development Strategy, support the development of a postschool education and training system that encourages society to build a developmental state, and encourage research, development,
and innovation that promote beneficiation and business enterprise.
Its main purpose is to advise the Minister and liaise with Sector Education and Training Authorities, Setas, and the National Skills Development Strategy. Concerns were raised about inadequate financial reporting, even though it received money from the NSFAS and the Department of Higher Education and Training. Commendable is its continued advice to the Minister with regard to skills development issues and the Setas. A recommendation was made to increase its research capacity.
Hon Chair, I table the report for consideration by the House.
Debate concluded.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training can take her seat.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Chairperson, I move that the Reports be adopted.
Declarations of vote:
Prof B BOZZOLI: Hon House Chair, the DA objects to the second of these two reports because we do not believe that this report goes far enough. Many of the country’s 21 Setas are deeply dysfunctional. The Auditor-General tells us every year how appallingly managed many of them are. We believe that Setas should be scrapped and the funds used directly for the training of students.
Here is why. As is the case of many projects managed by the ANC-led government, the average Seta has a particular life cycle which looks like this: The Seta is born with great fanfare and reference to values such as ubuntu, liberation, the Freedom Charter, and the struggle against white monopoly capital. The hubris is palpable. In its childhood, the Seta develops a strategic plan which is hugely ambitious and looks good on paper.
In its adolescence, the Seta, however, goes off the rails, like a teenager who gets hooked on drugs, but these are not chemical drugs. They are the drugs of money and patronage. People start stealing. They fail to meet their targets, they under- or overspend, and they appoint wrong people into jobs they can’t do. Things sink into the familiar mire of ANC mismanagement and disaster. An entire layer of rent-seeking parasites grows upon the fat of the Seta pretending to offer
educational opportunities but, in fact, simply making money. The Department of High Education and Training gets to the point where it can no longer ignore the failures of the Setas and puts it into rehab or, as is more commonly known, under administration. An administrator comes in who develops that wonderful thing: a turnaround strategy. The turnaround strategy is presented to us as a great step forward. It makes little reference to the great step backwards which preceded it.
Chairperson, you only need a turnaround strategy if you have failed in the first place. Under the administrator, some progress is made. In rare cases, the Seta actually gets fixed but often the period of rehab is followed by a severe relapse as soon as the administrator leaves. The drugs of theft and patronage prove irresistible, and the cycle starts all over again.
One of these perpetually adolescent institutions is the Local Government Seta, perhaps, the most unsuccessful and incompetent in the country. It is now under administration, and it is doubtful that when the period of administration ends, it will be fixed. The committee has made stringent recommendations to the department, but will these recommendations be taken seriously, or will this important
Seta be allowed to sink further into the mud of incompetence that characterises the local government in general?
We believe Setas have no sustainable future, and the funds, again, should be taken away from the rent-seeking parasites and given to students for their education. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M S MBATHA: Hon House Chair, when the new regime on the skills for South Africans was re-engineered, there were many hopes in particular around the earlier failures when the majority of the skills areas were linked to the Department of Labour. When they were now linked to the new Department of Higher Education and Training, hope was then revealed, but it soon died on the road just like it has always been found in “Hopeville”.
The National Skills Fund and the National Skills Authority were meant to drive the skill base of poor South Africans to higher levels. With a total revenue of over R4 billion, the National Skills Fund has failed completely to do any of its tasks. Two of those things that characterise these are the vacancy rate of 60% and the fact that the National Skills Fund still has links with the department which also calls for a lot of political interference and political re-engineering from time to time.
It fails to achieve its targets around upskilling and ensuring that South Africa has a collection of skills in particular as we need more than 432 000 technicians and more than 216 middle managers. In a range of professions, we need approximately
178 professionals that were supposed to have been pulled through the system. The system has not moved even an inch.
The National Skills Fund claimed to have given up to
R1,2 billion for undergraduate bursaries and postgraduate degrees or postgraduate scholarships. It has about
R1,1 billion in the bank, unallocated. Watch the space. As we get closer to the elections, it will be immediately allocated to devious programmes that don’t have any clear, achievable goal. The EFF rejects this, and we feel that our people deserve better, and our people deserve a new deal in skills.
Another big problem that has followed the South African local government era is the Local Government Sector Education and Training Authority. This Seta has been admitted to rehab not once but on several occasions. It has not once but on several occasions been given the best persons to lead it, but because of the inherent inability of the initial collective that sits in that Seta, they plan the downfall of each and every senior executive that comes into this Seta. This Seta will never be re-engineered, and it will never be of use to any local government. We reject all of them. [Time expired.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon House Chair, on a point of order: We are of the opinion that when the House is sitting, no committee should be sitting concurrently. We are being sent messages that we must go and attend the Subcommittee on Review of National Assembly Rules, and we have business in the House.
Can you please give an instruction that the committee must be dissolved until we are done in the Assembly because we are all expected to be here during a sitting.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon Ndlozi. I will communicate with the National Assembly Table, and they will discuss with the Chairperson concerned on that.
Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Hon House Chairperson, having served in the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training, I know that the hon Minister has been very concerned about the performance of all the Setas. I know the reasons for which these Setas were established are indeed very noble. However, the performance of most, if not all, of them has been very disappointing.
The two setas we are talking about – the Local Government Seta and the Services Seta – have been found by the Auditor-General to be the worst performing Setas. Local government is struggling with skilled artisans because the Seta which is supposed to be supplying local government with skilled people
is not doing that. If you read the report in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATCs, you will find that instead of doing their work, those in charge of the Setas are paying themselves huge bonuses. As we talk now, the recommendation by the portfolio committee was that these officials be charged; yet, we haven’t heard anything about any action taken by the department. I’m waiting for any sane person to provide me with justification as to why these Setas should not be – I am looking for the right verb – scrapped.
Yes, I think that’s the best verb.
I sympathise with you, hon Minister. You mean well, but these Setas are really disappointing you. I’m sure that you agree with us that instead of wasting taxpayers’ money, they should be scrapped. Don’t you think so, hon Minister?
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: On a point of
order, Chairperson: I think the hon Mpontshane shouldn’t cause confusion in the House. We are not talking about sweethearts; we are talking about Setas. [Laughter.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon Minister.
Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Did I say sweethearts? [Laughter.] I thought I heard myself saying Setas.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Okay, you can proceed, hon Mpontshane. You have just clarified yourself. Your time will expire soon.
Mr A M MPONTSHANE: I know my friend there. I won’t tell you a story of when we went to Cuba together and how he used the sweethearts. [Laughter.] [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon members! Order! Hon members, I’m told by the National Assembly Table that the subcommittee is preparing for the National Assembly Rules Committee that is sitting tomorrow. I’m sure that they will communicate with relevant parties accordingly. I am responding to the matter that I said I would clarify.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, we are respectfully submitting that when we are here in the National Assembly, we get prejudiced as we can’t participate as members of the subcommittee when we have business in the House. This is a multiparty democratic Parliament, and we are appealing. They can wait. We have the last debate that is taking place.
Through you, give an instruction that they halt the process until we are done with the business of the House. It’s very simple.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon member. I think that matter, as indicated, can be discussed further with the chairperson of the committee, together with the different Whips of parties.
Mr J S MALEMA: No, no, no ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema, are you rising on a point of order?
Mr J S MALEMA: Yes. You know, we represent some of the smallest parties here, and they have to be on the other side and, at the same time, on this side. That is practically impossible. Please, we are pleading. We want to focus on the business of this Parliament here. Please, let’s dissolve that committee so that even the smallest parties can participate in these or those proceedings. That’s what we are appealing for.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon members. That’s exactly why I communicated with the National Assembly Table. Together with the chair of the committee, they will have discussions with the respective parties and find an amicable solution.
Prof N M KHUBISA: House Chairperson, the NFP concurs with the portfolio committee that the delays in the appointment of the
new board of the NSA by the Minister is a cause for concern. It’s of concern that the NSF is still under the Department of Higher Education and Training. The view that the NSF be made a legal persona is supported by the NFP. This will allow clear space for accountability.
The NSF has not yet developed performance indicators to track its beneficiaries, to determine whether the funded learners are succeeding in the funded skills development projects. The time taken to start building Technical Vocational Education and Training, TVET, colleges is concerning. The building of TVET colleges must be fast-tracked.
Some Setas are not performing the way that they should, and the NFP is concerned about that. The NFP is also worried that there are Setas that still have a backlog of outstanding certificates in the current year. Why are they not releasing certificates? That must be done with immediate effect. Thank you very much.
Mr C D KEKANA: Hon Chair, the ANC acknowledges all the discrepancies that are pointed out; yet, we say that there is hope in education. Actually, the situation has improved because we are producing students who are performing well.
However, we do acknowledge that we still have a long way to go because we come from a situation where, for example in the
NSFAS, it is the responsibility ... a lot of students come from disadvantaged backgrounds, and their families cannot afford to give them an education, so they need to be funded to achieve an education. However, we don’t lose hope, and we are confident that we are going to achieve our goals and use education to combat poverty.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: On a point of order, Chair ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon Kekana. Can you take your seat? Hon Shivambu?
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I’m coming from outside, and there’s a committee that is sitting while the House is in session. [Interjections.] Parliamentary Rules, procedures, and processes do not allow for another committee to sit while the House is in session. We rightfully should be participating there to determine the Rules process, and all of us want to participate here. It’s not allowed. You must dissolve that committee or dissolve this House. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon Shivambu. As indicated, the matter you are raising was raised earlier by the hon members of your party. I did respond initially and, indeed, there was again another request which I communicated to the National Assembly Table and also to the
House, saying that I will request that the National Assembly Table together with the chair of that specific committee and yourself as the Chief Whip of the EFF have a discussion so that we can find an amicable solution.
However, I would also like to advise members that when committees need to meet, even when the House is sitting, they apply to the House Chairperson: Committees, and they are then given permission to do so. When the House has to vote when a division is called, those members are released by their committees to come and vote.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chair, we are saying that the committee is sitting now. The issue is not being attended to.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The committee is sitting there discussing important issues that relate to Rules ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... and you are depriving us of an opportunity to discuss the Rules there because we must be here. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, can I request that you do as I have requested?
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No, but you are disadvantaging us now. As I’m talking here, there is a committee meeting that is going on there ... [Interjections.] ... discussing Rules that all of us must contribute to.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): That’s exactly what I’m advising. That’s why I said I’m asking you and the National Assembly Table, together with the chairperson of the committee, to discuss the matter that you are raising so that you can resolve how we proceed.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We spoke to the Whips of the ANC ... the Deputy Chief Whip now. We went there. They are continuing with the committee meeting. We have done everything that you have said we should do. What else do we do now? We went there, and they are continuing with the committee meeting while we are sitting here.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, can you take your seat? I will ask the Secretary of the National Assembly Table to attend to it.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But the committee meeting is continuing there
...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon member!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... and we want to participate there. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, I have noted your concern.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Let’s agree to dissolve that committee first until we conclude here. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, we cannot as the House in our sitting just pronounce on the Rules that we adopt impromptu; we cannot. That is why I outlined the process on how permission is sought by committees to sit. You indeed ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: There was no permission sought.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order! Order!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: There was no permission sought because, as members of that committee, we weren’t told about it.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, order! Hon Shivambu, can you please take your seat? Can you please take your seat?
Ms M S KHAWULA: Sihlalo, uxolo. [Excuse me, Chairperson.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Ndlozi, take your seat!
Ms M S KHAWULA: Sihlalo, uxolo, sekunegama futhi la ... [Chairperson, excuse me, there is another name given again here ...]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Khawula! Hon Khawula!
Ms M S KHAWULA: ... sekukhona ababiza umhlonishwa Shivambu ngokuthi uyisgantsontso. Ngifuna ukwazi ukuthi sinaye usgantsontso lana na? Asilungiseni bafowethu, ngoba iyaqala le nto futhi. (Translation of isiZulu sentences follows.)
[... there are others who refer to hon Shivambu as “the tough one”. I want to know whether is there somebody known as “the tough one” in here? Let us fix this thing, good people, as it is starting to rear its head again.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Khawula, take your seat.
Ms M S KHAWULA: Angisho-ke manje ukuthi, uthini ngalo sigantsontso esenimusho manje? Asiyifuni leyo nto, asiyifuni neze leyo nto! (Translation of isiZulu sentences follows.)
[Let me ask you now, what is the “the tough one” thing that you are referring to? We do not like that thing; we do not like it at all!]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Khawula! Hon Ndlozi, please take your seat.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, I’m rising on a point of order.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Ndlozi, can you please take your seat so that I can finish the matter I was addressing with your Chief Whip?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: All right.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you very much. Hon members, I have indeed asked that the hon Chief Whip of the EFF consults with the National Assembly Table and the Chairperson of the National Assembly Rules Committee to raise
the concerns that they have raised in this House so that an amicable decision can be reached on how to move forward. You have come back to say that the process is still continuing. You ask this House to take a decision, and I advised you that, unfortunately, it is not within this House’s competence to make Rules here without it having been processed by the Rules Committee. I would again advise that the National Assembly Table – they will send a representative here – consult with you and the chair of the committee so that indeed an amicable solution is found.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, can we correct a point of information? It is not consistent. The committee was scheduled to sit at 17:00 because it anticipated that the National Assembly would be done by 17:00. [Interjections.] Now, clearly, we are not done by 17:00. So, as to when the application to the chairperson happened, it can’t be consistent. So, it’s not true that they made an application to sit at the same time as the National Assembly because they anticipated. We sit in that committee so we know. We anticipated that, at 17:00, we would’ve been done.
I’m providing this information because it’s prejudicial that that committee meeting is continuing without other members who must participate in it, and they are discussing Rules on how to prevent disruptions in the House. We must all form part of
that discussion. [Interjections.] It favours everyone in here because everybody disrupts the House.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order! Hon member, it is precisely because of that concern that I am advising in the manner that I do, so that the matter is addressed. That’s why I appealed that the Chief Whip of the EFF together with the National Assembly Table and the chairperson go outside. I see now that the Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party is also offering to go outside so that the matter can be resolved amicably. Can we move on? Order, hon members! Hon Khawula, can you take your seat?
Ms M S KHAWULA: Sifun’ukuzwa ukuthi isigantsontso ngubani la ngaphakathi. [We want to know who the powerful, muscular person in here is.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon member Khawula, you have raised a point of order, but unfortunately you have not cited the name of the member who allegedly pronounced the name.
An HON MEMBER: Nangu! [He is here!]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON: (Ms A T Didiza): Ubani? [Who?]
Mr M S MBATHA: It’s hon Sibusiso from Mpumalanga.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Sibusiso, did you say the words, ``as alleged’’?
Mr G S RADEBE: I don’t remember saying those words. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon members, I think we need to take into consideration that all of us here are hon members and must be respectful towards one another. Can we allow the hon Kekana to proceed and finish his declaration?
Mr C D KEKANA: Chair, I was saying the education matters are receiving the fullest attention of the department and the Portfolio Committee of Higher Education and Training. Where there are shortfalls and limited finances - for example, the issue of the NSFAS, which is by and large not of our own making, but affected by the performance of the economy of the country - we will definitely make sure that we do the best with the little that we have.
The Local Government Seta and Services Seta are receiving our closest monitoring. We really want to see our Setas performing because it is the only chance to link our technical and
vocational colleges with to private sector or industry. So, we really want to make them perform and link our students with industry and colleges so that we can have students that serve the needs of the economy of the country.
Personally, I must say, I haven’t lost confidence, as the students who were given an opportunity continue to perform well although there is still room for improvement. Thank very much. [Applause.]
Motion agreed to.
Report on 2013-2014 Annual Report of National Skills Fund and National Skills Authority accordingly adopted (Economic Freedom Fighters and Inkatha Freedom Party dissenting).
Report on 2013-2014 Annual Report of Local Government Sector Education and Training Authority and Services Sector Education and Training Authority accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance, Economic Freedom Fighters, Inkatha Freedom Party, Freedom Front Plus and National Freedom Party dissenting).
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): This brings us to the end of the reports. The Secretary will now read the next Order.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chairperson, we need the report from the Table staff on what is happening in that committee ... [Interjections.] ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you very much, hon Ndlozi. [Interjections.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... because we don’t want to disrupt the debate. We want to hear that we are moving on or that we have decided to adjourn the House ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you very much.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... so that we can go and monitor deliberations about the Rules that will make sure the Speaker and the Table staff never disrupt Parliament again.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Precisely. Once we are advised, we will inform the House.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: No, hon Chairperson, I am proposing that we determine that before. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Ndlozi, I have indeed ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House
Chairperson, may I address you on the matter of that subcommittee?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Yes, hon Deputy Chief Whip.
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House
Chairperson, again, we are being held to ransom by the EFF. What I can say is that, for that committee to sit at 17:00, an application was made to the House Chairperson: Committees and was approved. We approved it as well. So, we went outside to discuss this matter, in good faith, of course, but the hon Shivambu insisted on going into that committee room where we were debating this matter. Now they said they are going to adjourn that meeting. It is unfair for them to do so because all parties are represented in that meeting, and we said the EFF could send one member to go and represent them.
We cannot continue like this. A party like the EFF cannot always hold us to ransom and prevent us from doing our work as Members of Parliament ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon Deputy Chief Whip. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: They are also
violating our rights to serve the people who elected us to this Parliament. [Applause.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon Deputy Chief Whip. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Chair?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon members. I think ... [Interjections.] ... Hon Malema, I will recognise you.
Mr J S MALEMA: Can I address you. Can I address you before you make a ruling? [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Could I just respond
... [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: No, but she has just made a very wrong statement ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema?
Mr J S MALEMA: ... which must be responded to. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema, please take a seat. [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: No, but can I respond to her ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): I will recognise you. I will recognise you. [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: No, I want to respond to her before ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema? [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: You allowed her to speak. You allowed her to speak ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema, I will allow you to speak. Can you please take your seat?
Mr J S MALEMA: But you would have made a ruling before you heard me. Can you hear me out? Can you hear me out?
An HON MEMBER: No!
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema!
Mr J S MALEMA: Don’t say no, man. You have no option, man. You are going to listen; you have no option.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order! Hon Malema, I will recognise you, but can you please take your seat? [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: Can I be heard before you make a ruling? [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Could you please take your seat? [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Chair, she spoke to you ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema! [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: She cannot speak and not be challenged. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Malema, I will recognise the Deputy Chief Whip. Can you take your seat? [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: I want to challenge what she said. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Take your seat! Hon Malema, can you please take your seat? Hon members, a question having been asked on progress, the Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party asked to respond on the matter. Her response indicated that the committee is adjourning and coming back to proceed in the House. So, having heard that response, I am sure the House will be allowed to continue. Hon Malema, what is your point of order? [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: No, Chair, it is extremely wrong to suggest that the EFF is holding this House to ransom ... [Interjections.] ... because we have a right to express ourselves if we are not happy with certain processes. I addressed you earlier on the point that it is actually unfair to small parties to have two meetings taking place at the same time. If you are not persuaded, you must rule otherwise, but that is the point we have raised. If the meeting has now adjourned, it means you are persuaded and that you agree with
us. That is not holding the House to ransom. That is persuasion.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Thank you, hon member. Take your seat. Hon members, again, I think we need to appreciate what our Rules say. [Interjections.] I have indicated ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, take your seat.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson, I have been outside to get responses. I must give a reply.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, take your seat.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Are you going to recognise me?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Take your seat.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Are you going to recognise me?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Are you going to recognise me?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Please take your seat!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I am asking you a simple question. Are you going to recognise me? [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, I asked you to take your seat.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Are you going to recognise me, Chair?
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Can you allow me to actually address the House? Hon Malema, precisely on the issue you are raising, we did advise the House on the processes that we were going to follow to address your matter. Such processes have been undertaken, in part led by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party who then went outside and consulted. I had asked the National Assembly Table to deal with the matters accordingly. As we have had the report, the matter has been addressed, and every member is back in the House. Can I therefore allow the meeting to continue?
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chair, the information you have just provided now is not correct. I have come from the committee. We went to sit in the committee to propose that the committee cannot
continue when the House is in session. The committee people are refusing. The chair of the committee proposed that they must all come back here, but certain ANC deployees are saying they cannot come here because they want to deprive us of the opportunity to participate in that process. They want to make Rules without our participation.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, I have heard you, and that is why ...
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Voorsitter, op ’n punt van orde ... [Hon Chairperson, on a point of order ...]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): I will recognise you, hon Groenewald.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Voorsitter, ek dink hierdie probleem kan opgelos word deur ’n beroep te doen op die hoofsweep van die EFF om te sorg dat al hul lede hier is, want ek sien daar is omtrent net 50%, en dit is, lyk my, die probleem oor hoekom hulle nie een lid kan afstaan om by ’n komitee te wees nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] So, die hoofsweep van die EFF moet sy werk doen en sorg dat sy party se lede hier is sodat hulle dan almal kan deelneem. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Dr P J GROENEWALD: Hon Chairperson, I think this problem can be solved by making an appeal to the Chief Whip of the EFF to ensure that all his party members are in attendance. I only see about 50% of them here, and this might be the reason why they cannot spare a member to attend a committee meeting. [Interjections.] So, the Chief Whip of the EFF should do his job and ensure that his party’s members are here so they can all participate. [Applause.]]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon members! I will now ask the Secretary to read the next Order. [Interjections.]
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: House Chairperson, there is an issue which we have said must be resolved here.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): The issue can’t be resolved in this meeting.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: You can’t convene two committees on top of another, particularly when the House is in session. The National Assembly is in session, and you have the committee to discuss the Rules there. [Interjections.] What Rules are they discussing? We want to be part of that process. We must conclude here first.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, as indicated earlier, this august House cannot make the Rules or change the processes to the Rules on how committees operate. I have advised ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No, no, no, Chair! You made a commitment that we must deal with those issues there. Why are you now turning on that issue? We have ... [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, what I’m saying is that you can’t expect this House to change Rules about meetings, requests, and applications. Hence I said the National Assembly Table, together with yourself and the chairperson of the committee, must resolve this matter. If the matter ... [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu! Hon Shivambu!
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Let me assist you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): If the matter has not been resolved, we will continue to persuade members in that committee to resolve the matter. So, you cannot allow ...
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Let’s assist you.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): You can’t assist me. [Interjections.]
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I’m assisting you because I went outside, and the committee there is insisting on going ahead with the sitting in session now. There was a directive ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Shivambu, so what is your assistance?
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: You must give a directive that that committee must be dissolved, and we continue here. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order! Order! Then it means we don’t understand the processes and procedures around which we work in this House. [Applause.] I will, therefore, ask you respectfully to take your seat while we continue to engage on the matter. Can I ask the Secretary to read the next Order?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, before the Secretary reads the Order, may I please ... It is not true that we don’t enjoy the protection of this House in as far as concurrent meetings are called when the National Assembly is sitting. It is not true. [Interjections.] We made a request to you. We made a request to the Chief Whip of the Majority Party. The Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party came in here and said we have agreed to resolve the committee. New information reveals that is not the case, and you are just leaving it like that. So ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): No one has left this matter.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: ... it is you who is being inconsistent, Chairperson. We are requesting that we want to form part of that process, and there is an agreement that all of us should be allowed to form part of that process if and when it is necessary.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Ndlozi!
Hon Chair, may we please be allowed to delay the meeting until the Al-Bashir debate is done? It is not a vote; it is a debate. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon members, I don’t think you understood what I said. I said since the matter is not resolved, the processes I indicated earlier should continue to find an amicable resolution on the matter. So, what do you mean when you say we have just thrown our hands in the air on the issue?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: The decision to allow them to meet is made by the presiding officers. [Interjections.] The presiding officers decide, through the House Chairperson: Committees, that we are going to have a meeting when the National Assembly
is sitting. So, we are told now that you are the people who decided. Earlier on, I said there was never such an application. The Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party says you have allowed for that committee to go on. We are pleading with you, as the powers that allowed that committee to go on, to please ask them to suspend the process until we are able to go there; that’s the procedure of the House. [Interjections.]
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon Ndlozi, the unfortunate part is that you listen selectively. I have said committees apply to the House Chairperson: Committees. I never said they apply to the presiding officers. I said chairpersons of committees, for their meetings, apply to the House Chairperson: Committees, and – can you please listen? – those processes have been followed.
You have indicated your displeasure in that you would want to participate in the proceedings of the House, and I have outlined how we must continue to assist you in resolving the matter. So, I am not sure, hon member, seated here, what more you want us to do apart from that. Can I ask the Secretary to read the next Order?
Mr M M DLAMINI: Hon Chair ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Secretary, can you proceed to read?
Mr M M DLAMINI: Hon Chair ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Can you proceed to read?
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson, there is a person on the floor. Why do you insist that the Secretary read the Order?
Mr M M DLAMINI: I must be respected here, as well.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: You must not take us for granted. Please! We are members of this House, and when a member stands up and says “hon Chair”, you must recognise that member. [Interjections.] Please don’t do that.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Take your seats! Can you take your seat, hon Shivambu? Hon Shivambu, equally when the House Chairperson or any presiding officer addresses the House, hon members must listen. It is equally so. The respect you want to be accorded, the presiding officers must be accorded the same.
Mr M M DLAMINI: Yes, Chair, I am respecting you. I am respecting you, and you must respect me as well.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Order, hon member! You are doing precisely what is wrong. Allow me to respond to your Chief Whip.
Mr M M DLAMINI: No, I was talking to you ...
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): I was responding ... Order, hon member!
Mr M M DLAMINI: ... and you did not respect me, and I don’t appreciate that. [Interjections.] Can I speak now? The Deputy Chief Whip of the Majority Party came here and said there is an agreement that that meeting should be adjourned, and you then said the matter is resolved. Now you are changing that.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): Hon member, I don’t think you are really listening because the matter is not closed.
Mr M M DLAMINI: No, I am listening.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): You are not. I said there is a process that this matter must continue to be addressed.
Mr M M DLAMINI: That is not true.
The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms A T Didiza): So, can you please take your seat? Secretary, please read the next Order. [Interjections.]
Ms H O MAXON: Hon Deputy Speaker ... [Interjections.] You can scream. You can do whatever. I have a right to speak here. You can scream. You can do whatever. I don’t care. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Why are you rising, hon member?
Ms H O MAXON: I am rising on the same matter. I think you, as chairpersons, like to complicate things unnecessarily. The hon Mbuyiseni Ndlozi is part of that subcommittee of the Rules Committee. [Interjections.] He confirmed that they have agreed that, after this meeting, that meeting will continue. I don’t understand what the problem is with dissolving that committee to allow for matters to be concluded here before the meeting is proceeded with. We want to be part and parcel of that subcommittee too. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Mokgalapa, please take the podium.
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Hon Deputy Speaker, a point of order has just been raised by the deputy secretary-general. Why do you just ignore it? We have requested that the committee on the Rules not continue as long as this session is still on. You must allow the National Assembly to finish its business, and all other committees of Parliament will sit afterwards because we want to participate in both. In terms of accepted practice, a House sitting cannot run concurrently with a committee sitting elsewhere. [Interjections.] Why do you want to impose that on us, even when it isn’t allowed?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, I would respectfully like to draw to your attention that you should please stop ignoring the injunctions of the Chair. Stop completely ignoring the request that those kinds of decisions are not to be made in the House. The programming committee and the Chief Whips’ Forum are where decisions of this nature are made. If you did not get joy there, you can’t bring it here in the manner in which you are doing.
You have repeatedly – several of you – raised concerns about which you were addressed. You are refusing to accept that address. You only want your answer.
The House cannot be run that way. I would like to suggest to you that you not proceed in that direction. Decisions about committee meetings and how they are done have been explained sufficiently. We cannot take any other route other than that one.
I would like us to proceed with the decision of the House to proceed with the debate.
DEBATE ON MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE: THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE ATTENDANCE AND DEPARTURE OF PRESIDENT OMAR AL-BASHIR FROM THE AFRICAN UNION SUMMIT IN SOUTH AFRICA
Mr S MOKGALAPA: Hon Deputy Speaker, this debate happens at a shameful time in South African history.
We are here to get answers on how government stooped so low and actively chose to take the moral low ground and allowed a wanted man to escape accountability for crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. [Interjections.]
Human rights should be the cornerstone of South African foreign policy. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon members, order! Proceed, hon member.
Mr S MOKGALAPA: Human rights should be the cornerstone of South African foreign policy. Only through a firm commitment to justice and the rule of law, and the promotion of international law will we achieve a stable and prosperous African continent.
Section 165(5) of our Constitution clearly stipulates that “an order or decision issued by a court binds all persons to whom and organs of state to which it applies”. This means the executive was duty bound by our Constitution to comply with the order that Mr Al-Bashir should not leave until the court had decided whether South Africa was to arrest him as per the warrants issued by the International Criminal Court. By not complying with this order, the executive is, quite simply, in contempt of court. [Interjections.] The question now is: Why did the government flagrantly ignore our own court and abandon our human rights and rule of law-based Constitution and foreign policy?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Mokgalapa, please take your seat.
Hon members, I would like to apologise for not having done this right at the beginning. I should have started by pointing out that Rule 67 cautions that we must responsibly address matters that are before the courts, without reference to their merits or demerits. We can discuss everything else around
those matters without any reference to the merits or demerits of the case. If we do that, we are in contempt of our own Rules and the relationship we have set and the Rules we ourselves have pointed out.
We would like to point that out as a guide for the manner in which we deal with these discussions. We do want to point out that even if we may not – maybe - point this out to every one of the speakers who are going to speak, we will review the statements made before the House so that we take appropriate remedies to ensure that we do not ever have to violate the Rules that we have made for ourselves.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Deputy Speaker, may I address you on Rule 67?
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Deputy Speaker, I would submit to you that Rule 67 does not apply in this matter. The matter has already been before the court. The court has handed down a judgment in this matter. The only thing that is outstanding is an affidavit that that court has instructed a Minister to provide. There is no way any discussion on any matter today in this House around the case is going to prejudice the outcome of the judicial matter.
We’ve had rulings in the Constitutional Court, most notably in the Midi Television matter, which put Rule 67 in serious constitutional problems, which is why, in the review of the Rules, we have excluded it.
I would suggest to you today that if one looks at the rulings taken in the House and if one refers to the Hansard of 1998 in the fifth session, on page 208, it is very clear there that the intention is never to stifle debate in the House.
The hon Mokgalapa is not touching on the merits of the matter, and even if he were to do so, it would not influence the outcome of the case because a judge has already made a judgment on it. I would submit to you, hon Deputy Speaker, that you abide by the ruling handed down in the Hansard then, which was then confirmed in the House if one looks at the Hansard of Wednesday, 18 March this year, in which the Speaker dealt with the sub judice Rule quite extensively in this House. This matter is not before the courts.
I ask you to not limit speakers having a full and proper discussion. It is important in a democracy that this House expresses itself on this matter. I ask that that not be limited. We have the right to freedom of speech. It is entrenched in the Constitution, and that trumps anything that Rule 67 might provide.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): Hon Deputy Speaker, the hon Chief Whip of the Opposition is not correct. The matter is still before the courts. [Interjections.]
The Gauteng North High Court gave an order. It hasn’t even given its reasons yet. Those reasons are only being delivered tomorrow. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Deputy Minister. Hon members ... [Interjections.] The Rules of the House are adjudicated by the presiding officers. I have pointed out to you that this matter needs us to discuss it, but we must be careful because, in my opinion, and my understanding of where the situation is, we cannot go into the merits or demerits of that matter.
Chief Whip, what you have just said is part of the Rule. Don’t just look at one part of the Rule. Look at the Rule in its entirety. The part you commented on is exactly what I am saying you must do, including the rest that says you mustn’t go into areas that are yet to be decided. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: It has already been decided!
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I am saying to you that we will come back to you on the ruling on this matter.
Mr D W MACPHERSON: Don’t be stifled!
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You are not making the Rules. We are adjudicating the Rules here. [Interjections.] Hon member! Hon member! [Interjections.] Hon Mokgalapa, speak.
Mr S MOKGALAPA: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. South Africa is a signatory to the Rome Statute and has domesticated this into our own domestic law through ratification and promulgation of an Act called the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, Act 27 of 2002.
The executive has directly violated parliamentary authority by not adhering to our international obligations. It must then be asked what the purpose is of this Parliament ratifying treaties when the executive decides on a whim to defy them. Mr Al-Bashir should have been arrested because we are morally, legally, and constitutionally duty bound to comply with domestic law and international obligations. [Applause.]
The ANC government, led by Jacob Zuma, has committed the crime of assisting a wanted man to run from the law. Let us, for a moment, think about what allowing Mr Al-Bashir to evade the
law means to the 300 000 people who were murdered and the 2,5 million people who were displaced in Darfur by Mr Al- Bashir.
This saga has dented our moral standing and now tarnished our previous title as champions of human rights. With increasing haste, the executive branch of government seems to show no regard for the rule of law or any of the constitutional principles we have jealously guarded for more than 20 years. How does President Zuma take advice from the likes of Mr Mugabe and protect Mr Al-Bashir? The answer is that birds of a feather flock together, and President Zuma flouts the laws of our country with the same impunity these men seem to. [Interjections.]
There are many questions unanswered by this sad chapter, and the DA will not rest until the truth is exposed. Ultimately, it is the people of South Africa and Sudan who are the losers because the executive has demonstrated that it has no regard for the loss of life and displacement of millions of Africans at the hands of one man.
The Minister of International Relations and Co-operation claims that she will not appear before the committee to brief it on the Al-Bashir debacle because the matter is sub judice. This simply isn’t true and is just more thinly veiled pretext
to avoid accountability. [Interjections.] This is what we have come to expect from members of the executive who choose to spuriously apply rules as and when it suits them.
South Africa has a lot of work to do if we are to redeem our moral standing and international responsibility. The DA’s values of freedom, fairness, and opportunity mean that we believe that the government should at all times act honestly, transparently, and in the best interests of all South Africans.
The people of South Africa have the power to make our country a shining beacon for Africa and the world again. The government, under President Zuma, has failed in its duty to uphold the Constitution, has failed the people of South Africa, and has failed those who were murdered and displaced in Darfur. Shame on you! [Applause.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF CO-OPERATIVE GOVERNANCE AND TRADITIONAL AFFAIRS RESPONSIBLE FOR TRADITIONAL AFFAIRS (Mr K O Bapela):
Hon Deputy Speaker, hon Ministers, hon Deputy Ministers, hon members and South Africans, good evening.
Unfortunately, the proposer of the motion is not here. We are reliably informed that he is somewhere in the United States of America and is probably consulting his brothers and sisters in
the liberal group on the project they call the “African Project”. In a meeting with their former leader, Helen Zille, this group stated that the DA is its beacon of hope on the African continent. This is simply because they won on a project of the liberal agenda, which is antimajoritarian and which is also about regime change. Good luck on those consultations!
The ANC welcomes the debate on this matter, arising out of the recent attendance of the President of the Republic of Sudan, His Excellency Omar al-Bashir, at the 25th Summit of African Union Heads of State and Government, which has just been held in Johannesburg. We welcome the debate because, properly engaged, it holds the possibility for our country to expand its horizons regarding the complexities of international law, the imperatives and practice of foreign relations, and thereby invigorate policy and, more specifically, the law.
In this context, we note that the matter concerning President Bashir’s attendance at the AU Summit is currently before the courts and, as a consequence, there is a limit to the extent to which we as parliamentarians can debate the details. [Interjections.] We agree with the many South Africans who say we should respect the processes of the law.
Bearing this fact in mind, the ANC is of the view that the debate we are having, or rather should have, is one about the challenges of achieving peace, justice and reconciliation on the one hand, and the pursuit of international justice as represented by the International Criminal Court, on the other.
We want to restate the ANC’s noble policy of adhering to the human rights culture and the rule of law. [Interjections.] We do not by any means promote impunity, and we take seriously the matter of what happened in Darfur, where 300 000 were killed and over 2,5 million people were displaced. Indeed, those who have done this must still be called to account. [Interjections.]
When he addressed the OAU Meeting of Heads of State and Government as President of democratic South Africa for the first time on 13 June 1994 in Tunis, Tunisia, President Nelson Mandela said, among other things:
Finally, at this summit meeting in Tunis, we shall remove from our agenda the consideration of the question of Apartheid South Africa.
He further said:
Where South Africa appears on the agenda again, let it be because we want to discuss what its contribution shall be to the making of the new African renaissance. Let it be because we want to discuss what materials it will supply for the rebuilding of the African city of Carthage. One epoch with its historic tasks has come to an end. Surely, another must commence with its own challenges. Africa cries out for new birth; Carthage awaits the restoration of its glory.
The ANC enters the debate informed by the considerations and commitment President Mandela made to the OAU in 1994. In particular, we assert the following. Firstly, South Africa has national interests which it must at all times defend and pursue within the context of international solidarity and the renewal of Africa in all its elements. Secondly, South Africa has an obligation to strengthen the continent’s intergovernmental organisations and to contribute to the reform of institutions of global governance. Thirdly, diplomacy has established norms and conventions which cannot be ignored, lest we promulgate untenable precedents which may serve to defeat other valued objectives in the diplomatic and political realms. [Interjections.] Lastly, we remain committed to the rule of law ... [Interjections.] ... human rights in their broad sense, as captured in the Constitution of the Republic and, as resolution 42 of the Mangaung ANC National
Conference stated, we do not “condone impunity, authoritarian and violent regimes”. [Interjections.]
In its 2009 report, the AU High-Level Panel on Darfur, AUPD, chaired by former President Thabo Mbeki, described the nature of the Darfurian conflict as Sudan’s crisis in Darfur. For its part, the Eastern Sudan Peace Agreement recognises, in its preamble, “that political, social, and economic marginalisation constitutes the core problem in Eastern Sudan”.
This serves to give the lie to the commonly advanced platitude that is often advanced about the primary contradiction of Sudan’s and the Darfur conflict as one between Africans on the one hand and Arabs on the other. In the Sudanese context, as elsewhere on the continent, the descriptions “African” and “Arab” are but notional appellations of identity, no more so than they are genetic.
The ANC believes that our country should continue to support the African Union’s honest and sustained efforts at finding a peaceful solution to Sudan’s conflicts and efforts towards its democratisation. We note that over and above what it has already done, the AU is continuing to mediate between the parties to the war in the Blue Nile, South Kordofan, and Darfur states. Sudan will also soon convene a national
dialogue to discuss questions of democratisation, the economy, national identity, and international relations. For these processes to succeed, President Al-Bashir is, like FW de Klerk during our own process of negotiations in this country, one of the critical players. The Sudanese people, therefore, need him in Khartoum, and not in The Hague! [Interjections.]
Sudan shares borders with seven African countries, among them the Central African Republic, South Sudan, and Libya, which face various peace and security challenges. It is obvious, therefore, that if something went wrong in Sudan, it would not only affect Sudan, but it would also affect the larger neighbourhood and serve to exacerbate already existing peace and security challenges in the region. Peace is important for the continent. Matters of justice can only work where there is peace. [Interjections.]
Chairperson, earlier on I referred to the AUPD report, which investigated how best to address the issues of accountability and combating impunity on the one hand, and peace, healing, and reconciliation on the other. I, therefore, want to state that President Al-Bashir was invited to the AU Summit by the AU. He was not visiting South Africa. [Interjections.] He was not on a state visit here. He had attended a meeting, which was hosted in South Africa, constituted by an Act of the African Union. [Interjections.]
In the 70 years of the existence of the UN, the USA has never attempted to arrest any leader, and there have been some notorious dictators during that time. [Interjections.] They did not lay a hand on any of them because the law of immunity was agreed to in 1961. All countries agreed in Vienna that this law must be allowed because we are now living in a world that must reach consensus. Even if you hate some, you have to meet with them in order to seek solutions. Therefore, the meeting of the AU had immunity, which was not challenged by anybody for 10 days. That was published, and no one objected to it until he arrived in the country. We are therefore not going to use the AU as a platform where we arrest leaders. [Interjections.] That will never happen, just as the UN was never used to arrest any leader.
However, we agree that the issues in Darfur are serious. We agree with you. However, don’t use the AU because the day that happens, it will mean the death of the AU. The day that happens within the UN, it will mean that the UN will never gather again because leaders will be afraid to go there because they will be arrested. [Interjections.] We do not want such a situation to be created anywhere in the world so that we can pursue the matters that are raised. That is why we say that we will then follow it up. However, this is what we stand for. [Interjections.]
This cannot be done by using the AU or any one of our intergovernmental organisations as a snare to arrest leaders who attend meetings and summits. Most importantly in this regard, and this is no reference to our courts, the demand that South Africa must arrest President Al-Bashir while attending an AU Summit illustrates the contempt that some hold for Africa and Africans. This demand is never made of the UN. The US government also called on us to co-operate with the International Criminal Court, ICC, and yet the US itself does not even accede to the ICC. [Interjections.]
Therefore, the ANC wants to make the following pronouncement. We call for the reform of the ICC. We went in voluntarily; the option of going out voluntarily is still open. No countries are forced to be in the ICC. South Africa joined when we signed the protocol in 1998, and when we acceded to the instrument in 2003 because we wanted to lead, and we thought everybody would follow. However, not everybody followed and, as a result, the ICC is losing its direction and its credibility. It is being undermined because not everybody wants to join it.
Secondly, we are calling for the UN Security Council to no longer have the power to refer matters to the ICC because within it sit countries that are refusing to accede to the instrument, but they have the power to say that so-and-so must
go. [Interjections.] When it is about them, they veto it. Therefore, it is not a fair instrument. We, therefore, say that the Rome Statute must begin to introduce reform in that regard until everyone in the UN Security Council is a member, and then we can allow them to go into it. We call for that reform. We need to remove the article that says it is voluntary to join, and all countries must join. We must replace this and say that all must be in the ICC. Then it will become the objective instrument that we need. As long as it is just a voluntary arrangement, with some joining and others not joining, it will lose its credibility. We are therefore calling for that particular reform, namely that all must join. [Interjections.]
Therefore, the ANC reserves the right to raise some of these particular reform packages and present them. If they are rejected at a particular point, we will have no option but to review our membership of the ICC. I thank you. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Deputy Speaker, the reality is that we currently have a political crisis, and this is due to the ANC’s lack of understanding of intra-African and intracontinental inadequacies, though otherwise sophisticated, on how to handle international conflict, peace, and justice.
I, therefore, think we must give the context in terms of what the available options are.
On 3 June 1991, 51 heads of state and government met in Abuja to sign the treaty which established the African Economic Community. Under article 7 of that treaty, there is the establishment of organs of the African Economic Community: the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, the Council of Ministers, the Pan-African Parliament, the Commission on Social and Economic Affairs, but most importantly the African Court of Justice. All of the other organs of the African Economic Community have been established, but the African Court of Justice has not been fully established. Why? Because there is no decisive and clear leadership either from South Africa or from any of the parties in the African Union, which was going to hold all African leaders accountable on issues relating to peace and the violation of human rights. We therefore have a lawless continent, thereby allowing space for the International Criminal Court to come and prosecute Africans. We do not agree with the selective prosecution of Africans by the ICC because it looks as if it has only existed for Africans since its establishment.
It was also naïve of whoever took the government to court to think that it would be wise to arrest a head of state here in South Africa. It was going to lead to instability in the
country of origin from which he came. It was even going to threaten our security as South Africa. It was also going to lead to the undermining of the stature of South Africa in the international context.
Now, if the ICC is to be trusted by everyone else involved, it should take decisive action in arresting the Prime Minister of Morocco, who continues to colonially occupy Western Sahara.
The ICC should arrest George Bush for the illegal war in Iraq. [Interjections.] The ICC should arrest Tony Blair for the illegal war in Iraq. [Interjections.] It should arrest Benjamin Netanyahu for the continued devastation of Palestine. [Interjections.] It should arrest Barack Obama and President Zuma for colluding to kill Muammar Gaddafi in Libya. It is a matter of fact that it was through that collusion that they killed Muammar Gaddafi, who was a visionary in terms of African unity. [Interjections.]
It should take bold action in terms of dealing with those issues, but it must also arrest Cyril Ramaphosa for killing workers in Marikana – that is what the ICC should be focusing on. It must go and arrest these people in their countries of origin. If the ICC wants Al-Bashir, it must go and fetch him in Khartoum. That is where he could be found, nowhere else. [Interjections.]
The EFF does not agree with the deliberate disregard for court orders by the ANC-led government because it sets a precedent for the future defiance of courts in terms of what should happen. There could have been a more sophisticated way to deal with the issue of Al-Bashir than just utter defiance and disregard for the courts of law.
Africans must rise up to establish their own institutions of accountability to hold each other accountable so that we do not end up with a situation where conflict is intensified and peace is threatened due to a narrow and unfocused pursuit of justice. Thank you very much. [Time expired.] [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Mr M A MNCWANGO: Hon Deputy Speaker, the recent well-planned, co-ordinated, and executed government plot to ensure the ICC’s most wanted man and sitting Sudanese President, Omar al- Bashir, enters and exits South Africa without fear of arrest or detention, despite an ICC standing warrant of arrest, despite South Africa being a signatory to the Rome Statute voluntarily, and despite being in contempt of our own High Court order, speaks volumes about the current government’s thinking around our Constitution, the rule of law, international law, and international treaties to which South Africa is a signatory.
To put it quite simply, this government does not care. The rule of law ...
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I would just like to suggest that the speaker at the podium has pre-empted the courts in this regard. There has been no decision that has found any contempt on the part of anybody in this matter as yet. I ask that you look at this matter.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes. Hon Mncwango, I did warn, right at the start, that you are not supposed to do that. Please avoid and desist from doing so. Otherwise, you are in contempt, not only of your own rules, but also of the relationship that we are supposed to have with matters before the courts. [Interjections.]
Mr M A MNCWANGO: Deputy Speaker, fortunately, I am not in contempt of any rule of law. [Applause.] The rule of law, the supremacy of the Constitution, international law, and treaties are all subject to the overriding will of the President and his executive. If any law is in contravention with that will, it is simply invalid to the extent that it is contrary. This message is now loud and clear to all South Africans and to the rest of the world.
Reports emerging over the last few days allege that it was agreed beforehand between South Africa and Sudan that President Al-Bashir will be protected by any and all means necessary, which clearly also included trampling on the Constitution of this country and the rule of law.
The meeting was reportedly attended by the Minister in the Presidency, the Minister of International Relations and Co- Operation, the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, the Minister of State Security and the Minister of Police, who agreed that President Al-Bashir will be afforded maximum protection were he to travel to South Africa for the summit.
This was confirmed by President Robert Mugabe - another potential ICC candidate – at a subsequent press conference when he advised that he had spoken with President Zuma who assured him that South Africa would not arrest Al-Bashir and that all delegates at the conference would be granted immunity. [Interjections.]
This clearly illustrates the blatant and intentional disregard by the hon President Zuma and his executive for the rule of law in South Africa. In so doing, this government has struck a mighty blow to the legitimacy of our courts in South Africa.
How does government expect our citizens to respect and uphold the decisions of our judiciary when they so openly and with
great contempt and malice of forethought trounce upon court orders? [Time expired.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon Mncwango, to you and all the members who have spoken on this platform, we have raised concerns about your violating the rules that you yourself had agreed to before. Despite our warning, you have proceeded to do so.
I do wish to let you know that we are going to be coming back to each one of you who have said so, so that we talk about it. [Interjections.] The appropriate structures of Parliament will deal with it. [Interjections.] Your time has expired, sir. [Applause.]
Mr M L SHELEMBE: Hon Deputy Speaker and hon members, the first and foremost founding principle of the NFP is to uphold and defend the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, to adhere to the provisions of the Constitution, to implement the provisions of the Constitution, and to strengthen our democracy. In light of our founding principle, we cannot condone or agree with the sentiments and the scandalous conduct of the ANC-led government.
The debate today is not about the perceived bias of the ICC, and it is not about the guilt or innocence of Sudanese President Al-Bashir. The debate today is about the
implications of the violation of our Constitution by the very same government that has been entrusted to protect and uphold it, the very same Constitution that the ANC was instrumental in drafting, with our Deputy President being one of the chief negotiators.
Our Constitution clearly sets out the effect of South Africa ratifying international instruments and clearly states that, once an international instrument has been ratified, it takes precedence over domestic law. The government was well aware of that when it ratified the Rome Statute, and it was well aware of its obligation under article 59(1) to give effect to an ICC warrant of arrest if called upon to do so.
The ANC-led government was aware that a warrant of arrest was issued for President Al-Bashir when he was invited to attend the AU summit. Unfolding events suggest that the ANC-led government had deliberately calculated and planned to evade its obligations under the Rome Statute. In doing so, the ANC- led government was well aware that they would be violating the Constitution, yet they went right ahead, regardless.
We cannot pick and choose which obligations we will honour once we have entered into an agreement, nor can we pick and choose which provisions of our Constitution we wish to obey. Allowing the Sudanese President access to South Africa and
then ensuring that he is able to leave, despite an order from the court, suggests that we have a lawless regime. It suggests a regime that is corrupt in the deepest and most profound way. It also suggests that we have a regime that has disregard for the fundamental principle that democracy has to be hedged by a constitution which provides limits on what a government can do.
The calculated and deliberate act of violating the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa did little for the South African government’s reputation as a defender of the rule of law and has unmasked the true ANC and its leadership for what it is. I thank you. [Time expired.]
Dr B H HOLOMISA: Benimyekelani ningambambi lo mntu nibe nisisokolisa apha? [Why didn’t you arrest this person in the first place and stop running around being evasive?]
Hon Deputy Speaker and hon members, the UDM deplores anyone responsible for the denial of human rights to the people of our country, the continent, and the world over. We firmly stand with the victims of atrocities against humanity and strongly believe that whoever is found to be abusing human rights must face the full might of the law.
However, the South African policy is suspect and has, once again, exposed us. It is not the first time we experience this situation. Recently, we were accused of conniving with the Western bloc against Libya. We need to clarify our geopolitical strategy unambiguously. We need an overarching foreign policy approach that unites the nation, clearly articulates our own interests, and defends our constitutional democracy. However, if the ICC is to be a credible instrument for international justice, a common approach to international justice has to be established, and it must bind all nations equally, including the most powerful states.
The UN Security Council, which recommended that the court try President Al-Bashir in 2005 and received a vote of 11 in favour with only four abstentions, should find other means at their disposal to assist the ICC and not hijack the AU in our country. After all, the UN Security Council, to which we are all affiliated through its peacekeeping force, is currently patrolling the streets of Darfur.
Kutheni bengambambi phaya? [Uwele-wele.] [Kwaqhwatywa.] [Why don’t they arrest him there? [Interjections.] [Applause.]]
Dr P W A MULDER: Agb Adjunkspeaker, die vraag is: Wat is goeie leierskap? ’n Leier moet die toekoms antisipeer en vroegtydig stappe doen in belang van sy organisasie om skade aan sy
organisasie te voorkom. ’n Goeie leier moet dus oor die bult kan sien as moeilikheid kom en betyds reageer. President Zuma en die ANC-regering het in hierdie geval dit nie gedoen nie en Suid-Afrika groot skade aangerig. Hoekom? Wat is die feite? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Dr P W A MULDER: Hon Deputy Speaker, the question is: What is good leadership? A leader should anticipate the future and act in the interest of his organisation timeously to ensure the organisation doesn’t suffer any damage. A good leader should thus anticipate trouble and act in time. President Zuma and the ANC-led government did not act accordingly in this case and caused great damage to South Africa. Why? What are the facts?]
Firstly, the ANC government signed, ratified, and internationalised, by way of legislation, the Rome Statute and ICC convention; thus they are bound to honour it.
Tweedens, ’n lasbrief vir Al-Bashir se inhegtenisname is uitgereik en is wêreldwyd geldig, veral ook in Suid-Afrika as ’n land wat die Statuut van Rome onderteken het.
Derdens, Al-Bashir kom in Suid-Afrika aan. Natuurlik is daar argumente dat die Internasionale Strafhof slegs Afrika teiken
– daar is nie twyfel oor nie. Die huidige nege
konfliksituasies wat die hof ondersoek, is almal op Afrika gemik, en dit is nie reg nie. Daarom sê ek dat leierskap beteken jy moet die probleme voorsien. As die regering dan nie met die strafhof saamstem nie, soos daar vandag hier gesê is, dan moes ons vroegtydig onttrek het daaruit. Dit het nie gebeur nie en word nou voorgestel. As ons dan nie wil onttrek daaruit nie, moes ons aan Al-Bashir ’n boodskap gestuur het en gesê het ons het ’n probleem, dat ons nog lid is daarvan, dat ons in ’n krisis-situasie gaan wees, en dat hy nie hierheen moet kom nie.
Die regering het nie een van die twee gedoen nie. Wat doen hulle? Hulle beroep hulle op immuniteit vir staatshoofde. Nou vra ek die vraag: Wie was die regsadviseurs wat die President hieroor geadviseer het? Artikel 27 van die Statuut van Rome bepaal dat jou status as staatshoof jou nie immuniteit teen die hof se jurisdiksie gee nie. Het die ANC dit geweet? Ek dink so.
Op 4 Junie 2002 het ons in hierdie Raad debatteer oor die implementering van die Statuut van Rome in hierdie Parlement. Adv Johnny de Lange het namens die ANC in die debat gesê: (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Secondly, an internationally binding warrant that also binds South Africa as a signatory to the Rome Statute was issued for the arrest of Al-Bashir.
Thirdly, Al-Bashir arrives in South Africa. Of course, arguments can be made that the International Criminal Court only targets Africa – there is no doubt about this. The nine conflict situations currently under investigation by the court all target Africa, and this is unfair. Therefore, I submit that leadership requires one to anticipate problems. Had the government not agreed with the criminal court, as has been stated today, we should have withdrawn in advance. It did not happen but is now being mooted. If we had no desire to withdraw from the court, then we should have sent Al-Bashir a message to tell him that we have a problem, that we are still a member of the court, that we will find ourselves in a difficult position, and that he shouldn’t come to this country.
The government did neither. What did they do? They invoked immunity for heads of states. I have to pose this question: Which legal advisers advised the President on this matter? Section 27 of the Rome Statute determines that the position of head of state doesn’t grant one immunity from the jurisdiction of the court. Had the ANC been aware of this? I believe so.
On 4 June 2002, the implementation of the Rome Statute was debated in this House of Parliament.
On behalf of the ANC, Adv Johnny de Lange said the following during the debate:]
Another very important principle spelled out in the legislation is that heads of state, heads of government and members of parliaments will not be able to raise a defence that they are heads of state.
The hon Landers, who is still here, said in the same debate:
For perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, the world has suddenly become a small place and the number of safe havens has been drastically reduced.
So, die ANC weet wat die feite daaromtrent is. Maar nou sê hulle Al-Bashir het skelm die land uitgevlug. Meneer, het hy skelm oor die Limpoporivier in die nag gegaan? Nee, hy vertrek vanaf Waterkloof – ’n militêre sleutelpunt. Nou sê ek, as hy daarvandaan vertrek het sonder dat die regering daarvan geweet het, is hulle uiters onbevoeg. As hulle dit wel geweet het, dan is dit ’n berekende besluit om die hof te verontagsaam.
Met altwee sit ons in gevaarlike grondwetlike plekke.
(Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[So, the ANC is aware of the facts in this regard. However, now they maintain Al-Bashir fled the country surreptitiously. Sir, did he cunningly cross the Limpopo River under cover of darkness? No, he departed from Waterkloof – a military key point. Now, I maintain, if he departed without government being aware of it, they are utterly incompetent. If indeed they had been aware of it, then it was a calculated decision to disregard the court order. Whichever way we look at it, we find ourselves in a dangerous constitutional position.]
Forget about Fifa. The Al-Bashir crisis makes the Fifa version look like a Sunday school picnic. No other executive act has ever exposed the ANC as a human rights violator on such a grand scale to the whole world.
Ons gaan die prys betaal hiervoor vir nog baie jare. [Tyd verstreke.] Ek dank u. [Applous.] [We will suffer the consequences of this decision for years to come. I thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]]
Mr M G P LEKOTA: Deputy Speaker, when our country ratified the Rome Statute in 2002-03, we were not compelled by anybody; we did so of our own accord. We did so because of our steadfast commitment to cherish human rights, to prevent genocide, and to act against those who committed such heinous crimes.
All of this was known to the President and his executive. So, when President Zuma’s government gave President Al-Bashir an assurance that he could come to South Africa with legal immunity, it took the decision to transgress the law of our land and international law. When the President and some of his Cabinet Ministers defied an order of the court not to allow President Al-Bashir to slip out of the country while it considered the case, they acted in contempt and in direct violation of the authority of our judicial authority. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: They must be locked up!
Mr M G P LEKOTA: It is not our view that Al-Bashir is guilty of anything. It is our view that he must go and appear before an open and fair judicial authority to hear evidence against him and then to reply and prove his innocence. That is what we want. This must be done because we should have asked these questions when we signed and ratified the statute in this House. [Interjections.] If we did not want to obey this statute, we should have taken action to reverse our commitment to this. [Interjections.]
What has been done in the name of the people of South Africa is a serious crime. The leadership – President Zuma and his Cabinet – and those who colluded do not deserve to lead us.
They have failed to uphold the Constitution of our land. The oaths you made mean nothing. You lied to us when you said that you would uphold the Constitution, uphold the law, and be an example. You have misled the people of our country. Now we are ashamed before the nations of the world. [Interjections.] We don’t agree with what you have done.
The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Deputy Speaker,
on a point of order: The hon member just said that we lied. [Interjections.] We lied about upholding the Constitution.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes, we will come back to that.
The MINISTER OF SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT: Deputy Speaker and
hon members of the House, we are proud members of the ANC. [Interjections.] The decisions that were taken were collective decisions by the Cabinet of President Jacob Zuma who leads the ANC. [Interjections.]
Today, we are inspired by the visit of the Cuban 5 and, therefore, a Fidel Castro quote should not come as a surprise. It will come as a surprise for those who do not know how we got here. In 1953, Fidel Castro, whilst defending himself, stated:
I know that imprisonment will be harder for me than it has ever been for anyone, filled with cowardly threats and hideous cruelty. But I do not fear prison, as I do not fear the fury of the miserable tyrant who took the lives of seventy of my comrades. Condemn me. It does not matter.
History will absolve me.
As we today debate this matter, I particularly recall this statement, especially because I am thinking of all the condemnation and noise that has been made by those who are bent on distorting our hard-earned commitment to human rights and respect for the rule of law. [Interjections.] We say to you: History will absolve us. [Interjections.]
South Africa’s track record of contributing to finding lasting and peaceful solutions to the challenges faced by the continent speaks for itself. Again, I will say proudly that history will absolve us. From its inception in 1962, the Organisation of African Unity was founded to promote the unity and cohesion of the continent and, more specifically, to rid the continent of colonialism and apartheid. The road has never been easy; neither did we think it was going to be easy.
Our interventions in the Burundi peace process, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Great Lakes area, as well as our facilitation process in Zimbabwe, Lesotho, Madagascar, and
ongoing efforts to resolve the conflict in South Sudan, as led by Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa as a special envoy to South Sudan, are indicative of our commitment to the promotion of peace, stability, and development on the continent. We do this because South Africa’s developmental trajectory is inextricably linked to that of our continent. [Applause.]
Furthermore, our foreign policy is directly premised on the prioritisation of the African Agenda, and we continue to redouble our efforts towards the realisation of an integrated, prosperous, and peaceful Africa, driven by its own citizens, representing a dynamic force in the global arena. From its inception, the African Union, AU, has exercised socioeconomic development on the continent and has exhibited the ability to resolve postcolonial conflict because, as Africans, we recognise that peace and stability are integral parts of Africa’s renewal.
From a mediation point of view, the attempt to superordinate the justice element over all others serves counterproductive ends, as the belligerents have no incentive to settle disputes for fear that they will be locked up the day after the resolution of the conflict. It was an appreciation of this reality ... may I repeat this: It was an appreciation of this reality that informed the ANC to make necessary accommodations to the apartheid leaders who, by the way, had we taken a
different route, some of the members of this House would not be sitting where they are sitting right now. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Indeed, Africa’s newest state, the Republic of South Sudan, would not be in existence today had the parties placed the issue of justice above all others. This does not mean that there is no role for justice for the victims of conflict. It means that recognising the complexities – and I know many of the members who sit in this House have no clue of the complexities of the African continent – it is best to address the question of justice in the context of a political settlement. [Interjections.]
It is important for us, as Africans, to learn from each other in terms of peace-building efforts. As South Africa, we might have placed more emphasis on justice than peace. If that had been the case, I repeat again, some of the members who are proudly called “honourable members” today would not have been sitting in this House. [Applause.] [Interjections.] We must also recognise that part of the challenges facing the region that we are talking about, and the continent as a whole today, is still premised on colonial injustices imposed on our people. As a continent, we therefore remain resolute to our common cause of peace, security, development, and the collective nature in which we have always endeavoured to
achieve our development. We continue to support our commission and its organs in its efforts create a better Africa and a better world.
I wish to remind this House that South Africa was instrumental in the establishment of the International Criminal Court. We are one of the 123 members of the Rome Statute, of which
34 member states are African. This, in fact, makes the largest number of signatories to the ICC from the African continent. This certainly reaffirms the continent’s commitment to peace, human rights, and upholding the rule of law against perpetrators of human rights, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. [Interjections.] Largely as a result of our own efforts – again, many of the members who sit in this House have never bothered to follow our efforts when it comes to the issues of the African Union. Today, they can focus on President Al-Bashir. If you were to ask them about other issues that are related to the African continent and the challenges faced by the African continent, they would never have an answer to that. [Interjections.]
As African member states, we must increase our efforts in strengthening our own institutions, in particular, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and more countries must ratify the protocol to ensure that our people gain confidence in our institutions and that we find African solutions that
best address African challenges. I am sure, hon members, some members on this side of the House wish we were talking about the European Union, EU, rather than the AU. We are here talking about the AU. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
It should be recalled that upon the issuance of the warrant of arrest by the ICC for President Al-Bashir in 2009, the African Union submitted a request to the United Nations Security Council requesting a deferral – a deferral – of the ruling of the ICC in terms of article 16 of the Rome Statute, which allows the UN Security Council to do so as the entity that referred the case to the ICC. The decision by the AU to submit the request for deferral was informed by the peace initiative in the Sudan which, in the view of the AU, was at a delicate stage in building confidence among parties, with President Al- Bashir instrumental in that. Confidence among parties is something that some of the parties on the other side of the House will never understand. In the view of the AU, having Al- Bashir indicted would have jeopardised the process. It should be recalled that South Africa was and still is involved in the peace initiative through her troops and negotiations. As such, South Africa was instrumental in the decision to get a deferral by the ICC through the United Nations.
In July 2012, at its Ordinary Summit held in Sirte, which, by the way, I attended, the African Union took a decision that it
would not co-operate with the ICC. I repeat: The African Union took a decision that it would not co-operate with the ICC. [Interjections.] This decision was taken as a result of the ICC’s refusal to address legitimate and fundamental concerns of the AU regarding some of its indictments, especially the one of President Al-Bashir, and some of the members who have spoken here have said so. The AU pronounced that it—
... deeply regrets that the request by the African Union to the UN Security Council to defer the proceedings initiated against President Al-Bashir of Sudan in accordance with article 16 of the Rome Statute of the ICC, has neither been heard nor acted upon and, in this regard, reiterates its request to the UN Security Council.
Furthermore, it “decides that in view of the fact that the request by the African Union has never been acted upon” – and I wonder whether members have bothered themselves about that – “the AU member states shall not co-operate pursuant to the provisions of article 98 of the Rome Statute”.
Can these members really think we are going to arrest a head of state? They must think again. [Time expired.] [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, as the Catholic parliamentary liaison research office pointed out, there could be some validity to the argument that the International Criminal Court has shown bias against prominent African figures while ignoring serious human rights violations elsewhere. Of course, President Al-Bashir is not wanted by the ICC for harming Western interests or for violence aimed at Europe or America. He was indicted for genocide and mass murder of African people, black African people, in Darfur where his regime still targets Sudan’s non-Arab and non-Muslim population.
There may also be a legitimate legal question about whether President Omar al-Bashir was actually on South African soil when attending the AU summit in Sandton or whether, by way of a legal fiction, he was on territory temporarily under AU control. Even if we were to accept both these positions as government and the AU seem to have done, these arguments should have been made while following the due process of international and domestic law.
South Africa could, of course, decide to withdraw from the Rome Statute that brought the ICC into being, but only once we have done so will we be free of our obligation to honour the ICC’s arrest warrants. Government could also decide to appeal the order granted last week by the North Gauteng High Court and to argue that diplomatic immunity applied to Al-Bashir,
exempting him from arrest. Government cannot, however, simply ignore its obligations under international law, act in violation of the Constitution, and display contempt for the High Court, which it has done by allowing Al-Bashir to leave and even assisting him to do so.
Yes, it is obvious that government was placed in a difficult and unenviable position during the AU conference in having to balance the risk of massive diplomatic fallout among African countries against its duty to respect the court’s judgment.
Court orders, however, are not negotiable, and governments cannot play fast and loose with the rule of law.
The supremacy of the Constitution and the rule of law are founding provisions of our Constitution. Sadly, government has disregarded the rule of law to its own detriment, to the detriment of South Africa, and to the detriment of Africa.
This is a tragic and possibly even fatal mistake in terms of our democracy and the fragile state of democracy in Africa. Thank you.
Mr M P GALO: Hon Deputy Speaker, the AIC is not surprised by the contentions that the state plotted to ensure the safe passage of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir out of the country. Recently, the country was shocked to learn that Air Force Base Waterkloof was used as a landing base for the
Guptas’ wedding jet. All the above and other incidents should be a clear signal to the people of this country that South Africa is fast becoming a nation of lawlessness.
The AIC believes that if South Africa was run by seamless and value-based leadership, it wouldn’t have allowed President Omar al-Bashir to come to South Africa. He was not even supposed to attend the AU summit in the first place. [Interjections.] It is common knowledge that President Omar al-Bashir came to power in a coup in 1989 and has since ruled the country with an iron fist. This led to the two rebel groups, the Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement, launching a full-scale rebellion against the Sudanese government in 2003. The reasons for the rebellion were ongoing economic marginalisation and insecurity.
President Al-Bashir’s government responded to the rebellion with the Arab militia carrying out violent attacks on villages throughout the country. Since 2003, approximately
100 000 people have been killed by the government under the presidency of Omar al-Bashir. So, somebody must be held accountable for the Darfur genocide.
In conclusion, the AIC calls upon this Parliament to uphold the rule of law by launching an investigation into who plotted President Al-Bashir’s safe passage out of South Africa because South Africa is a signatory of the Rome Statute, the Act that
set up the ICC. Therefore, this means that those found guilty of this serious offence of flouting the court order for President Al-Bashir to be arrested must be charged by a court of law and be arrested. If they are Cabinet Ministers, they must resign as members of the executive because we cannot be led by such people.
Mr N T GODI: Hon Deputy Speaker, comrades and hon members, South Africa is a member of the African Union and, as such, is bound by decisions and resolutions of this continental body.
As Pan-Africanists, we have always called for Africa to speak with one voice on matters of international and continental importance.
On the matter of the ICC, there are clear resolutions of the AU declaring that no sitting head of state should face trial by the ICC and for member states not to co-operate with the ICC in this regard. [Applause.] President Al-Bashir has been on summits and visits to many countries before; why do we have this hullabaloo when he comes to South Africa? [Applause.] [Interjections.]
The court action taken by that reactionary institution is repulsive and an affront to the national interest of South Africa and the continent. As for the sponsors of this topic, the question is: How patriotic are they? [Interjections.] The
obvious answer is: Not at all. They have consistently positioned themselves as the beachheads of imperialism. [Interjections.] They are the echo chambers of foreign interests in South Africa.
Haitian revolutionary citizen Toussaint said more than
150 years ago that if anyone wants a dirty job done, be he white or mulatto, they will always get a black man to do it. [Interjections.] Morgan Tsvangirai was not the first, and he is certainly not the last. [Interjections.] National and continental interests must always supersede any other considerations, legal or otherwise. This is how all non- neocolonial countries behave. That is how America and Europe behave.
The shrill voices of the liberals and their imperialist masters must be ignored and rejected with contempt. I thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Mr J SELFE: Deputy Speaker, I think before the hon Godi speaks with any credibility in this House, he needs to explain to this House who paid his election deposit.
HON MEMBERS: Yes! [Interjections.]
Mr J SELFE: The weekend before last, South Africa played host to President Omar al-Bashir. He has been referred to as “His Excellency”. [Interjections.] The only thing he is excellent at is killing people!
HON MEMBERS: Yes!
Mr J SELFE: He is the subject of a warrant of arrest from the ICC on five counts of crimes against humanity, involving murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture and rape. [Interjections.] He is also wanted on two counts of war crimes
– directing attacks against civilians and pillaging - and three counts of genocide. According to conservative estimates, he is thought to have been responsible for the deaths of
300 000 people - fellow Africans - and the displacement of 2,5 million more.
Now, South Africa is a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC. Nobody forced us to become a member – we are a member! Article 12(1) of the Statute obliges us to accept the jurisdiction of the ICC in respect of crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide. Our obligations in this regard are specified in the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act.
When the warrant was first issued in 2009, the then Director- General for International Relations and Co-operation, Dr Ayanda Ntsaluba, said the following:
If today, President Al-Bashir landed, in terms of the provisions of the Rome Statute, he would have to be arrested.
He went on to say:
The ICC has issued a warrant for President Al-Bashir and this requires signatory states to execute the warrant should he land on their soil ... Not only that, our Parliament passed a law and that law is extremely explicit about what would happen if a situation like that happens.
That law was the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act, and it was debated in this Chamber on Tuesday, 11 June 2002. Unlike the hon Minister, I remember it very clearly. On that occasion, Adv Johnny de Lange said, on behalf of the ANC, the following:
If there is some person somewhere who thinks that he or she can commit genocide or war crimes and hide in this country, this legislation will not allow that. There is an obligation upon our prosecuting authority to prosecute such a person.
He then goes on to say, “If we do not do that, we will definitely collaborate with the international court to bring such people to book”. [Interjections.] The then Minister of Justice, Penuell Maduna, repeated this. He said, “If, indeed, we choose not to prosecute them in our country, we will be required to surrender them to the ICC”.
Then, the hon Landers, who has now been elevated to the position of Deputy Minister of International Relations and Co- operation, said, in the same debate:
I reiterate, for perpetrators of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, the world has just become a small place, and the number of safe havens has been drastically reduced.
Well, under his watch, and presumably with his concurrence, the Deputy Minister made the world a bigger place for President Al-Bashir and provided a convenient safe haven for him to escape arrest. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: Yes!
Mr J SELFE: It is not as if President Al-Bashir arrived unexpectedly. On 28 May, the Registrar of the ICC reminded the South African Embassy in The Hague of our obligations to
arrest Al-Bashir if he arrived here. On 13 June – the same day Al-Bashir arrived here – the Registrar was directed to formally inform the “competent authorities” in South Africa of their obligation. Yet, the “competent authorities” sat on their hands, like that hon Minister. What is far worse, however, is that government did not merely cock a snook at its international obligations in defiance of section 231(4) of the Constitution, it did so to our own courts.
HON MEMBERS: Yes!
Mr J SELFE: The North Gauteng High Court handed down an order prohibiting President Al-Bashir from leaving the country. Yet, he left, and all sorts of people apparently colluded to allow this! President Al-Bashir’s jet was moved to Waterkloof Air Force Base and hidden in a hangar. Al-Bashir was apparently escorted there by a police protection team, so he could escape arrest – the very same policemen that should have arrested him. [Interjections.]
The Ministers in the Peace and Security Cluster reportedly had a meeting to plan for this contingency. The Border Control Operational Co-ordinating Committee was told in an SMS to give instructions to all border posts. There can be no doubt that our government colluded to defy the International Criminal Court and our courts! [Interjections.]
HON MEMBERS: Yes!
Mr J SELFE: In the process, it has given South Africa the reputation as an unreliable country in the international community – a country that does not honour its international commitments. However, perhaps worse than this, it has undermined the rule of law and the Constitution by wilfully ignoring a court order.
Let me remind members of what the Supreme Court of Appeal said in a judgment handed down in March this year, in the so-called Somali Association of South Africa case. The judges said:
It is a most dangerous thing for a litigant, particularly a state department and senior officials in its employ, to wilfully ignore an order of court ... It cannot be left to the litigants to themselves judge whether or not an order of court should be obeyed ... No democracy can survive if court orders can be shunned and trampled on, as happened here.
That the state must obey the law is fundamental to any civilised society.
HON MEMBERS: Hear! Hear!
Mr J SELFE: We could not have expressed it better, and the government should hang its head in shame!
HON MEMBERS: Yes! [Applause.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): Deputy Speaker, as previous ANC speakers have said, an investigation is being conducted into the circumstances of President Al-Bashir’s departure, and an affidavit providing the detail must be submitted to court by Thursday. I am therefore not going to comment on any of the allegations made here or in the media on the circumstances of President Al- Bashir’s departure. [Interjections.] However, the hon Selfe and his colleagues in the DA - and the hon Mncwango - would know that government issued a statement denying any knowledge of a meeting that had taken place. [Interjections.]
In discussing this matter, we need to take into consideration the importance to South Africa of fulfilling our obligations to the International Criminal Court but also the importance to us of the African Union and our relations with other states on the continent. [Interjections.] We recognise our international obligations, but, at the same time, we have to be mindful of our obligations to the African Union and our interests in the region and on the continent. [Interjections.]
South Africa was asked to host the AU Summit, which was held a week ago. [Interjections.] I wish that the hon members would
listen to the argument; they might learn something. [Interjections.] The summit was attended by the heads of state and government of all AU member states. This includes Sudan.
We believed that, in spite of the ICC arrest warrant, President Al-Bashir had immunity to attend an international summit, as head of state, and that is different to his attendance in South Africa on the invitation of the South African government or for some other function.
Our government’s legal argument was along these lines - namely, that President Al-Bashir, as a sitting head of state, has diplomatic immunity in terms of the Diplomatic Immunities and Privileges Act, Act 37 of 2001. [Interjections.] He was attending the AU Summit, which took place in our country ... [Interjections.] ... and, basically, if you look at the articles of the Rome Statute ...
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon members!
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): ... one can argue that the combined effect of articles 27 and 98 is that a state party may not claim immunity for its own officials, but it must respect the immunity of the officials of a nonstate party, which is Sudan. [Interjections.]
We do not yet have the High Court’s reasons for their order, as these are only being handed down tomorrow. One is therefore not in a position here today to discuss the legal arguments in great detail. [Interjections.] It must also be added, however, that another court could have come to a different decision and that the option of an appeal is one we will consider. However, it would be premature and speculative to even open such a discussion. [Interjections.]
Let’s look at other international cases involving immunity – cases which support the argument that sitting heads of state have immunity. [Interjections.] The Pinochet case in Britain is one that has been referred to, quite often ... [Interjections.] ... please listen! The House of Lords in Britain accepted that serving heads of state retain absolute immunities – the so-called ratione personae, that is - immunity on account of their official status, irrespective of the nature of the crime alleged, unless waived by the sending state. [Interjections.]
The Lordships, yes, denied immunity to Pinochet in his capacity as a former head of state. However, they made it clear that if he had still been acting head of state, this immunity in international law would have continued to subsist. One of the Lords in the Pinochet case said:
Senator Pinochet is not a serving head of state. If he were, he could not be extradited. It would be an intolerable affront to the Republic of Chile to arrest or detain him.
In the decision of Democratic Republic of Congo v Belgium, the International Court of Justice reaffirmed the same point. [Interjections.]
It is interesting to note that Nigeria, when President Al- Bashir visited in July 2013, also did not arrest him. The ICC subsequently absolved Nigeria of liability for the failure of its security forces to arrest him, as the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC ruled that Nigeria had justifiable reasons for its failure to arrest President Al-Bashir. [Interjections.] Nigeria submitted that it did not invite President Al-Bashir to undertake a visit. They argued that the Sudanese President appeared in Nigeria to attend the Special Summit of the African Union on HIV and Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria, which took place in Abuja. [Interjections.]
South Africa, correctly, has been a vocal proponent of the establishment of the International Criminal Court. [Interjections.] We believed, as we still do, that an independent and objective instrument was needed to bring an end to the heinous crimes against humanity and the violation of human rights, which were, then, very prevalent on the
continent, and in the world, as a whole. We believed, as we still do, that those who committed such crimes must be prosecuted and punished by an impartial body empowered by international co-operation to defend the universal values of justice. [Interjections.] The matter relating to President Al- Bashir therefore is of major concern, and we view the accusations levelled against him in a serious light. [Interjections.]
However, the ICC is not the court we signed up for. It has diverted from its mandate and has allowed itself to be influenced by powerful nonmember states. We signed up for a court that was going to hold human beings accountable for their war crimes, regardless of where they were from. We perceive it as tending to act as a proxy instrument for these states, who see no need to subject themselves to its discipline, to persecute African leaders and effect regime change on the continent. [Interjections.] It is being used as a court against Africa, deliberately oblivious to the fact that African countries, themselves, were vocal in their support for the necessity of such a mechanism, with, for example, Senegal being the first country to ratify the Rome Statute.
So, let’s look at the ICC – 36 people have been indicted by the ICC since 2005. All of them are from Africa, and the
record of these cases is not good. Only two people were found guilty, and charges against eight were withdrawn or dismissed, or they were found not guilty. [Interjections.] Responding to criticism that its focus is too narrow, the ICC has, since, launched preliminary examinations in a number of countries, such as Afghanistan, Georgia, Guinea, Colombia, Honduras, and Korea.
However, even these matters are not without controversy, as some will argue that the non-African cases are going nowhere. For example, the Georgian investigation started in 2008, and the Afghanistan investigation in 2007. What results have they shown, if any? The court’s jurisdiction is affected by the nonparticipation or nonco-operation of many countries, most notably the United States which dropped out in May 2002, after initially signing up at the last minute.
The US government has consistently opposed an international court that could hold US military and political leaders to a uniform global standard of justice. [Interjections.] In addition, the US has asked many countries not to agree to transfer US nationals to the ICC in order to gain immunity for its citizens, and has threatened, as leverage, termination of economic aid and the withdrawal of military assistance and other measures if countries wouldn’t agree to bilateral agreements.
Both the US and Israel objected when Palestine joined the ICC. When the Palestinian leaders applied, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said they had chosen a path of confrontation. The US State Department said it didn’t believe that Palestine is a sovereign state and therefore didn’t qualify to join. They also said that they advised Palestine and Israel to rather resolve their differences through direct negotiation, and they have threatened to cut off funding to the Palestinian Authority if they take the Israelis to the ICC.
The fact remains that Africa has been the focus of a court which is based in Europe. Given the continent’s history of colonialism, this problem is obvious. [Interjections.] The African Union, which represents the continent’s governments, has campaigned heavily, contending that no sitting head of state should be prosecuted.
There is much criticism that the ICC is manipulated by the West. What Africa is saying is that the ICC, as it is constituted, should no longer have jurisdiction over Africa. All member states need to be signatories for there to be universal justice. Otherwise, we should rely on an African court of justice and human rights. [Interjections.]
We are concerned about the manipulation of the ICC by European powers. Let’s take the example of the former President of Côte d’Ivoire, Laurent Gbagbo. Independent Media’s foreign editor, Shannon Ebrahim, argues that France has a vested interest in ensuring that the leaders of the Ivory Coast and other French- speaking countries toe the line in terms of their economic policies. They must not suggest launching their own currency because that would be the end of the franc in West Africa.
The greatest threat to this goal was the emergence of Laurent Gbagbo, who won the elections in 2000 and wanted to break away from the former colonial power’s economic stranglehold. [Interjections.] To pressurise Gbagbo, France closed the doors of the French banks operating in the country, which controlled more than 50% of the banking sector. This made it impossible for Gbagbo to pay salaries.
The ICC then became the vehicle through which to neutralise Gbagbo. The French justice minister went to The Hague, in 2011, to ask that Gbagbo be transferred to the ICC, where he was held for 15 months, without charge. [Interjections.] The ICC, which is primarily funded by France, Germany and the EU, used the 15 months to try and collect evidence against him, but in June 2013, the decision of the Pre-Trial Chamber was that there was not enough evidence to send Gbagbo to trial. [Interjections.]
Instead of releasing him, the ICC set out for another seven months trying to find evidence against him. Gbagbo was denied bail nine times. He is supposed to be tried this year, but the trial date keeps getting postponed, and it is now in November. The reason, argues Ebrahim, is to keep him remanded until the elections have taken place in the Ivory Coast in October.
Some, particularly on the DA side of the House, will say that Africa is neither willing nor capable of trying persons accused of war crimes. This is not true. The former president of Chad, Hissène Habré, will be tried for crimes against humanity by a Senegalese court next month. The trial is expected to start on 20 July. For the first time in history, a former head of an African state will stand trial in Africa before an internationalised tribunal, the Extraordinary African Chambers in a Senegalese court - and remember, Senegal was the first country to ratify the Rome Statute. The Extraordinary African Chambers is an ad hoc court which is set up by the African Union under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
Without making any comment on the circumstances of President Al-Bashir’s departure, what would have happened ... [Interjections.] ... because it is still before the courts, you idiot! [Interjections.] I withdraw that. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Deputy Speaker, on a point of order ...
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): I withdraw that.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: No, no! [Interjections.] Sorry, sorry ...
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Yes?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: The hon member can’t just make a statement that is derogatory to another member and then simply say, “I withdraw”. [Interjections.] Deputy Speaker, you cannot have a member in this House calling another member an “idiot”. It’s no wonder this man’s only a Deputy Minister! [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Go ahead, hon member, and do the right thing. You know what to do.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): Deputy Speaker, I have withdrawn. I am sorry. The DA has heckled me throughout the whole speech ...
[Interjections.] I should have restrained myself. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon members! Hon members, order! [Interjections.] You can’t be screaming like that, hon members. [Interjections.] There is no justification for screaming in the House.
An HON MEMBER: Yes, there is!
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: There is no justification for screaming in the House. [Interjections.] Go ahead, hon Deputy Minister.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): Without making any comments on the circumstances of President Al-Bashir’s departure, what would have happened had South Africa arrested him? [Interjections.] What would the response have been from the African Union? [Interjections.] What would our standing have been regarding other countries in the region? [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order, hon members. [Interjections.] Hon member, order! Proceed, hon member.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H
Jeffery): I’m aware that some members of the DA wish we were part of the EU and not the AU ... [Interjections.] ... but the fact remains – we are in Africa, not Europe. [Interjections.]
If we had told the President of the United States, George Bush, when he visited Africa - and we couldn’t arrest him in terms of the ICC because the United States has a veto on the Security Council for the referral of people from states that are not members of the ICC - that, in terms of the Convention against Torture and our Prevention and Combating of Torture of Persons Act, he couldn’t leave South Africa until a court had decided whether he would be charged, do we think that the United States would have just stood idly by and waited? [Interjections.] As Prof Steven Friedman said, “How do you prevent a foreign head of state leaving the country? You’re basically declaring war if you do that.” [Interjections.]
I raise these questions in the context of a legal process that has far from been exhausted and that may well ultimately emerge with a different decision. [Interjections.]
The hon Mokgalapa has purported to speak on behalf of the Sudanese people. I am not sure on what basis he assumes that. There is a statement on record from the former Vice President
of South Sudan stating the devastating effects on South Africa’s relations with the Sudanese people had South Africa arrested President Al-Bashir. [Interjections.] Some of those who criticise South Africa for not arresting President Al- Bashir have never – not once, hon Kohler-Barnard – raised with the same intensity any concern over the situation in Darfur.
At the same time, gross human rights violations committed by nonsignatory countries go unpunished and often uncriticised.
It is time that the Rome Statute is reviewed to ensure that all UN members are subject to the same level of scrutiny and the same justice. [Interjections.] [Applause.] To have two standards of justice is mere hypocrisy. [Interjections.] Thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Mr M HLENGWA: Hon Deputy Speaker, hon Deputy Speaker ...
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon members ... yes, hon member?
Mr M HLENGWA: Hon Deputy Speaker, may I please address you? Earlier on, you made reference to the fact that the comments by the hon Mncwango be looked at very seriously. First of all,
...
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I said to all members, like the hon Mncwango, yes.
Mr M HLENGWA: Yes. Yes, hon Deputy Speaker, I take your point. However, we want to put on record, firstly, that we took the manner in which you addressed the hon Mncwango to be picking on him and to be a biased approach in the presiding that you were doing at the time. [Interjections.]
Secondly, your failure to raise those concerns with other speakers throughout the debate puts in question the manner in which you are presiding over this particular debate, which we feel that, had the view of the presiding officer been that the matter is sub judice, you should not have allowed it in the first place. [Interjections.] By allowing it, you should have allowed members then to express themselves, and that they should have. [Interjections.]
So, we then want to appeal to you, hon Deputy Speaker, that you address the matter in a fair manner and stop the perpetual and persistent bullying of the opposition parties because that stifles progress in this House. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: All right. Hon members, order! Order! Hon Hlengwa, you are ignoring the reality that I apologised right at the beginning - that I should have spoken about the Rules at the beginning. The reason I spoke to the hon Mncwango is that a point of order was raised about him. I wasn’t picking on him! I had to rule on that matter, and that’s the reason I
did that. You have no basis on which to suggest there was any unfairness on that matter, and I actually think you are out of order. [Interjections.]
Debate concluded.
The House adjourned at 19:48.
ANNOUNCEMENTS, TABLINGS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS
Please click on the following link to access the relevant Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports for this day.
https://www.parliament.gov.za/parliamentary-papers?sorts[date]=-1
Audio
No related