Hansard: NCOP: Unrevised Hansard
House: National Council of Provinces
Date of Meeting: 09 May 2024
Summary
No summary available.
Minutes
UNREVISED HANSARD
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
THURSDAY, 09 MAY 2024
PROCEEDINGS OF VIRTUAL NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES
Watch video here: Plenary
The Council met at 10:00.
The Chairperson took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayers or meditation.
The Chairperson announced that the virtual sitting constituted a sitting of the National Council of Provinces.
RULES OF THE VIRTUAL SITTING
(Announcements)
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Greetings to everyone. In keeping with our tradition, I will now bow to my right and bow to my left. Therefore, having done so, I now request delegates to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation. Thank you very much. Please be reminded the hon delegates that the rules, hence the process apply for this virtual sitting.
herefore, before we proceed, I would like to remind delegates of the rules relating to virtual and hybrid meetings and sittings, in particular subrules 21, 22 and 23 of Rule 103 which provides as follows: That the virtual sitting constitutes a sitting of the National Council of Provinces; that delegates in the sitting enjoy the same powers and privileges that apply in the sitting of the National Council of Provinces; that for purposes of the quorum all delegates who are logged on to the virtual platform shall be considered present; that delegates must switch on their videos if they want to speak; that delegates should ensure that the microphones on their gadgets are muted and must always remain muted unless they have permission to speak; and that all delegates may participate in the discussions through the chat room.
In addition, I would like to remind delegates that the interpretation facility is active. Permanent delegates, members of the executive, special delegates and SA Local Government Association, Salga, representatives on the virtual platform are requested to ensure that the interpretation facility on their electronic devices are properly activated to facilitate access to the interpretation services.
Hon delegates, before we proceed, I would also like to welcome all permanent delegates and members of the executive council, MCEs, and all special delegates and Salga representatives to the House. Having done so, hon members, I will now allow for notices of a motion. Please indicate if you want to table notice of a motion. Therefore, I’ll start with hon Ndongeni.
Hon Ndongeni to be followed by hon Bartlett.
NOTICES OF MOTION
Ms N NDONGENI: Good morning, Chair. I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the Council I shall move on behalf of the African National Congress:
That the Council debates the urgent intervention geared at bolstering mental health support services in South African schools to provide counselling to the school community to ensure learners receive the necessary assistance and guidance during difficult times.
Thank you, Chairperson.
Ms B M BARTLETT: Hon Chairperson, I must just apologise that I cannot switch on my video because I have got a problem. Is it okay, Chair? Hon Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the Council I shall move on behalf of the African National Congress:
That the Council debates mechanisms geared at dealing decisively with criminal syndicates that are hampering the implementation of human settlement projects and hijacking buildings.
I thank you, hon Chairperson.
Ms M L MAMAREGANE: Hon Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the Council I shall move on behalf of the African National Congress:
That the Council debates the acceleration of the professionalisation of the performance of municipalities and strengthening of their abilities to deliver the utmost best service in the provision of basic services such as water and sanitation, municipal waste collection, and the repair and maintenance of roads faster.
Thanks, Chairperson.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much, hon Mamaregane. There was a name there of hon Lehihi. The name has disappeared from the list in front of me. That being the case I think that I should move on. Thank you very much, hon members. We will now move on to motions without notice. We will start with hon Shaikh. Hon Shaikh!
MOTIONS WITHOUTH NOTICE
DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS UNVEILS MOBILE OFFICES
(Draft Resolution)
Ms S SHAIKH: Hon Chairperson, on behalf of the African National Congress I move:
That the Council –
(1) commends the unveiling of a 100 Department of Home Affairs mobile offices in Mokopane, Limpopo by President Ramaphosa on Tuesday the 7th of May 2024;
(2) notes that the unveiling of new mobile offices is set to be part of the Department of Home Affairs’ hybrid access model aimed at servicing areas where the department’s footprint is limited;
(3) also notes that the new trucks purpose-built offices offer all Home Affairs services in a convenient way, including shaded waiting areas and ample parking spaces;
(4) further notes that apart from the 412 Home Affairs offices in different parts of the country, the department is expanding the reach of its services through partnerships with banks and shopping malls and also with the current expansion of offices like trucks launched in Mokopane;
(5) believes that the mobile trucks will enable Home Affairs services to reach people in rural areas as
well as ensure that services are available during load shedding and times of poor network connection;
(6) also believes that the mobile officers will assist a great deal in reducing the influx of people at the department’s offices and across the Home Affairs initiative for mobile offices, which are going to improve the provision of Home Affairs services across South Africa; and
(7) welcomes the announcement that mobile offices will be spread to all other provinces as well.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
KWAZULU-NATAL OPENS NEW STATE-OF-THE-ART POLICE STATIONS
(Draft Resolution)
Ms A D MALEKA: No, Chair, I’m available. I was trying to unmute. I’m sorry and good morning, Chairperson. I hereby move without notice on behalf of African National Congress:
That the Council –
(1) welcomes the recent opening of five new state-of-the- art police stations in KwaZulu-Natal;
(2) notes that the stations which include Gamalakhe, Donnybrook, Melmoth, KwaDabhazi and eManguzi were officially handed over by the national Minister of Police, hon Beki Cele;
(3) further notes that the significance of the opening of these police stations is aimed at improving the communities access to policing services;
(4) believes that the more police stations are built, the more credence there is for the increased footprint of the South African police, especially in rural areas, which are often far-flung from government services;
(5) further believes that the police stations would effectively improve police response times and enable the SA Police Service, SAPS, to deliver professional
and effective service in response to the needs of communities; and
(6) commends that the Department of Police for expanding police services to areas in need and those costs on communities who continue to work with police and rid the area of crime.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONSTRUCTION SITE COLLAPSES
(Draft Resolution)
Ms M L MOSHODI: Good morning, hon Chairperson, hon members and the Chief Whip of the Council. Hon Chairperson, allow me to rise without notice on behalf of the African National Congress in the Western Cape:
That this august House –
(1) notes with a concern the media reports about the collapse of a construction site in the town of George in the Western Cape province where more than 39 workers were reported to be trapped in the rubble and seven people reported dead at the time of writing this motion;
(2) calls on this august House to send heartfelt condolences to the families of the deceased;
(3) further believes that this incident raises serious concerns about the occupational safety and compliance with the building safety standards;
(4) further calls upon this august House to call for a multiagency investigation, led by the Department of Labour, into the cause of this collapse and ensure that those who are found to be culpable meet the full might of the law; and
(5) further calls for public restrain against the blaming of any individuals or entities until the investigations are completed.
Thank you.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCE CONTINUES AND INTENSIFIES ITS BOMBARDMENT
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M DANGOR: Hon Chairperson, I rise without notice on behalf of the African National Congress:
That the Council –
(1) notes with concern the continued and intensified bombardment of social and economic infrastructure by the Israel Defense Force in Gaza, which undermines the transportation of international humanitarian support;
(2) further notes that this intensified bombardment persists despite the public support by the Palestinians War and ceasefire and the beginning of
peaceful dialogue for a lasting solution to the conflict; and
(3) therefore, calls on this august House to condemn these bombardments and call upon the United Nations Security Council to take drastic actions that will force the warring parties to the negotiating table in search of a lasting peaceful and just solution to the ongoing war in the Middle East.
Thank you, Chairperson.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
PROGRAMME AIMED AND EQUIPPING RESIDENTS WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND RESOURCES LAUNCHED
(Draft Resolution)
Ms L C BEBEE: Chairperson, I hereby move without notice on behalf of the African National Congress:
That the Council –
(1) welcomes as a step in the right direction the launch of a programme aimed and equipping residents with the knowledge and resources necessary to cultivate healthy and nutritious crops in their neighbourhoods by KwaZulu-Natal Premier Nomusa Dube-Ncube;
(2) also notes that the township agriculture programme is aimed and maximising food production in small spaces to promote a healthy ecosystem and increase biodiversity in urban areas;
(3) further notes that the programme is also aimed to the combating hunger and fostering economic growth within township settings;
(4) understands that it seeks to harness the untapped potential and the urban spaces promoting sustainable agricultural practices to maximise food production;
(5) further understands that it provides opportunities for women, youth, individuals with disabilities, and
child-headed households to actively participate in agricultural activities, thereby promoting inclusively in the township communities;
(6) also understands that the KwaZulu-Natal government has allocated R6 million in funding to facilitate to implementation of these projects;
(7) commends the KwaZulu-Natal government dedication to support grassroots initiatives aimed at addressing food insecurity and uplifting township communities.
Thank you.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: I object to that motion, Chair. It’s only corruption, and nothing else.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Mokause, are you objecting to the motion?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: I have objected to that motion.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: There has been an objection. The motion may not be proceeded with and will become a notice of a motion.
SOUTH AFRICA CELEBRATES 30 YEARS OF DEMOCRACY
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces and hon members, I hereby move without notice:
That the Council –
(1) notes that this year on 27 April South Africa celebrated 30 years since the dawn of democracy in 1994;
(2) acknowledges that in the last 30 years of democracy, South Africa is vastly different from what it was under the ruthless racist apartheid regime before 1994;
(3) further acknowledges that today the material conditions of millions of ordinary people have changed for the better, with many of our people carry a great sense of hope for prosperous South Africa is built on a firm foundation for inclusive ... [Inaudible.] ... founded on values of human dignity, human rights, freedom, nonracialism, nonsexism, the rule of law, respect for national sovereignty, and media freedom;
(4) takes this opportunity to further acknowledge that even though there is still much that remains to be done to truly realise the fundamental transformation that we envisage at the onset of democracy in 1994, the ANC remains the only formidable political alternative for driving the agenda for a better life for all South Africans; and
(5) recognises the firm foundations laid by the great leadership of Comrade Nelson Mandela and the entire collective of freedom fighters who tirelessly work for a nonracial free South Africa that the struggle is on for fundamental social transformation agenda in South Africa.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: There has been an objection. The motion may not be proceeded with and will become a notice of a motion.
DUBE TRADEPORT SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LAUNCHES PHASE 2
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M I RAYI: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council—
(1) welcomes the announcement of the launch of the Dube Zone Trade 2 announced at a ribbon-cutting ceremony attended by members of the national and provincial government as well as regional business leaders;
(2) notes that due to the success of the industrial zone’s Phase 1 at the side adjacent to the King Shak International Airport in the north of Durban, the second phase, the Dube Trade Zone 2 project expansion was launched;
(3) also notes that Dube Trade Zone 2 has already attracted R1,8 billion in investment and it is expected to create 600 jobs within five years;
(4) recalls that the first phase of the project has done well, and it has already attracted R4,6 billion in investment creating over 5 000 permanent jobs in the process;
(5) further recalls that Dube Trade Zone 1 is currently occupied by 50 investors including international companies such as Mahindra, Samsung, DHL and PepsiCo FutureLife;
(6) believes that the special economic zones assist a great deal in developing export-oriented industries, attract foreign direct investment and technology transfer and achieve the generation of employment opportunities;
(7) applauds the successes and expansion of this zone project; and
(8) believes that it will go a long way towards boosting economic growth and job creation in KwaZulu-Natal.
Motion objected.
DR SAM MOTSUENYANE PASS ON
(Draft Resolution)
Ms N E NKOSI: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council—
(1) notes with sadness the passing away of one of the South Africa’s pioneers and mainstay of black economic empowerment and excellence, Dr Sam Motsuenyane, the founding father of the National Federated Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Nafcoc, the African Bank and the African Bank Constriction Company;
(2) further notes that under his leadership and astute business acumen he formed the African Bank and the National Federated Chamber of Commerce and Industry,
Nafcoc, into formidable forces to drive development and transform the financial and the economic sectors to be inclusive;
(3) also notes that Dr Motsuenyane played a leading role in building and nurturing our current democracy contributing to the development of the country’s microeconomic policy, the country’s growth and building excellence within Nafcoc and a new class of leadership capable of driving development, transformation and ensuring equity in the economy;
(4) further notes that he served the country in numerous political and diplomatic spheres and also serves as an ambassador in the Gulf States; and
(5) therefore, expresses to the Motsuenyane family and Nafcoc its condolences.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
DA AIRS TREASONOUS FLAG BURNING ADVERTISEMENT
(Draft Resolution)
Mr K M MMOIEMANG: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council—
(1) notes with complete dismay the DA’s despicable advertisement that depicts the burning of the South African public flag amid the celebration of 30 years of freedom and the preservation of tolerance and peace in the build up to the 29 May national and provincial elections;
(2) acknowledges that the DA’s advertisement does not only undermine the ultimate symbol of democracy and freedom, but also wedges explicable and contemptuous flagrant violation of the founding pillars and values of democracy and freedom;
(3) further acknowledges that our national flag remains a sacred symbol of our national identity, integrity and unity that all South Africans carry with profound pride
and consciousness that transcends petty ignorant and racially driven party-political interests;
(4) further acknowledges that our national flag hosts profound significance for the nation as it represents the hard-won freedom and peace achieved through historical struggle against the injustices and atrocities of our atrocious past; and
(5) takes this opportunity to call on all South Africans to rise up in unity to reject the despicable racist and disgraceful treasonous burning of one of the sacred symbols of our democracy as not only an attack on our hard-won democracy, but as a depiction of the DA’s divisive and racists’ agenda which must be rejected on
29 May 2024.
Motion objected.
SOUTH AFRICAN CONSTITUTION ANNIVERSARY
(Draft Resolution)
Mr T S C DODOVU: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council—
(1) notes that yesterday, 8 May, was an important day in the announce of our history because it marks the 28th anniversary of the adoption of the South African Constitution, which is the founding and sacred pillar of our hard-earned democracy;
(2) acknowledges that there are many great strides and milestones that have been presented to South Africans and this is yet another opportunity to reaffirm our commitment to promote the founding values and principles of the Constitution, namely, democracy, peace, gender equality, unity and prosperity in our land;
(3) further acknowledges that our Constitution forms the unbreakable commitment to work tirelessly to heal the divisions of the past and establish a society based on democracy, fundamental human rights and social justice; and
(4) therefore, takes this opportunity to pay homage to all men and women of our nation who continue to work tirelessly with the profound determination to improve the quality of lives of our people and to build a united, nonracial, nonsexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa, and that they must work very hard and continue very hard to make South Africa proud and place it high as a sovereign country in the family of nations.
Motion objected.
MR FLIP DE WET PASS ON
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S F DU TOIT: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the Council—
(1) notes with great sadness the passing of Mr Flip de Wet, a respected community leader, dear friend, father and grandfather;
(2) further notes that this giant will be missed by his friends, family and colleagues;
(3) further that his legacy of living with a caring heart, fair judgement, respect and empathy will live on in his absence; and
(4) conveys our heartfelt condolences to the De Wet family.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Mr D R RYDER: Chairperson, the host has muted all participants. Suddenly, when you call someone, the host is asking you to unmute yourself. This does not allow us to object to the motions. Someone is playing games in the back office with the administrations. All motions that have been read out should be null and void because you cannot have a process where the host of a zoom meeting is controlling who gets an opportunity to speak and when they get an opportunity to speak.
We have videos. We have all taken screenshot evidence of what is happening. This is not correct. Honestly, we can’t carry on like this.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Your objection is noted, hon Ryder.
Mr D R RYDER: I call for the scraping of these motions.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Your objection is noted. I’ll ask the Table to please look into this matter. But on the question of the motions without notice, hon Ryder, are you tabling a motion or not? Aren’t you tabling a motion, hon Ryder?
Mr D R RYDER: Let me unmute as it is blocking me. I can’t answer you. You are asking me a question, and I cannot answer you, Chair. What’s going on?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Chair, the best procedure that the Rules provide is that, members, within the Rules, can raise their objections. What I want to raise is that there were a few moments where it was difficult to unmute, and the host seemed to have corrected it. In an area
where the hon Ryder has indicated objections it will stay as such that they objected. So, there is no need to regard the process that you have undertaken with honour and dignity to be scrapped. That’s totally out of order. I do not understand this kind of a proposal. I suggest that we proceed because the Table can note in a record what has been unfolding. Thank you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Again, from my side I extend an apology to everybody that has been affected. We will do everything possible to correct that anormal to ensure that things have smoothly unfolded and proceeded as expected.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Chair, yes, I object to the motion done by the hon Dodovu. I didn’t have an opportunity to object against it. I would like to say with all due respect that at the end of the five-year term for the Chief Whip come and say that we are out of order. What is actually out of order is that this meeting was set up incorrectly. The right thing would have been for the Chief Whip to admit and say that I apologise, and we will start with the motions from the beginning. Right from the beginning we were all muted. None of us could say anything. This is unacceptable. It doesn’t matter how we go about it. We can sling mud or do anything, but this is
unacceptable. We cannot be muted and then raise everything, and you say we have to have a motion and the Chief Whip tell this and that. The fact of the matter is this is incorrect, unacceptable and we cannot continue like this.
It will not be recorded. None of our objections against the motions will be recorded in anyway because we couldn’t raise our voices. What was put on the check was also ignored. Can we please start again with the motions so that we can raise our objections. Thank you.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Good morning, and thank you very much, Chair. Chair, yes, I object to the motion that was made by hon Dodovu because I didn’t have the opportunity to object to it. With all due respect, at the end of a 5-year term for the Chief Whip to come and say that we are out of order ... because what is out of order is that this meeting was set up incorrectly. The right thing would have been for the Chief Whip to admit it and apologise, and we would start with the motions or start from the beginning because right from the beginning, we were all muted. None of us could say anything.
So, this is unacceptable. It doesn’t matter how we go about it. We can be smart and do anything. We cannot be muted be
expected to raise something. You are saying we must have a motion, while the Chief Whip is saying this and that. The fact of the matter is that this is incorrect, unacceptable, and we cannot continue like this. That will not be recorded. None of our objections against the motions can be recorded in any way because we couldn’t raise our voices. What was put on the chat was also ignored. So, can we please start again with the motions so that we can raise our objections. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas):
Chairperson, on a point of order, please.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Yes, hon Lucas.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas):
Chairperson, the point of order that I want to raise is that the time for motions has in case passed, and that case we please move to the next item on the Order Paper? Twenty minutes has lapsed.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, you are putting me in a very difficult situation because many people have now spoken but did not table the motions as expected. So, if I may
just plead for your indulgence and try to accommodate the following persons ... I know that the time allocated is not keeping with what has happened. But we also need to deal with this perception that there is the manipulation of the system, and that members are not allowed to table their motions. As far as I am concerned, there’s nothing of the sort. There are a few objections here and there, those have been noted and we are trying to get to the table to ensure that these problems do not occur. Can we move on to hon Bara? Let’s have Labuschagne first. Hon Labuschagne, please table your motion.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Chair, my motion is a point of order. I am still muted. I can only speak when you allow me to speak. I cannot unmute myself and we are all manipulated. It doesn’t matter how you call it. The fact that you don’t know it is not my problem. The fact is that we are all muted because the host has asked you to start a video. Everything ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): On a point
of order, please. [Interjections.]
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: This is unacceptable ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas):
Chairperson, on a point of order.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Hon Deputy Chair, you are not in the Chair, so stop ruling from your chair, as you normally do.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): I am
entitled to raise a point of order as you are entitled to ... [Inaudible.] ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Order, hon members. [Interjections.]
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: We cannot unmute ourselves. We cannot raise
...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Bara, you are next. [Interjections.]
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: You are manipulating this sitting. If I ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Bara, please proceed.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: That is the only thing that you can ... [Interjections.]
Mr Z MKIVA: Oh no, this is not a European Parliament. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Can we please have order.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: You don’t know how to run a Parliament. You don’t know how to follow the Rules. You only know how to manipulate ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, hon Bara.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Yes, you
are the best.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: I will keep on talking until you unmute me.
Ms S B LEHIHI: You are making noise, hon Labuschagne.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, hon Bara. [Interjections.]
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: I will not ... There are no Rules. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Chairperson, we have raised our hands.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: This is unacceptable.
Mr M R BARA: Chair, you called me to make my point. What is happening is unacceptable. I don’t know which Rule to put across, but I think it is not fair that we are not able to talk to what is happening in this House. Now, the problem that I have is that there are motions that are put across, and we want to make our voice heard on those and it was not open. I tried many times to raise my hand to put my view on the motions that have been put, I couldn’t. And for a long time, I have been trying to unmute, I couldn’t. Now, it can’t be that people just speak from the floor and say what they want to say regarding what we are raising. We are raising a genuine issue which makes a mockery of what is happening in this House. So, I think, Chairperson, it’s not fair. It’s wrong, and
politically it’s incorrect for people not to be able to air their views on the proceedings of the House. Why are we here then if we are going to sit and listen, and when you want to participate you are not allowed to? So, I don’t have a motion to put across, but I feel that I must raise my voice as well, because it’s not a hon Labuschagne issue, it’s an issue that that we are all confronted with. Mokause was ... [Interjections.]
Mr K M MMOIEMANG: You are holding us to ransom. You were sleeping. [Interjections.]
Mr M R BARA: You are making a mockery of this House. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much. Please proceed, hon Bara. Hon Nhanha. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: My hand is up. It has been up.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Yes, you are on the list. Hon Nhanha!
Mr M A NHANHA: Chairperson, thank you very much, and good morning to hon members. As this episode is unfolding, I can’t help to think ... [Interjections.]
Mr K M MMOIEMANG: But Chair, it does not hurt that you give all these members to raise one and the same issue. When are we
... [Interjections.]
Mr D R RYDER: On a point of order. You cannot interject.
Mr M J MAGWALA: But what is this thing of yours? People are on the floor, you are talking.
Mr M A NHANHA: Chairperson, can I be protected?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Nhanha, please proceed with the motion. [Interjections.]
Mr M E NCHABELENG: It is because we are going towards elections, and everybody wants to say something. People are sick.
Mr M A NHANHA: Thank you very much, hon Chairperson, I was saying, I can’t help but think of a situation in the 5th Parliament in which members of the National Assembly’s phones and gadgets were jammed because they were the 5th Administration was trying to block Members of Parliament from communicating what was happening inside with the outside world. This is completely wrong. I dare move even beyond the proposal that colleagues are putting on the table, there must be somebody who is held accountable for this act. This is a complete disrespect of our Constitution. This is complete disrespect of the privileges of Members of Parliament, and it cannot be left like this, Chairperson. This is ANC’s desperation in steroids, because the truth is, when hon Mokause started to object to all of the motions that were being put across by the ANC, showing off your successes, launching of this, and launching of that, the plan must have been devised then. I am saying to Chairperson, we must get to the bottom of this. Somebody responsible for this ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): On a point
of order. Can I be allowed to speak. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson, I have been raising my hand in an orderly manner ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Can I on this point request the secretary of the NCOP, Adv Phindela, to make a comment or two. Adv Phindela! [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson of the Council, it is Mohai here.
Mr M J MAGWALA: I have raised my hand even before the current speaker started speaking.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Then why is Mohai speaking?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): I have been raising my hand ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: When is Mohai speaking when we have raised our hands ... Why is he talking? [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Chief Whip, hon Mohai.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, we are trying to ... [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... what this House should agree on, Chairperson. What this House should agree on ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We have been raising our hands from the beginning.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... is that
whatever technical glitch that may have arisen today ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: So, a person can just speak without being recognized, like Mohai? [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... should be reported to the appropriate structure. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Why is Mohai speaking?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Secondly, Chair
... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We are equal here, Chair.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... in keeping with the decorum of the meeting, members who do not switch their videos must not be allowed to speak ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Why are you lecturing us. That’s nonsense. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Those who just speak without a permission from the Chairperson must be removed ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Nonsense man. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... from the platform. We are raising this, Chair, because this House cannot discuss the technical glitch, but the report must be presented. Those members are in order. [Interjections.]
Mr M NHANHA: But how do you know if it is a technical glitch, Mohai? [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): No, I am saying
... Here is a point ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Chairperson ... [Interjections.] [Inaudible.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... were raised were recognized. But later on ... [Interjections.]
Mr M NHANHA: How do you arrive at that conclusion? You are lying. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... but later because motions are not debated in the House, they are either approved or objected. [Interjections.] So, I suggest that for you to be in charge of the House ... [Interjections.]
Mr M NHANHA: If you are muted, how do you object? [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... nobody
should be able to unmute themselves unless proper request is made. I so move, hon Chairperson. Thank you. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, given the amount of time spent on this item and the fact that time is up, I will therefore move to the next item ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: My hand is up. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Chairperson, I am not going to give up. My hand has been up for a very long time. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: My hand has been up.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much ... [Inaudible.] ... the motion on the Order Paper. Hon Chief Whip, please proceed with the motion. [Interjections.] [Inaudible.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Our hands are up. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: You can’t do that, Chair. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Time is up. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: You cannot proceed. We are not going to proceed. You must allow members to speak. [Interjections.] We want to participate, Chairperson.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I made a ruling, we will proceed.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E LUCAS): On a point of order, Chairperson.
Mr M J MAGWALA: We can’t proceed. Our hands have been up, Chairperson. Orderly so ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Chief Whip, please proceed.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Hon members ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Inaudible. Our hands have been up. [Interjections.]
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Wait, you are not the Chairperson.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): ... we have
requested that the DA and EFF have rehearsed to want to sabotage the proceedings today because they are in alliance
... [Interjections.] ... I need guidance from you, Chairperson
... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, order. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You can’t think.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order!
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Why are you calling order while you are allowing Mohai to control you, because you can’t take charge of the House. [Interjections.] [Inaudible.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Chairperson ... [Inaudible.] ... It’s hon Magwala ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Mohai, please proceed.
Ms M O MOKAUSE. No, we need to resolve the previous matter. Our hands are up.
Mr M J MAGWALA: Mohai is not going to speak. He is the cause of this problem. And immediately when this host gave Mohai the rights to be the co-host, that’s where the problem started.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Is this the level of desperation that you can speak to ... [Inaudible.]
... that’s why you are advocating for the burning of the flag of the country ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: ... It’s your office when you were given the rights to be the co-host. And we knew immediately after that, that there is going to be a problem. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): You have deteriorated, you have stagnated ... [Interjections.] ... please allow us to proceed with the sitting ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: You and your office, Mohai, are the ones who caused this problem when you were given the rights ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Mr S E Lucas):
Chairperson, on a point of order. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members ...
Mr M J MAGWALA: No, I am going to speak like Mohai did, without being recognized.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: We can never be suppressed by the ANC ... [Interjections.] ... It can never be. Mohai is a problem ... [Interjections.] ... I am saying this now ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Maybe we can sing but can’t all talk at the same time ...
Mr M J MAGWALA: ... Hon Mohai is the problem of ... [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: Hon Mohai is the Chief Whip of this House ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: No, Chief Whip of what?
An HON MEMBER: That’s a fact. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: That is why he is doing this. He speaks without being recognized. We are being abused. This is abuse. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): You will
not tell me to keep quiet.
Mr M J MAGWALA: This is not how you run the House. You are abusing other members. You are using your political power to do what you are doing. Mohai just speaks without being recognized by the Chairperson. You’ll want us to be disciplined. What you are doing is wrong. I have been raising my hand very nicely waiting to be recognized. It can never ... [Interjections.]
Mr M E NCHABELENG: But you are talking now, and we are listening to you. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Let’s proceed. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: No, Chairperson, I have raised my hand. You are not recognizing the problem, which is Mohai the Chief Whip. He is the one who caused the problem. People can’t unmute themselves. What is that. You don’t want to rule on it. You are busy calling the Advocate. You must rule on it before this House ... [Inaudible.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, Chief Whip.
Mr M J MAGWALA: It can never be business as usual. How many members have raised this thing?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Magwala, you have not been given permission to speak. Chief Whip ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Just like Mohai, he didn’t get permission to speak, that’s why I was speaking. Now I am done. I have raised my point. Give us a ruling on this thing.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, hon Mohai.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: There is no Mohai who is going to proceed here. We must restart this process all over again. We cannot let Mohai talk, and we are not going to be suppressed here. No provincial ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I will now ask the table to please mute Mokause and mute Magwala. Please proceed, Chief Whip.
Mr K MOTSAMAI: I have raised my hand, and you didn’t recognize me. ... [Inaudible.] ... because I want to know why we cannot talk.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Stop what you are doing. Stop it.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Thank you, Chair
... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You are not going to speak. Mohai, you are not speaking here.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I will now ask the table to please mute Mokause and Magwala. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE COUNCIL (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson, I don’t think it would be of any harm if we restart the motions because all these parties didn’t have any motions ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.] ... except the second motion by the FFPlus. So, it demonstrates how ill prepared they are for this sitting. I don’t see a problem to cancel and restart the motions to demonstrate to them our capacity ... [Inaudible.]
... to take this process serious. [Interjections.]
Mr C F B SMIT: You are out of order. [Interjections.]
Mr K MOTSAMAI: I want to raise my motion. [Interjections.]
Mr M R BARA: You are disappointing, Chief Whip. Let me tell you. [Interjections.]
Ms N E NKOSI: You too, Bara, you are a disappointment. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: You know, Chairperson, after five years holding hon Mohai in such high esteem, I can tell you, the entire caucus of the DA in the NCOP has been respecting him because he always came across as a level-headed man, who knows his job. I dare say today, Chairperson, I am just as disappointed ... [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): We have placed a proposal that we restart the motions and allow ... [Inaudible.] ... from a very ignorant member of the DA here. Let’s proceed. We propose that, Chair. Honestly.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): The DA and the EFF have rehearsed this, Chair. We appeal to you to rule to restart the process.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: If I may just ask you not to respond to what is being said, but to go directly and raise your motion.
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Chair ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: There is no motion of Mohai. We need to restart the process of motions so that equal opportunity is given to us to object or not to object, Chairperson. This is illegal, and you know it. Mohai has started all these problems [nyakanyaka]. So, he needs to sit by it and control it until the end. [Inaudible.] [Interjections.]
Ms N E NKOSI: The problem [nyakanyaka] is not the Chief Whip, it’s you, Mokause.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, we proceed.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We cannot proceed ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: We have already made a ruling ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: It is illegal.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... We proceed to the motion on the Order Paper.
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Chair ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We cannot proceed. We cannot go to the Order Paper. We need to restart this whole process. [Interjections.]
Ms A D MALEKA: Your aim is to collapse us. You can’t do that. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: No one collapsed you. You have collapsed yourselves. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: You have already collapsed. [Interjections.]
Mr M R BARA: What is the ruling, Chairperson?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You can’t even handle a Council sitting. How are you expected to handle the whole country when you have collapsed a Council sitting? Let’s restart this whole process.
Ms L N MOSS: You are out of order.
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Chair ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Hey, who are you?
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Chair ...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): No Mokause.
No.
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Chair.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Yes, hon Boshoff, what’s your point?
Ms H S BOSHOFF: At long last. Many hands have been raised since the beginning of this sitting and you ignored them flatly, and that is unacceptable because as the Chair, with helpers sitting in front of you, you should have seen the hands that had been raised and give those people an opportunity to speak. So, like everybody else, we are asking for this process to restart. Otherwise, we are not going to get anywhere. Thank you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Boshoff, just a brief response to you, I have noted down every hand ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Can you
allow the Chair to speak.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... on the screen religiously, and ... [Interjections.]
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Hon Chair ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I have given every person an opportunity to speak except the last five hands we saw because of the commotion that the erupted in the House. I am pleading with you, hon members, that we should move on to the next item, the motion on the Chief Whip on our Order Paper.
Mr M J MAGWALA: Hon Chair, before you move on, can I just ... [Inaudible.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, Chief Whip.
Mr M J MAGWALA: Hon Chair, can I ask one thing? Two seconds.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Magwala, you are not allowed to speak. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): On that
point? There is no point. [Inaudible.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Can you wait Deputy Chair. Hon Chair, I have been recognised now.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Chief Whip ... [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: Hon Chair, I want to ask. What is the ruling that you have made in terms of ... [Inaudible.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I am not going to speak, hon member. [Interjections.]
Mr M J MAGWALA: I am asking for an opportunity. My hand has been up. Please recognize me.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I am not allowing you to speak.
Mr M NHANHA: Hon Chief whip and hon Lucas have been speaking willy nilly here and you never raised the issue ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.] ... for God’s sake, you are a presiding officer.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): No, I am a
member of this House.
Mr M NHANHA: I am saying you must be recognized before you speak. In the same way ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Many were
not recognized ... [Inaudible.]
Mr M NHANHA: That’s exactly my point.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): But Magwala
made a speech, and you didn’t stop him.
Mr M NHANHA: But who is the Chairperson here? Deputy Chair, you are not chairing.
Ms H S BOSHOFF: Hon Lucas cannot take criticism.
Mr M NHANHA: Of course, she can’t, she is quite thin.
Mr M J MAGWALA: It is wrong. I am asking very nicely.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Our hands are up. You must recognise us, pleae. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Order, hon members.
An HON MEMBER: I have never seen such anarchy in my life.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Our hands are up.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, Chief Whip. The motion on the Order Paper ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: There is no Chief Whip ... There is no Mohai who is going to talk. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson, under normal circumstances, had we had a hybrid sitting, we would
immediately converge as the Whippery to look into the matter that has happened, that impacted on the full participation of all members ... [Interjections.]
Ms H S BOSHOFF: You started this. This is why we are where we are ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): ... however ... with due respect, hon Boshoff ... [Interjections.]
AN HON MEMBER: Haa, shut up, hon Boshoff ... [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): ... however, the situation is that we are on 100% fully virtual. Because we are unable to converge immediately as the Whippery, I’ll propose to you, Chairperson, to agree to allow for motions to be run again so that we are consistent and as you have been providing a guide to this, because all parties didn’t raise motions except the ANC and the FF-Plus, but one motion by the FF-Plus.
So, we can easily run the motions and record objections. Because there were motions that were not contested, that there were no objections on. That’s why initially I proposed that we
refer back to the chat where hon Ryder was indicating that there is an objection, however, he is unable to unmute.
So, I would make that proposal, Chair, that indicates a level of fairness for those members that say they were unable to unmute, so that we do not allow rabblerousers in this meeting to succeed, to undermine a very important sitting. Thank you.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You are the rabblerouser, Mohai. Behind the scenes you are the rabblerouser.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members ... [Interjections.]
...
AN HON MEMBER: Mokause, you’re out of order ... [Interjections.]
AN HON MEMBER: ... and we cannot tolerate that. How do you disrespect the Chief Whip, Mokause? It’s enough now ... [Interjections.] ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: That rabblerouser ... that rabblerouser ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, can I please ... [Interjections.] ... Order, hon members.
Hon members, in an attempt to really ensure that we accommodate everyone and that the chaos that has raged in the House in the past 30 minutes or so is really avoided, I will now go back to the motions being raised again.
Now, in so far as the question of notices of motion are concerned, there were no objections. The were only four notices of motion raised by hon Ndongeni, Bartlett, Mameragane and we were supposed to have Lehihi, who didn’t put forward the motion.
Can I find out if there’s anyone who wants to raise a notice of a motion?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Chairperson, wait. We need to restart the process of motions without notice so that we have an opportunity to object and not object. Why are you taking a shortcut?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I’m taking... [Interjections.] [Inaudible.] ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Why are you taking a shortcut?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... in fact I’m allowing for notices of motion to be tabled as well. I’m trying to find out, is there anybody who wants to raise a notice of a motion?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Let us restart, go back to those people who presented motions without notice.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Nobody, thank you very much.
We now move on to motions without notice. The first person who raised the motion was hon Shaikh ... [Interjections.] ...
Mr M NHANHA: Chairperson, my hand is up ... [Interjections.]
...
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Chairperson, I want to raise a motion without notice ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Shaikh, could you please raise the motion again ... [Interjections.] ...
Mr M NHANHA: Chairperson, my hand is up ... [Interjections ...
Mr K MOTSAMAI: I want to raise a notice of motion, Chairperson
...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I’m starting ... [Interjections.] [inaudible.] ... afresh.
THE LAUNCH OF HOME AFFAIRS MOBILE OFFICES IN MOKOPANE
(Draft Resolution)
Ms S SHAIKH: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
(1) Commends the unveiling of 100 Department of Home Affairs mobile offices in Mokopane, Limpopo, by President Cyril Ramaphosa on Tuesday, 07 May 2024 ... [Interjections.] ...
Mr M NHANHA: Chairperson, my hand is up. You are obligated in terms of the rules that you should recognise me ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, hon Shaikh ... [Interjections.] ...
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Chairperson, I want to raise a motion without notice ...
Mr M NHANHA: ... you can’t ... [Inaudible.] ... like this, Chairperson. It’s wrong ... [Interjections.] ...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Raise your hand, Motsamai, on the right platform. Raise your hand ...
Ms S SHAIKH:
(2) notes that the unveiling of the new mobile offices is said to be part of the Department of Home Affairs’ Hybrid Access Model aimed at servicing areas where the department’s footprint is limited,
(3) also notes that new trucks’ purpose-built offices offer all home affairs services in a convenient way, including shaded waiting areas and ample parking spaces ... [Interjections.] ...
Mr M NHANHA: My hand has been up. Somebody has taken down my hand. Chairperson, you cannot continue like this. Please, can you recognise the hand. You cannot continue like this, it’s wrong ...
Ms S SHAIKH:
(4) understands that apart from the 412 Home Affairs offices in different parts of the country, the department is expanding the reach of its services through partnerships with banks and shopping malls, and also with the current expansion offices like the trucks launched in Mokopane;
(5) believes that the mobile trucks will enable home affairs services to reach people in rural areas as well as ensure that services are available during loadshedding and times of poor network connection;
(6) also believes that the mobile offices will assist a great deal in reducing the influx of people at the department’s offices; and
(7) applauds home affairs’ initiative for mobile offices, which is going to improve the provision of home affairs services across South Africa and welcomes the announcement that mobile offices will be spread to all other provinces as well.
Not agreed to.
ANC WELCOMS THE OPENING OF FIVE POLICE STATIONS IN KWAZULU-NATAL
(Draft Resolution)
Ms A D MALEKA: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
(1) welcomes the recent opening of five new state of the art police stations in KwaZulu-Natal;
(2) notes that the stations, which include Gamalakhe, Donnybrook, Melmoth, KwaDabhazi and eManguzi were officially opened by the national Minister of Police, hon Bheki Cele;
(3) further notes the significance of the opening of these police stations is aimed at improving the community’s access to policing services;
(4) believes that the more police stations are built the more credence there is for the increased footprint of the SA Police, especially in rural areas, which are often far-flung from government services;
(5) further believes that the police stations will effectively improve police response times and enable the SA Police Services, SAPS, to deliver professional and effective service in response to the needs of communities; and
(6) commends the Department of Police for expanding police services to areas in need and thus calls on
communities to continue to work with police to rid the area of crime.
Not agreed to.
A COLLAPSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION SITE IN GEORGE, WESTERN CAPE, LEAVES 39 WORKERS TRAPPED IN THE RUBBLE AND SEVEN DEAD
(Draft Resolution)
Ms M L MOSHODI: Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House –
(1) notes with concern the media reports about the collapse of a construction site in the town of George in the Western Cape province where more than 39 workers were reported to be trapped in the rubble and seven people reported dead;
(2) calls on this august House to send heartfelt condolences to the families of the deceased;
(3) further believes that this incident raises serious concerns about the occupational safety and compliance with the building safety standards;
(4) further calls upon this august House to call for a multi-agency investigation, led by the Department of Labour, into the cause of this collapse and ensure that those who are found to be culpable meet the full wrath of the law; and
(5) further calls for public restrain against the blaming of any individuals or entities until the investigations are completed.
Agreed to.
CALLING ON THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL TO TAKE DRASTIC ACTION AGAINST THE CONTINUED ISRAELI DEFENSE FORCE BOMBARDMENT IN GAZA
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M DANGOR: Hon Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House—
(1) notes with concern the continued and intensified bombardment of social and economic infrastructure by the Israel Defence Force in Gaza, which undermines the transportation of international humanitarian aid and support to the people;
(2) also notes that this intensified bombardment persists despite the public support by the Palestinians for a ceasefire and the beginning of peaceful dialogue for a lasting solution to the conflict; and
(3) calls on this House to condemn these bombardments and call upon the United Nations Security Council to take drastic actions that will force the warring parties to the negotiating table in search of a lasting peaceful and just solution to the ongoing conflict in the Middle East. Thank you, Chairperson.
Motion agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
TOWNSHIP AGRICULTURE PROGRAMME IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
(Draft Resolution)
Ms L C BEBEE: Hon Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House—
(1) welcomes, as a step in the right direction, the launch of a programme aimed at equipping residents with the knowledge and resources necessary to cultivate healthy and nutritious crops in their neighbourhoods by KwaZulu-Natal Premier Nomusa Dube- Ncube;
(2) notes that the Township Agriculture Programme is aimed at maximising food production in small spaces to promote a healthy ecosystem and increase biodiversity in urban areas;
(3) further notes that the programme is also aimed at combating hunger and fostering economic growth within township settings;
(4) understands that it seeks to harness the untapped potential of urban spaces, promoting sustainable agricultural practices to maximise food production;
(5) also understands that it provides opportunities for women, youth, individuals with disabilities and child-headed households to actively participate in agricultural activities, thereby promoting inclusivity in the township communities;
(6) acknowledge that to KwaZulu -Natal government has allocated R6 million in funding to facilitate the implementation of this project; and
(7) commends the KwaZulu-Natal government’s dedication to support grassroots initiatives aimed at addressing food insecurity and uplifting township communities. Thank you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much, hon Bebee. Any objection to the motion? Thank you very much ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: I object ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... no objection to the motion. Therefore ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: I have objected ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... the motion is agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution ... [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Hey! There is no agreement here. There can never be an agreement when I am being muted again. I have been trying to unmute myself. I have objected to that motion, and that is the very same motion that caused problems. I have objected.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much. There being an objection, the motion may not be proceeded with and will become a notice of a motion. Thank you very much.
Hon Mohai, you are next.
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Chairperson? Chairperson?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Motsamai, on what point are you rising?
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Chairperson, I had my hand up to raise a notice of a motion, but I couldn’t get in. I don’t know what’s wrong. Can I be allowed to ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: We have passed that already. The motion has been objected to and will become a notice of a motion. Hon Mohai?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Hon Chairperson of the Council, I move ... [Interjections.]
Mr K MOTSAMAI: Chairperson?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson, this cannot be allowed. I think there is purely an undermining of the Chair ... [Interjections.]
Mr K MOTSAMAI: I raised my hand ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Motsamai, I already responded to you. I have said that the motion that you are referring to has already been put aside and will become a notice of a motion. Hon Mohai, please proceed.
SOUTH AFRICA CELEBRATING THIRTY YEARS OF DEMOCRACY
(Draft Resolution)
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Chairperson of the Council, I move without notice:
That this House—
(1) notes that this year on 27 April, South Africa celebrated 30 years since the dawn of democracy in 1994;
(2) acknowledges that in the last 30 years of democracy South Africa is vastly different from what it was under the ruthless and racist minority regime under apartheid;
(3) also acknowledges that today, the material conditions of millions of ordinary people have changed for the better with many of our people carrying a great sense of hope for a prosperous South Africa that is built on a firm foundation for an inclusive polity, founded on values of human dignity, human rights, freedom, non-racialism, non- sexism, the rule of law, respect for national sovereignty and media freedom;
(4) further acknowledge that even though there is still much that remains to be done to truly realise the fundamental transformation that we envisaged at the onset of democracy in 1994, the ANC remains the only formidable political alternative for driving the agenda for a better South Africa; and
(5) salutes the undying spirit of the founding father of our democracy, President Nelson Mandela and many of his generation for staying firm to building the nation and reconciling it from deep ashes of racism in our country.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Any objection to the motion?
HON MEMBERS: We object.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: There being an objection, the motion may not be proceeded with and will become a notice of a motion.
SUCCESSES AND EXPANSION OF THE DUBE TRADEZONE
(Draft Resolution)
Mr M I RAYI: Hon Chairperson, I move without notice:
That the House—
(1) welcomes the announcement of the launch of Dube TradeZone 2, which was announced at a ribbon-cutting ceremony attended by members of national and provincial government as well as regional business leaders;
(2) notes that due to the success of the industrial zone’s first phase at the site adjacent to King Shaka International Airport, north of Durban, the second phase Dube TradeZone 2 project expansion was launched;
(3) also notes that the Dube TradeZone 2 has already attracted R1,8 billion in investment and is expected to create 600 jobs within five years;
(4) recalls that the first phase of the project has done well and has already attracted R4,6 billion in investment, creating over 5 000 permanent jobs in the process;
(5) further recalls that TradeZone 1 is currently occupied by 50 investors, including international companies such as Mahindra, Samsung, DHL and PepsiCo-Futurelife;
(6) believes that Special Economic Zones assist a great deal in developing export-oriented industries, attract foreign direct investment and technology
transfer and achieve the generation of employment opportunities; and
(7) applauds the successes and expansion of this Special Economic Zone project and believes that it will go a long way in boosting economic growth and job creation in KwaZulu-Natal.
SOUTH AFRICAN LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES COMMENDED FOR ACTING AGAINST BLUE LIGHT GANG SUSPECTS
(Draft Resolution)
Mr I NTSUBE: I hereby move without notice on behalf of the ANC:
That the House-
(1) commends the South African law enforcement agencies for acting against blue light gang suspects who were allegedly terrorising motorists on the N3 freeway on Sunday 28 April 2024;
(2) notes that the gang was alleged to have committed robberies using the police blue lights on the entry between Villiers and Heidelberg using white Toyota Hilux;
(3) understands that the information that the police have received about the gang, they have mobilised themselves and traced the suspects to the N3 highway Grootvlei in Mpumalanga;
(4) further understands that the police spotted the vehicle with the blue lights and the high-speed chase towards Zonkizizwe ...
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Please proceed, hon Ntsube.
Mr M J MAGWALA: He has left the platform, Chairperson.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Okay. Let’s leave the hon Ntsube out for now.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: He was told to boycott you. [Interjections.] He was called to boycott you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Dodovu? Hon Dodovu is not there. Hon Ryder?
Mr D R RYDER: Chair, I didn’t have a motion mine was just a complaint about the process being followed. Thank you. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Labuschagne, you are next.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Thank you, Chair. I don’t have a motion. That was a previous hand.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: No, I can’t hear you, hon Labuschagne. You are not audible.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Chair, I said I don’t have a motion. That was a previous hand.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much. Hon Boshoff?
Mr H S BOSHOFF: Mine was just a hand to complain about the process. Thank you.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Okay, thank you very much. Hon Bara?
Mr M R BARA: I am part of the complainants.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Bara? [Interjections.] Okay. Hon Nhanha?
THE CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): You must be mindful of your language Magwala ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: But what is Mohai’s problem? Why are you not calling Mohai to order when is ... [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: No man, please behave. You are old man, please behave.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): What is
Mokause’s problem.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Talk to Mohai. Mohai is old. Talk to Mohai ... Tell Mohai that ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): What about you? [Interjections.]
Mr M NHANHA: Chairperson, I don’t know what is wrong with the Chief Whip today, probably he can’t accept defeat graciously. You’ll have to swallow the pill. Chief, you have lost today. [Interjections.] I do not have a motion, Chairperson. Thank you. [Interjections.] He didn’t drink his medication
Mr F J BADENHORST: Chair, there was objection ... [Inaudible]
... to the process. Thank you.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: I was objecting to the nonsensical treatment of ... [Interjections.] ... who is co-chairing and making you a Chairperson that can’t chair - making you a child. He has done that for five years and today you allowed … [Interjections.]. That’s how weak you are!
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): That’s not
a motion, mute her. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: The next ... Hon Lucas.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas):
Chairperson. At that moment when I raised my hand, I wanted to call for order and to request that we ask the Table what went wrong at that stage. So, I didn’t have a motion. But if you allow ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You know very well what went wrong. You know very well.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): ... Because
at that stage all of us were muted and we ... [Interjections.]
... what is happening … [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: The next question is by the hon Beyers Smit. Hon Beyers Smit? Hon Beyers?
An HON MEMBER: I know Beyers Naude, not that one.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much. Hon Magwala?
Mr M J MAGWALA: Thank you, Chairperson. My hand was up because of that glitch that was caused by the office of the Chief Whip, hon Mohai. I don’t have any motion. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Thank you very much. Hon members, that was the list. I see the hon Nkosi’s hand is still up there. Hon Nkosi?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Her time has passed. You said so yourself. So, we can’t go back to Nkosi. Her time has passed.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): You must
wait your turn to become a Chairperson.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Who muted you? Who muted you? Your time is up. [Interjections.]
Ms N E NKOSI: We are tired of you bullying us. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Let’s move on. Let’s move on!
Ms N E NKOSI: We cannot allow Mokause to bully us in this meeting. [Interjections.]
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Let’s move on. No one is bullying you. You’ve been sleeping. You are even sleeping on the sofa. You are even
on a sofa. The way you are so unprofessional.
Ms N E NKOSI: We are tired of you, Mokause.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You are even on a sofa ... [Interjections.] You’ve been sleeping. You’ve been sleeping. You’ve been called manier times. [Interjections.] We even made count down on you. You’ve been sleeping on that sofa. [Laughter.] [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Are you
from Mpumalanga, Mokause?
Mr M DANGOR: Chairperson, if I may intervene. The decorum of the House is all of our responsibility.
Mr M J MAGWALA: You are not recognised, hon member. The Chairperson didn’t recognise you. [Interjections.] Don’t intervene. Don’t intervene!
Mr M DANGOR: I can repeat myself, hon Chair. The decorum of this House is all of our responsibility.
Mr M J MAGWALA: You are not recognised, hon Dangor. You are not recognised.
Mr M DANGOR: And I appeal to all members to behave in a fashion that when the public sees us ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: If the Chairperson is not going to chair, we are going to take over from him and chair. [Interjections.]. You are not recognised, Dangor. You are not recognised. If the Chair cannot chair, we will take over and chair. So, let us all of us speak ... [Interjections.]
Mr M DANGOR: And then let’s just move on for God’s sake. All I want to do is appeal for the decorum of this House, it is all of us our responsibility ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You should have appealed first from the ANC members. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, we are now done with the motions. [Interjections.]
An HON MEMBER: May I call on a point of order?
[Interjections.] I’ve raised my hand for a point of order. [Interjections.]
Mr S F DU TOIT: Hon Chair, may I please be recognised? [Interjections.] Hon Chair, may I please be recognised on point of order? [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I am not sure now where we are. On what point are you rising, hon Du Toit?
Mr S F DU TOIT: Hon Chair, thank you. The other members were granted an opportunity to bring the motions again but I was not given that opportunity and this is something that’s quite important to note. May I please have the opportunity to bring my ... [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon Du Toit, let’s hear you.
GREAT SADNESS ON THE PASSING OF FLIP DE WET
(Draft Resolution)
Mr S F DU TOIT: Hon Chair, I hereby move without notice on behalf of the FF Plus:
That the House-
(1) notes with great sadness the passing of Flip de Wet, a respected community leader, a dear friend, a father and a grandfather;
(2) also notes of this giant will be missed by friends, family and colleagues;
(3) further notes that his legacy with a caring heart and fair judgment and respect and empathy will live on in his absence;
(4) convey our heartfelt condolences to the De Wet family.
The motion agreed to in terms of section 65 of the Constitution.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, I am in line with the motion on the Order Paper. Chief Whip?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Thank you, Chairperson of the Council, once again ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: No, on the point of order. Order, Chair. Order.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: What’s your point of order, Mokause?
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We have been doing motions without notice. Procedurally, we should go to notices of motion. Why are you so in a hurry to call the rabble-rouser here? [Interjections.]
Ms N E NKOSI: Chairperson, Mokause is in the mission to collapse this meeting, and she’s not going to win. We cannot be bullied by ... [Interjections.] ... in this meeting.
Mr M J MAGWALA: No, what mission? What mission are you talking about? Hon Mokause is in charge here. [Interjections.]
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Hon members, I will now make the ruling. And please ... [Interjections.]
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Hon Chair, my hand was up.
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: ... let us work together to ensure that we do not compromise the standing of this House and therefore we’ll move on the motion on the Order Paper by the hon Mohai.
The Chief Whip of the Council moved: That the Council resolves that Rule 218(1), which provides inter alia that the consideration of a Bill may not commence before at least three working days have lapsed since the committee’s report was tabled, be suspended for the purposes of consideration of the following Bills:
(a) Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill [B8B–2021] (National Assembly – section 76);
(b) Public Procurement Bill [B18D–2023] (National Assembly – section 76);
(c) National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill [B25B–2023] (National Assembly – section 75); and
(d) South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill [B41B– 2023] (National Assembly – section 75).
Question put: That the Motion be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West.
AGAINST: Western Cape.
Motion accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
The Chairperson announced that he has received a Notice of a proposed Constitution Twenty First Amendment Bill and its particulars for public debate, submitted by Adv Glynnis Breytenbach, a Member of Parliament.
The Notice and its particulars were, therefore, tabled in accordance with Rule 102(2).
This will be published and then be dealt with in terms of a possible debate on a later date.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Hon Chairperson, yes, I have received a letter from your office on this motion, but it is not on the Order Paper for today. Can you just enlighten us or give clarity on this, please? You said now on a later date, but this Parliament comes to an end on 16 July. So, you placed it now before the Council, but when are we going to debate it then. Will there be a time for us to debate it or should this also be carried over to the Seventh Parliament?
The CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: I am sure that viewpoint is noted that this should be possibly considered in the Seventh Parliament.
Mr K M MMOIEMANG: Chair, they said that it is not on the Order Paper. How should we deal with something that is not on the Order Paper?
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON PROVISIONAL SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OF MS R GOVENDER, MAGISTRATE, LENYENYE, LIMPOPO, TABLED IN TERMS OF
SECTION 13(3)(B) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON 26 FEBRUARY 2024, DATED 24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON PROVISIONAL SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OF MR A A K SINGH, SENIOR MAGISTRATE, PIETERMARITZBURG, KWAZULU-NATAL, TABLED IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(3)(B) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON 18 APRIL 2024, DATED
24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON CONFIRMATION OF SUSPENSION/REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF MR M D HINXA, CHIEF MAGISTRATE, BLOEMFONTEIN ON THE GROUNDS OF MISCONDUCT TABLED IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(3)(B) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON 26 FEBRUARY 2024, DATED 24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON CONFIRMATION OF REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF MR K MAHARAJ, AN ADDITIONAL MAGISTRATE AT CALEDON, DUE TO HIS CONTINUED ILL-HEALTH IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(4)(A)(II) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
8 FEBRUARY 2024, DATED 24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON CONFIRMATION OF SUSPENSION/REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF MR H C RAATH, ADDITIONAL MAGISTRATE AT OBERHOLZER, ON THE GROUNDS OF MISCONDUCT IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(4)(A)(I) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON
8 FEBRUARY 2024, DATED 24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON CONFIRMATION OF SUSPENSION/REMOVAL FROM OFFICE OF MS N B DYEYI, MAGISTRATE AT FAURESMITH, DUE TO HER CONTINUED ILL-HEALTH IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(4)(A)(II) OF MAGISTRATES ACT
90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON 16 APRIL 2024,
DATED 24 APRIL 2024
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON UPLIFTMENT OF PROVISIONAL SUSPENSION ON CERTAIN CONDITIONS FROM OFFICE OF MAGISTRATE K BODLANI, AN ACTING REGIONAL MAGISTRATE AT UMLAZI (EMLAZI), KWAZULU-NATAL, IN TERMS OF SECTION 13(1)(G)(I) OF MAGISTRATES ACT 90 OF 1993, AND REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE ON 1 FEBRUARY 2024, DATED
24 APRIL 2024
Ms S SHAIKH: Hon Chairperson, the Select Committee on Security and Justice considered various reports tabled in Parliament by the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services in terms of section 13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act 90 of 1993 that relate to provisional suspension or removal and upliftment of a suspension of magistrates.
With regard to the provisional suspension from office of Ms R Govender, the Select Committee on Security and Justice reports as follows. Ms Govender was permanently appointed as a district court magistrate at the Lenyenye Magistrate Court in Limpopo on 1 February 2018. The misconduct charges against her stem from criminal proceedings in the High Court of South Africa, Polokwane, Limpopo province, in which the presiding officer Judy Kganyago ruled that a copy of the judgement be forwarded to the Magistrates Commission for its attention.
According to the judgement, Ms Govender was dishonest, her behaviour inappropriate and she brought the name of the magistracy into disrepute. The commission resolved to charge Ms Govender with misconduct and on 30 August 2028 served her with the charge sheet and a provisional letter of suspension dated 24 August 2023. She was charged with contravening, amongst others the Magistrates Act of 1993, the Regulations
for Judicial Officers of the Lower Courts and the Code of Judicial Conduct for Magistrates on the basis that she changed an accused person’s plea of guilty to not guilty and acquitted an accused without a trial taking place; woefully and unlawfully provided false and/or incorrect statements to the reviewing judges, when in truth and in fact magistrate Govender knew or ought to have known that she acquitted the accused without a trial taking place to the prejudice of the administration of justice.
The commission invited Ms Govender to make representations as to why it should not recommend her provisional suspension from office but she elected to remain silent. In the circumstances, the commission recommended that Ms Govender be provisionally suspended. The allegations against her are of such a serious nature as to make it inappropriate for her to further perform the functions of a magistrate.
On 20 December 2023, on the advice of the commission, the Minister decided to provisionally suspend Ms R Govender from office with immediate effect pending the outcome of the misconduct hearing of her fitness to hold office and tabled his report for consideration by Parliament.
Having considered the report of the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services dated 20 December 2023 and tabled in terms of section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act of 1993 on the provisional suspension of Ms R Govender, magistrate at Lenyenye, Limpopo, from office on the grounds of misconduct pending the outcome of a misconduct hearing into her fitness to hold the office of magistrate, the Select Committee on Security and Justice recommends that the National Council of Provinces confirm Ms R Govender’s provisional suspension from the office of magistrate.
Hon Chair and hon members, in relation to the provisional suspension from office of Mr A A K Singh, the committee reports as follows. Mr Singh is a senior magistrate in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal. The Magistrates Commission received several complaints against Mr Singh. A charge sheet and notice of the recommendation for provisional suspension, dated 27 September 2023, was served on him. The charges concern the following. In July 2023, he sent inappropriate, concerning and threatening Whatsapp messages to journalists following the publication of an article. Under oath, he stated that he had attended a meeting with members of the SA Police Service, SAPS, Crime Intelligence unit on 30 December 2016,
which he did not attend. He had or has a close relationship with officials attached to the SAPS Crime Intelligence unit, to the extent that during the period 2016 and 2017 he actively involved himself in the Crime Intelligence unit’s investigations and undercover operations by identifying and recruiting suspects appearing in the Pietermaritzburg Magistrate Court as informants or contacts; assisted with arrangements for the Crime Intelligence unit to covertly install recording equipment at an office he identified for recording purposes; assisted the Crime Intelligence unit with an investigation of a project into Fees Must Fall incidents; and divulged information regarding the strength of a case against arrested persons to an unidentified informant or contact.
On 9 October 2023, Mr Singh forwarded representations on why the commission should not recommend to the Minister that he be provisionally suspended. On 13 October 2023, having regard to the seriousness of the allegations against Mr Singh ... the evidence at hand in Mr Singh’s representation, the commission recommended that he be provisionally suspended.
On 18 December 2023, on the advice of the commission, the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services provisionally suspended Mr Singh from office with immediate effect pending the outcome of the misconduct hearing into his fitness to hold office, and tabled his report for consideration by Parliament.
Having considered the report of the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services dated 20 December 2023, tabled in terms of section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act of 1993 on the provisional suspension of Mr A A K Singh, senior magistrate at Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, from office on the grounds of misconduct, the committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces confirm Mr A A K Singh’s provisional suspension from office of magistrate, pending the outcome of a misconduct hearing into his fitness to hold the office of magistrate.
Hon Chair and hon members, on the confirmation of the suspension or removal from office of Mr M D Hinxa, chief magistrate at Bloemfontein, on the grounds of misconduct, the Select Committee on Security and Justice reports as follows. Following allegations of sexual assault, the Magistrates Commission initiated a preliminary investigation and charges of misconduct were brought against Mr Hinxa. After
unsuccessfully trying to report the matter on several occasions at different police stations, the complainant as a last resort lodged a complaint with the Minister of Justice and Correctional Services on 29 June 2016, alleging that Mr Hinxa had raped her. The complaint was submitted to the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development on
2 November 2016 and thereafter referred to the Magistrates Commission for attention.
Based on the evidence gathered in the preliminary investigation, Mr Hinxa was charged with two counts of misconduct. On the advice of the commission, the Minister provisionally suspended Mr Hinxa with effect from
29 November 2017 and Parliament confirmed the suspension.
On 23 January 2018, Mr Hinxa applied for an order to review to set aside the Minister’s provisional suspension, the commission's decision to institute a disciplinary or misconduct inquiry against him and declaring the disciplinary inquiry on the misconduct charges against him invalid and unlawful. The application was opposed but he did not proceed further with the application.
In the absence of a court order preventing the commission from proceeding, the misconduct inquiry began on 30 October 2018.
The commission closed its case on 26 November 2020. Mr Hinxa chose not to testify or call any witnesses in his defence and closed his case. The matter was postponed to the 14th and 29th of January 2021, the 7th of June 2021 and then to the 8th of July 2021 when Mr Hinxa was found guilty on both charges. The matter was postponed several times due to Mr Hinxa been unwell. However, the presiding officer allowed the commission to place its aggravating factors on record. He submitted mitigating factors in writing on 4 November 2021 but did not attend the hearing scheduled for the 29th and 30th of November 2021, where the presiding officer recommended that he be removed from office.
On 24 December 2021, he submitted representations on the sanctions imposed to the presiding officer and the commission. On 27 January 2022, the presiding officer indicated that she had nothing to add to her reasons for sanction. On
13 October 2023, having considered all the relevant documentation, the commission resolved to recommend that Mr Hinxa be removed from office on the grounds of misconduct. Mr Hinxa also instituted legal proceedings in the Free State
Division of the High Court to interdict the commission, the Minister and the Speaker of the National Assembly from implementing the decision of the presiding officer in the misconduct proceedings. However, on 20 December 2023, the matter was struck from the roll due to its lack of urgency, and review and set aside the decision of the commission and the presiding officer. However, no relief is sought against the Minister the third respondent and the Speaker the fourth respondent.
On the advice of the commission, the Minister confirmed Mr Hinxa’s suspension from office and tabled his report dated
2 February 2024 in terms of section 13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act of 1993. The select committee noted the inordinate delay in finalising this matter and similar disciplinary matters against magistrates, and has included this as an issue in its legacy report for the next Parliament to consider monitoring closely.
Having considered the Minister’s report dated 2 February 2024, requesting that the National Council of Provinces confirm the suspension or removal from office of Mr M D Hinxa, chief magistrate, Bloemfontein, on the grounds of misconduct, the
committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces resolves not to restore Mr M D Hinxa to the office of magistrate.
Hon Chair and hon members, with regard to the confirmation of suspension or removal from office of Mr H C Raath, additional magistrate at Oberholzer, the committee reports as follows.
The Magistrates Commission received several complaints on different occasions relating to Mr Raath’s conduct. There were complaints from individuals that Mr Raath had approached them to invest money in a property development in the Ivory Coast. The complainants were then introduced to Mr Raath’s brother- in-law as a potential investor. At the time, Mr Raath was the acting head ... the head of court at Oberholzer. The complainants were aware that Mr Raath is a magistrate, entrusting him, and then invested large amounts of money in the scheme.
Subsequently, it was found that there was no such development. Also, Mr Raath signed a memorandum of understanding in a company as creditor, with he and his brother-in-law as debtors. Certain properties were given as security. However,
Mr Raath knew that the properties did not belong to him or his brother-in-law when he signed the document.
Furthermore, Mr Morake, a prosecutor at Oberholzer, filed complaints against Mr Raath, alleging that he had on at least two occasions referred to him by using offensive and derogatory language. The commission viewed the complaints against Mr Raath in a very serious light and resolved to conduct a preliminary investigation in terms of regulation 26(1) of the Regulations for Judicial Officers in the Lower Courts, 1993. The commission charged him with six counts of misconduct and the charge sheet was served on him on
23 July 2018. The misconduct inquiry commenced on
17 March 2021 and concluded on 29 November 2021. Mr Raath was found guilty on all six charges of misconduct and the presiding officer recommended that he be removed from office. The commission supported the recommendation of removal on the grounds of misconduct. However, regarding the matter of sanction, a minority of members believed that Mr Raath should not be removed from office and recommended that the commission impose a lesser sanction. These members were invited to submit reasons but did not respond. On 14 September 2023, the commission informed the Minister of Justice and Correctional
Services of its decision to recommend the suspension of Mr Raath pending a resolution from Parliament and his removal from office on the grounds of misconduct.
On 23 November 2023, the Minister suspended Mr Raath from office with immediate effect pending Parliament's decision on whether or not to restore him to office and tabled his report in Parliament in terms of section 13(4)(b) of the Magistrates Act of 1993.
Having considered the Minister’s report dated 23 November 2023 concerning the suspension or removal from office of Mr H C Raath, additional magistrate, Oberholzer on the grounds of misconduct, the committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces resolves not to restore Mr H C Raath to the office of magistrate.
Hon Chair and hon members, on the confirmation of removal from office of Mr K Maharaj, an additional magistrate at Caledon due to his continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Magistrates Act of 1993, the committee reports as follows. Mr Maharaj was appointed as an aspirant magistrate on 1 February 2018 and on 24 February 2020 was
appointed as an additional magistrate at Caledon. On
2 March 2020 he experienced ill health while presiding in court. This had resulted in him being booked off sick from
2 March 2020 to date. The acting chief magistrate Wynberg immediately reported the matter to the Magistrates Commission at its meeting of 5 May 2021. The commission's ethics committee considered a neuropsychological assessment report from a neurologist and ordered that an investigation in terms of regulation (29)(1) of the Regulations for Judicial Officers in the Lower Courts, 1994, be held regarding the removal of Mr Maharaj from office on account of continued ill health. The commission accordingly informed Mr Maharaj in writing of its intended investigation in terms of regulation 29((2) of the regulations on 24 November 2021. He, however, refused to accept this. On the delivery of this notice, he advised that the date of his appointment as magistrate in the letter was incorrect. A revised letter dated 4 May 2022 was served on him on 8 May 2023. In terms of regulation 29(3) of the regulations, Mr Maharaj was requested to submit a medical report to the commission from a registered medical practitioner of his choice on or before 20 May 2023. In addition, he was afforded the opportunity to comment on the matter and to state a case in response with specific reference
to whether his illness was not as serious as suggested by his removal from office or to suggest alternatives. Mr Maharaj complied with the request and submitted an updated report dated 13 May 2023.
Based on the contents of the medical report submitted to the commission, the executive committee of the commission formed the opinion that Mr Maharaj did not have the capacity to carry out his duties of office in an efficient manner due to his continued ill health. On 14 September 2020, the commission furnished Mr Maharaj with a written explanation of its opinion that he did not have the capacity to carry out his duties of office in an efficient manner and in terms of regulation 29(6)(a)(2) of the regulations forwarded to him, the medical reports and any other relevant documents which may not have been in his possession. In terms of regulation 29(6)(b) of the regulations, Mr Maharaj was afforded the opportunity to submit to the chairperson of the commission his written comments regarding this opinion. In his e-mail dated 20 September 2023, Mr Maharaj in response agreed that he was unable to continue to function as a judicial officer. At its meeting on
1 November 2023, the commission considered the medical reports together with Mr Maharaj’s comments dated 20 September and
held the view that Mr Maharaj should be removed from office due to continued ill health.
Having considered the Minister’s report dated 1 December 2023 requesting that the National Council of Provinces confirm the removal from office of Mr K Maharaj, an additional magistrate at Caledon due to his continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii)of the Magistrates Act of 1993, the committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces resolves not to restore Mr K Maharaj to the office of magistrate.
Hon Chairperson and hon members, with regard to the confirmation of suspension or removal from office of Ms N B Dyeyi, magistrate at Fauresmith due to her continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Magistrates Act of 1993, the committee reports as follows. On
11 November 2022, the acting chief magistrate at Bloemfontein reported to the Magistrates Commission that Ms Dyeyi, on
6 February 2022, had been involved in a motor vehicle collision wherein she sustained very serious injuries, including a fractured arm and ... [Inaudible.] ... trauma brain injury. A senior magistrate at Bloemfontein was in frequent contact with Ms Dyeyi, morally supported her and
assisted her in obtaining medical reports to inter alia cover her absence from office. The commission was provided with the following progress reports relating to her ill Health, which were already in Ms Dyeyi’s possession. A rehabilitation occupation therapy report, a functional capacity evaluation report, the medical certificate from a psychiatrist and a report from a speech, language and feeding specialist, as well as a second functional capacity evaluation report.
Having considered the fact that Ms Dyeyi was no longer fulfilling her obligations as judicial officer through her continued absenteeism from office, the resultant financial burden and negative impact on court and case-flow management and the administration of justice in general, the executive committee of the commission, in terms of regulation 29(1) of the Regulations for Judicial Officers in Lower Courts ordered that an investigation be conducted regarding a possible removal from office on account of continued ill health. Ms Dyeyi was in compliance with Regulation 29(2) of the regulations ... notified about its intended investigation in writing. In compliance with Regulation 29(3) of the regulations, she was requested to submit any additional medical reports from a registered medical practitioner of her
choice to the commission and further afforded the opportunity in terms of the rules of administrative justice to comment on the matter and to state her case in response with specific reference to whether her illness was not as serious as to justify her removal from office or to suggest alternatives thereto. Ms Dyeyi did not respond.
The commission, on 30 November 2023, in compliance with regulation 29(6)(a)(1) of the regulations, provided over the written exposition of its opinion that she does not have the capacity to carry out her duties of office in an efficient manner. She was afforded an opportunity to forward her written comments on the commission’s opinion to the chairperson of the commission. She did not respond. According to the latest medical reports dated 18 September 2D23, the occupational therapist, having assessed Ms Dyeyi on 5 September, concluded that, based on the assessment findings, Ms Dyeyi does not meet the requirements of her current occupation. Furthermore, in his report dated 9 October, a neurosurgeon indicated that after a clinical examination, he fully agreed with the occupational therapist’s report and the recommendations.
At its meeting held on 2 February 2024, the executive committee, in compliance with Regulation 29(7)(a) of the regulations, considered the medical reports’ informed opinion that Ms Dyeyi should be removed from office due to continued ill health as contemplated in section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Act, read with Regulation 29(7)(b) of the regulations. The executive committee, based on the findings contained in the medical reports, is of the opinion that it is clear that Ms Dyeyi does not have the capacity to carry out her duties of office in an efficient manner due to her continued ill health and is therefore no longer fit and proper to hold the office of magistrate any longer. The executive committee of the Magistrates Commission therefore recommended that Ms N B Dyeyi, a magistrate at Fauresmith, be removed from office due to her continued ill health.
Having considered the Minister’s report dated 15 March 2024 requesting that the National Council of Provinces confirm the removal from office of Ms N B Dyeyi due to her continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Magistrates Act, the committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces resolve not to restore Ms N B Dyeyi to the office of magistrate.
Hon Chairperson and hon members, in terms of the last Order, on the upliftment of the provisional suspension from office on certain conditions of magistrate K Bodlani, an acting regional magistrate at Umlazi, KwaZulu-Natal, in terms of section 13(1)(g)(i) of the Magistrates Act of 1993, the committee reports as follows. Ms K Bodlani was appointed to the office of magistrate on 1 October 1996. Since beginning her probation as an acting regional magistrate on 4 November 2013, she mostly presided in the sexual offences court, Umlazi, in KwaZulu-Natal.
The Minister, on the advice of the Magistrates Commission, provisionally suspended Ms Bodlani on 21 July 2020 pending the outcome of an investigation into her fitness to hold office as acting regional magistrate in terms of section 13(3)(b) of the Act. Parliament confirmed Ms Bodlani’s provisional suspension. The National Council of Provinces passed a resolution in this regard on 17 September 2020 and the National Assembly passed a resolution on 19 March 2021. On 29 March 2023, the acting regional court president KwaZulu-Natal wrote to the commission, requesting that Ms Bodlani’s provisional suspension be lifted for her to attend to the reconstruction of a court report relating to a case over which she had
presided. The commission recommended that Ms Bodlani’s suspension from office be lifted in terms of section 13(1)(g)(i) of the Magistrates Act of 1993 to comply with the High Court order and pending the conclusion of the inquiry into her fitness to hold office on the following conditions. Ms Bodlani only deals with the reconstruction of the record of the Emlazi regional court case, the State v Clement Mbuso Ndlovu, case number RC 249/13 to comply with the order of the High Court; she be instructed to attend thereto as a matter of urgency; she must not conduct herself in a manner that compromises the integrity of the judiciary and brings the administration of justice into disrepute; she is not assigned any other cases to deal with; and the regional court president KwaZulu-Natal provide regular reports to the commission on whether Ms Bodlani is abiding by the conditions of the liftment of suspension and the progress of the reconstruction of the court record as referred by the High Court. The commission indicated that it had been advised that Ms Bodlani has no outstanding part heard matters.
In his letter dated 29th of November 2023, the Minister advised that he had received the commission’s recommendation that Ms Bodlani’s suspension be lifted on certain conditions
and that Parliament be approached to consider uplifting the suspension, which he supported.
However, having considered the Minister's request that Parliament uplift the provision of suspension on certain conditions from the office of magistrate K Bodlani, an acting regional magistrate at Umlazi, KwaZulu-Natal, the committee recommends that the National Council of Provinces approves the upliftment of the suspension with the conditions as outlined above, and further that the upliftment is for two weeks after the adoption of the report by the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces.
Hon Chairperson, the reports of the Select Committee on Security and Justice are tabled for consideration. Thank you very much.
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports,
24 April 2024, p 3) Provisional suspension from office of Ms R Govender, Magistrate, Lenyenye, Limpopo, tabled in terms of
Section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 26 February 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 24 April 2024, p 6) Provisional suspension from office of Mr
AAK Singh, Senior Magistrate, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal, tabled in terms of Section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 18 April 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 24 April 2024, p 8) Confirmation of suspension/removal from office of Mr MD Hinxa, Chief Magistrate, Bloemfontein on the grounds of misconduct tabled in terms of Section 13(3)(b) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 26 February 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports,
24 April 2024, p 11) Confirmation of removal from office of Mr K Maharaj, an additional magistrate at Caledon, due to his continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 8 February 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 24 April 2024, p 14) Confirmation of suspension/removal from
office of Mr HC Raath, Additional Magistrate at Oberholzer, on the grounds of misconduct in terms of section 13(4)(a)(i) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 8 February 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports,
24 April 2024, p 16) Confirmation of suspension/removal from office of Ms NB Dyeyi, Magistrate at Fauresmith, due to her continued ill health in terms of section 13(4)(a)(ii) of the Magistrates Act, Act 90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 16 April 2024, dated 24 April 2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
Question put: That the Report of Select Committee on Security and Justice (Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, 24 April 2024, p 20) Upliftment of the provisional suspension on certain conditions from office of Magistrate K Bodlani, an acting Regional Magistrate at Umlazi (eMlazi), KwaZulu-Natal, in terms of section 13(1)(g)(i) of the Magistrates Act, Act
90 of 1993, and referred to the Committee on 1 February 2024, dated 24 April2024 be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Report accordingly agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF DIVISION OF REVENUE BILL [B4–2024] (NATIONAL ASSEMBLY - SECTION 76) AND REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS THEREON
Ms D G MAHLANGU: Hon Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson of the National Council of the Provinces, the Chief Whip, Members of the Executive Council, MECs, permanent and special delegates. Hon Chairperson, it is a privilege to table before this House the report on the Division of Revenue Bill B4-2024 on behalf of the Select Committee on Appropriations today. The committee adopted the report while the DA and FF Plus did not support the Bill, and the EFF reserved its position on the Bill.
Hon Chairperson and members, upon the referral, National Treasury briefed the committee together with the provincial Portfolio Committees on Finance on the Bill on the 6th of March, 2024. Hon Chairperson, between 16 and 20 April 2024, permanent delegates briefed their provinces. The committee considered negotiating mandates on the 24th of April 2024 and the final mandates were adopted on the 30th of April 2024. In
line with section 72(1)(2) of the Constitution of the Republic, and section 9(5)(b) of the Money Bills and Related Matters Act, the committee facilitated public participation.
To this end, advertisements calling for public inputs were published on the parliamentary website in print media in all
11 official languages and the committee received inputs from Amandla Mobi, Budget Justice Coalition, Congress of South African Trade Unions and Equal Education Law Centre section 27, Rural Health Advocacy Project, TB Accountability Consortium and the Western Cape for Commissioner Children.
In accordance with section 214(2) of the Constitution of the republic and section 10(4) of the Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act 97 of 1997, the committee consulted with Financial Fiscal Commission, FFC, SA Local Government Association, Salga and Public Benefit Organisation, PBO. Hon Chairperson, the committee made observations on some issues and came up with the following recommendations.
The first being that the Minister of Finance should gazette the Bill once it is signed into law. As a custodian of the South African public finances, the Minister should ensure that
the National Treasury continues to assist all other spheres of government, including public entities to build proper financial management capacity and internal control measures to safeguard these allocations from corrupt elements and ensure that value for money is always achieved, failing which, the necessary consequence management must be implemented.
The National Treasury together with all departments affected by the current and future budget cuts of R23,9 billion and R2,9 billion from the baseline of both direct and indirect grants over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF should develop a clear plan within 90 days after the adoption of this report by this august House to mitigate any negative impact on service delivery.
The committee reiterates its previous stance that any budget cuts to government programmes should be guided by evidence and proper impact assessment to avoid undesirable amendments of departmental annual performance plans officially adopted by legislature. Hon Chair and members, the Department of Basic Education should develop clear plans within 60 days after the adoption of this report by this House to ensure efficient and
improved expenditure on the Early Childhood Development, ECD Grant to avoid any future budget cuts.
The Department of Basic Education together with its provincial counterparts should ensure that measures are developed within
60 days after the adoption of this report by the House to strengthen and improve the spending of the National School Nutrition Programme Grant to ensure that the grant objectives are aligned and that the allocation is inflation linked at all times.
Hon Chairperson and members, the Department of Health, together with the National Treasury should take steps within
60 days of the adoption of this report by this august House to ensure that the issue of unemployed qualified South African doctors and social workers is fully addressed over the MTEF.
The Department of Health together with the Gauteng Provincial Department of Health, should ensure that measures are developed within 60 days after the adoption of this report by the House to address the challenges around the shortage of radiation oncology services and the replenishment of the correct equipment supply for the healthcare sector and that
the remuneration of oncology staff is standardised across all provinces.
Hon Chairperson, the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs together with the National Treasury, should accelerate the process of putting measures in place to address underspending on infrastructure through the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agent, Misa and the National Treasury budgeting tools to ensure that all funds are used for the intended purpose and value for money is always achieved.
Parliament should continue to monitor progress in this regard.
Hon Chair and members, the National Treasury, together with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs and Salga should develop a clear plan within 60 days after the adoption of this report by the House, to ensure that municipalities address the legacy debt owed to both Eskom and Water Boards, which is currently undermining service delivery, including the debt relief programme to make sure that they are changed to correct rates for basic services and that these are cost reflective.
Hon members, the National Treasury together with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs should develop clear plans within 60 days after the adoption of this report by the House to ensure the effective implementation of the R2 billion smart meters grant to end support on project roll out, business case readiness assessment and support in developing a clear framework to protect the existing municipal revenue and optimise overall municipal revenue collection.
Hon members and Deputy Chairperson, we are also recommending that the National Treasury together with the Department of Water and Sanitation, Salga and Development Bank South Africa, DBSA should to develop clear plans with time frames within 60 days of the adoption of this report by the House to accelerate the process of addressing non-revenue water costs by water leaks due to aging infrastructure in illegal water connections through dedicated and competent technical teams. As such, this will continue to affect the expected municipal revenue and therefore municipal infrastructure maintenance should be prioritised in all aspects.
Hon Chairperson and members, the National Treasury should develop measures within 60 days of the adoption of this report by the House to ensure that the amended section 10 of the Bill, which deals with the duties of the transferring officer in respect of Schedule 5 and 6 allocation is properly implemented and that both financial and non-financial performance information is effectively monitored and evaluated to achieve value for money and address irregular and wasteful expenditure.
Chairperson, allow me to conclude because the report has been published on Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATC. Members will go through it and I know they have already gone through it. In conclusion, Chairperson and hon members, I wish to thank all committee members across party lines for their constructive, provincial finance or treasury committee members for their inputs, committee stakeholders, media and the general public, as well as the committee's support staff. The committee recommends to the House that the Bill be adopted without amendments. Thank you very much, hon Chairperson.
Debate concluded.
Declaration of vote:
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Hon Chair, this Bill might as well be called the time and again Bill because time and time again we hear the pleas from the provinces with a large rural component and large geographical spread that the provincial equitable share formula needs to be changed for it to accommodate the unique needs of those provinces. It is just a pity that time and again these pleas fell on deaf ears with the National Treasury time and again saying that they are close to coming up with a new model for determining the equitable share formula. When will this really happen?
Time and again we insist that bad financial management, the misappropriation of funds or corruption-driven decisions must lead to consequences for those that commit them, yet time and again we see that so many officials that committed these financial unsound or criminal acts remain in their positions without any consequence management being implemented.
Time and again the DA has warned that the endemic corruption within failing state-owned enterprises such as Eskom, Denel, the SA Airways, SAA, and the SABC to name but a few, as well as the continuous provision of government bailouts or taking
over of the debts of these mismanaged and failing state-owned enterprises, SOEs, will have a huge negative effect on the delivery of services to our people. It is now an undeniable fact that this is exactly what is currently happening. The over politicisation of appointments at local government level as well as ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Order! Hon
Christians, please mute.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: The over politicisation of appointments at local government level as well as cadre deployment are two of the largest contributors to the poor service delivery record that this government has attained. These two factors combined with the bloated number of people being employed in the Public Services sector as well as the increases that they receive are literally taking money away from the people. We saw this in this Bill with all the large amounts that have been taken away from provinces and local government in order to pay for these increases.
This Bill has a further negative effect on service delivery due to the fact that nongovernmental organisation, NGO, will
get less money from various government institutions, thus preventing these NGOs from fulfilling a large number of services that they normally delivered to our communities.
When we look at all these factors as well as all the inputs received from the various provinces, and one look at the continuous way in which some of those valid requests are being brushed aside time and again and year after year. We as the NCOP as well as our colleagues in the provincial legislatures have to ask ourselves if we are finally going to fulfil our duty and honour our obligation to the people by standing up for the provinces that we represent instead of time and again being a rubber stamp for the executive. The Western Cape does not support this Bill. I thank you.
Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West.
AGAINST: Western Cape.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF AGRICULTURAL LAND BILL
(Consideration of Report and Bill)
Ms T C MODISE: Hon Deputy Chair, this is the report of the Select Committee on Land Reform, Environment, Mineral Resources and Energy on the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill, Bill B8B–2021, section 76, dated 07 May 2024. The Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development briefed the committee on 27 February 2024 on the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Bill, Bill B8B– 2021, section 76.
The Bill weas referred to the committee on 5 December 2023 as section 76 Bill. The committee called for written comments on the Bill on 14 March 2024, while the public hearings were held by the provincial legislatures. At the end of the public engagements process of both the committee and the provincial legislatures, the negotiating mandate meeting was held by the committee together with the provincial legislatures on 30
April 2024. The Select Committee on Land Reform, Mineral Resource and Energy, having deliberated on the consideration of the subject of the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill, Bill B8B-2021, section 76, referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism, JTM, as section 76 Bill, reports that it agrees to the Bill, Bill B8B- 2021 without any amendments. The committee request the House to consider the Bill. Thank you very much, Chair.
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
BASIC EDUCATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and Report thereon)
Mr M E NCHABELENG: Thank you, hon Deputy Chair. The Basic Education Laws Amendment Bill proposes to amend the SA Schools Act of 1994 ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Chairperson before you proceed. Hon Labuschagne, I see that you raised your hand.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Yes, Chair, I rise on a point of order and on Rule 178(2)(b) of the Rules of the NCOP. It states that in its report the committee must specify each amendment if an amended Bill was agreed on by it, and each amendment that was considered and, for a reason other than it being out of order, was rejected by it; and so forth. The original report that was ATCd was a report that did not include the amendments as the clauses that were amended. The report is now going to be delivered is the correct report, I interrogated the C-list, but that report is not ATCd.
So, we continue with the process that is not correct. That report was corrected this morning or late last night, I don’t know. However, it was correctly put on the WhatsApp group of the Whips and distributed, but the correct procedure for the
Bill as important as this one is really nor being followed. Thank you, Chair.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Thank you
very much, hon Labuschagne. I think we have discussed the issue, and I would love the Chief Whip of the Council to give clarity with regards to the issue. Then if at all, because I don’t think there is a train smash. If we can just be clarified as to what procedure was followed, then we can be able to get clarity on this specific issue. Chief Whip, hon Mohai.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Thank you, Deputy Chairperson. I really do agree that should there be no unanimity on the committee in dealing with the report, the report can be deferred, but we got an impression that this was a correction and not a substantial matter of the report. That is why the report is circulated, but we don’t want to, because many things can be raised at this stage.
We understand. That is why we were consulting. We listened to the committee and the committee made corrections that it has forwarded. It has corrected the report as circulated. So, we
don’t have any issue should there not be any unanimity in terms of how this report should be processed.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Should we
then agree that there is no agreement on the issue of the processing of this specific report, and we then defer the report. Is that the ruling that we can make?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): I thought that hon Labuschagne was just raising a concern, or was she raising an objection that it should not be processed?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): That is
exactly what I want to understand, hon Labuschagne.
Ms C LABUSCHAGNE: Thank you, Chair. Yes, it is it. It would be easy to say let us all agree because I understand that things can slip in. The problem is the procedure. The report has to include all those clauses that they refer to as the C-list, which is now the D-list, which is corrected. However, this report that is now going to be read and that we are going to speak on is not the correct procedure.
I really think that we should refer this report back or let this report be ATCd and then follow up. You know as well as I know that anyone who wants to take this Bill further up procedurally, or with the procedures not being followed, will be another very good reason for objecting or standing or fighting this Bill in court. Yes, that is my point. Thank you.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Hon
members, if we can then rule on this specific report. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Deputy Chair, just the factual information before the Ruling. [Interjections.]
No, it can be referred, but I just want to give a factual report before it can be referred. The report has been circulated and the report is going to appear in the ATC today. So, if it is postponed, it should be postponed with understanding that it is not that the members have not been alerting each other with regard to the report.
So, I thought that with that understanding, there would not be any harm if the Council was to be proceed with the report.
That is what I would say from the Chief Whip’s point of view. However, if members of that committee were agreed that they still were struggling to find one another, that is the route we can go.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Adv
Phindela, can you please in terms of procedure support us and advise us as to how we continue with this? Can the table please assist us in terms of procedural issues. Adv Nonyane or Phindela, before we make the ... [Interjections.]
Is it only me that cannot hear you, advocate. Is it only me? But I can’t hear you. I don’t know if it is only me. I can’t hear you. We couldn’t hear you. If you can just repeat what you have been saying.
Adv M E PHINDELA: Deputy Chair, am I audible now?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas):
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): You are.
Thank you.
Adv M E PHINDELA: Okay, thank you very much. Deputy Chair, I was saying that the Chief Whip has proposed that... [Inaudible.] ... the report may be deferred to the next sitting of the Council [Inaudible.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Thank you
very much. Hon members as being advised by both the Chief Whip as well as the administration, the Table, we will request chairperson, and we want to apologise for that, because it seems as if procedurally things have not been well after there was agreement on the content matter. It is just a procedural issue of making sure that the report is put onto the ATC - the announcements, tabling and committees report. Apparently, it has not happened like that.
I would now rule that this matter be ATCd and be dealt with in the next House sitting. Thank you very much and I really apologize to the chairperson, because we have requested that it should be clarified before we start with this our sitting. However, there seems as if there were still some issues that that fell through the cracks. I really want to apologise to you, hon Nchabeleng. Hon members that gets out with the Tenth Order and we will now proceed to the Eleventh Order.
PUBLIC PROCUREMENT BILL
(Consideration of and Report thereon)
Ms M L MAMAREGANE: Thanks hon Deputy Chairperson and greetings to you. Today, I rise to present for the Council's consideration the Select Committee on Finance Report on the Public Procurement Bill. The Bill was ... Sorry for that. This Bill was introduced by the hon Minister of Finance in the National Assembly in June 2023. The Bill was processed and passed by the National Assembly and thereafter transmitted to the National Council of Provinces for concurrence on 8 December 2023.
The objective of the Bill is to regulate public procurement and to prescribe a framework within which preferential procurement must be implemented. The Bill intends to address the fragmentation of public procurement legislation to align it to international best practices, where appropriate, and assist in implementing government social economic policy objectives.
The Bill was processed in terms of the procedure is established in terms of section 76 of Constitution. The Select Committee on Finance invited the provincial portfolio committees on finance to the briefing on the Bill by National Treasury on 6 April 2024 and all the other meetings. The committee had public hearings on 23 February 2024, where it received a total of 23 submissions and 21 written submissions.
All the stakeholders who made submissions are listed in the report itself. At the meeting of the committee on 19 March, the National Treasury responded to the submissions of the stakeholders and they in turn responded to the National Treasury responses. The committee then engaged with both National Treasury and the stakeholders.
In these responses, the National Treasury dealt with, among others, concerns regarding constitutionality independence on the public procurement office functions on the PPOs, provincial treasuries and procuring institution, transparency and integrity measures with whistle blowers, dispute resolution and the extent of regulation making powers.
This was a very intense and involved process as the committee raised concerns about the National Treasury, in some instances, only to notice stakeholders’ comments and explaining that some of the issues will be addressed through regulations, seculars guidelines and instructions, and should not form part of the primary legislation. The committee expressed disappointment with the National Treasury's response and asked them to provide comprehensive feedback and engage constructively in the process.
The committee invited stakeholders to submit further comments and directed National Treasury to meet separately with the stakeholders to see if they can reduce the differences between them, given that the Bill is in the section 76 Bill, which must include the views of the provinces. Twelve stakeholders submitted summaries of outstanding issues that still have to be addressed.
Those who made submissions were Cosatu and Sactwu, GSR, Procurement Perform, Reform working groups, PFMA, CSCC and RF, Will Powers, IRR NPC, Black Business Councils, Business Unit South Africa and Dr Ncedo Mkondweni. Additional submissions was received by MK Liberation War Veterans, subsequently. The
National Treasury met with the stakeholders between 8 and 10 April 2024 and provided feedback on the outcome of the engagement to the committee on 17 April 2024.
The report was discussed at length in subsequent sittings of the committee. Permanent delegates of the committee briefed their respective provinces on the Bill between February and April 2024. On 30 April 2024 and 2 May 2024, the committee considered the provincial negotiating mandates.
The committee held meetings on 23-26 April, 30 April 2024 and
2 May 2024 to further process the Bill. The Bill decides on policy issues and consider the Bill clause-by-clause. ON 7 May 2024, the committee considered and adopted the report. In all, the committee spent 39 hours on the Bill.
In conclusion, leet me express the words from the chairperson of the Select Committee on Finance and express my appreciation for the collaborative work we put in during this process. Even though members of the opposition, like the DA and the FF-Plus did not support the Bill, they participated actively. Hon Deputy Chairperson, I now present the report on the Select
Committee on Finance on the Public Procurement Bill. I thank you, Chair.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP: Thank you very much hon Mamaregane. I gave you some extra minutes just for us to understand clearly on the process that actually transpired. Before we proceed to voting, I shall allow province as the opportunity to make the declarations of vote in terms of Rule 86, if they so wish.
Declarations of vote:
Ms C LABUSHAGNE: Deputy Chair, the Western Cape rejects the idea that race can be used as a proxy for disadvantage. It is undeniable that the majority of people who have been historically deprived of opportunity are black, it is also true that there are many others who have been disenfranchised. Furthermore, the past 30 years of democracy have gone some way to correcting the injustices experienced by many South Africans during the Apartheid years. Since much more needs to be done, focus should be on empowering those who have remained unempowered. Race is therefore an outdated measure.
It is demeaning to South Africans to still be subjected to the race classifications that made apartheid the evil system that it was. Our present government has simply adopted the racial mechanisms used by the previous government. The Western Cape believes that government must achieve socioeconomic redress by governing well, uplifting South Africans who remain trapped in hardship. The programme of favouring the few has to date been counterproductive, with projects designed to uplift large groups failing because of ineptitude or malfeasance. Redress is essential, but the current model has not achieved this, and the Bill simply presents a continuation of the same stale thinking.
While strategic government procurement is nothing new, the mechanisms entrenched by this Bill are the same mechanisms that have failed to have a broad impact over the past 30 years in South Africa. In stark contrast, the Democratic Alliance tabled a solution, the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Amendment Act, in June of 2023, which proposes focus on the Sustainable Development Goals to address the root causes of inequality of opportunity, benefiting the majority of poor and vulnerable citizens.
The committee, supported by the professional staff and with the patient and capable co-operation of Treasury, has done good work in panel beating this rushed Bill. The insertion of a clause demanding a review in two years is an admission that the Bill is flawed. While the Bill before us is a big improvement on the Bill that entered this House, we cannot accept the perpetuation of legislation that entrenches the racially divisive policies of the governing party. The Western Cape rejects this Bill.
Mr Y I CARRIM: Deputy Chairperson, firstly, in replying to the Western Cape, the statistics that we got from the Department of Trade Industry and Competition, National Treasury and our own research unit shows that we are far from empowering a sufficient number of people. So, the facts are stark and bare.
Secondly, I know, and we all do that the DA’s policy on opportunity being more important that affirmative action. However, there is a significant overlap between class and race. Their view, as does the Freedom Front Plus, is that this Bill will increase polarisation. We are saying that if we don’t do this – if we don’t give African people and blacks more generally and coloureds in particular, we are going to
increasingly polarise this country across race, class and gender lines. This Bill is necessary to reduce polarisation.
In fact, the provinces gave us very good submissions along similar lines, even the Western Cape - you made a very good submission even though we don’t agree with you. It doesn’t mean at all that if we come back to this Bill in 24 months that therefore the Bill is in adequate. No, the stakeholders came to us and said return the Bill to the National Economic Development and Labour Council, Nedlac, and then within six months the new incoming committee in the national council must look at it. We said no, while we respect the process in Nedlac, Nedlac is not our superior; it is Parliament that ultimately decides on Bills. We are not a subcommittee of Nedlac.
We spent 40 hours - on the last day it was not three but four hours and it was corrected in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATC, version and we made major changes. Let me put this to you, Deputy Chairperson. To be frank, as much as they were fundamentally opposed to the Bill, particularly the DA, they made a huge contribution. Mr Dennis Ryder in particular ... [Inaudible.] ... Chairperson. It doesn’t matter
which party raises things, especially in the NCOP where we are less advisory in theory. Mr Ryder made very good contributions that he constantly said, this is our policy, this is my view, it’s wrong, but I want to thank him and thank also other opposition members who came endlessly, in fact, we finished at 21:00 on Tuesday night.
Besides spending 40 hours on this Bill, we have given an opportunity in 24 months for the Bill to come back. Not because of what Mrs Labuschagne says, it is because the stakeholders wanted us to stop the Bill and because there are implementation issues. How often have we found that once we have a Bill, during implementation ... everywhere in the world and not just in South Africa, everywhere in the world in every parliament, they discover that there are some glitches. It is about implementation, it is about giving stakeholders a second chance, it’s about ... actually, I partly agree with the DA and the Freedom Front Plus, but it is not because the Bill is inadequate. It goes to the NA and they will look at it further and if they make changes it will come back to us.
I want to take this opportunity to say that they did contribute, and we are grateful for that as our Whip has said,
Comrade Mamaregane, it is a very important Bill. It was never going to be easy to process it. We have fundamental and philosophical and policy differences, but we are clear that if we don’t have this Bill, we all know that polarisation will become far worse. It will threaten social stability, undermine the prospects of economic development that we need so much and it will actually mean what July 2021 meant and happened. That will be a picnic. We don’t want that whichever party we are in. So, whatever our misgivings, let’s implement this Bill.
Thank you, Deputy Chairperson.
Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.
[Take in from minutes]
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.
GOLD AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTINGENCY RESERVE ACCOUNT DEFRAYAL AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report thereon)
Ms D G MAHLANGU: Honourable Deputy Chairperson, all protocol observed. It is once more my honour and privilege to table before this august House a report on the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Amendment Bill, that’s B7 of 2024 on behalf of the Select Committee on Appropriations.
The committee adopted the report, while the DA and the Freedom Fund Plus rejected the report, and the EFF reserved its position on the report. The Bill was tabled in Parliament with the 2024 Budget by the Minister of Finance on 21 February 2024 and it was passed by the National Assembly on 26 March 2024 where after it was referred to the National Council of Provinces for concurrence.
In compliance with section 4(4)(c) of the Money Bills Act, the committee consulted with the Financial and Fiscal Commission, FCC, on the Bill and invited the Parliamentary Budget Office, PBO, to comment. To facilitate public participation and involvement and in compliance with section 72 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, an advertisement was published on the website of Parliament and social media accounts inviting the public and all interested stakeholders
to make written submissions on the Bill. Therefore, written submissions were received from the following stakeholders, who also made oral submissions during the public hearings which were held on 15 March 2024. Adv B Cronin and the Congress of South African Trade Unions and Dr S M Muller.
During these public hearings, the committee observed some key issues and made the following recommendations. Firstly, the committee noted that the Bill provides for direct charges against the National Revenue Fund for the contingency reserve account on the South African Reserve Bank and for reporting of such funds informed by a new settlement agreement between the Minister of Finance and the South African Reserve Bank Governor and that under the new framework Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Amendment Bill, GFECRA, balances are distributed in a waterfall arrangement to three pools. To this end, the committee notes that National Treasury will receive R150 billion to be paid out in three tranches of R100 billion in the 2024-2025 financial year and R25 billion in each of the subsequent two financial years.
Secondly, the committee noted the FFC’s view that the use of GFRECA to the tune of R150 billion over the Medium-Term
Expenditure Framework, MTEF, has the potential to weaken South Africa’s strategic position and capability to stabilise the currency value in an increasingly volatile global economy and the country’s financial and fiscal integrity.
Thirdly, the committee welcomed Cosatu's view that consideration should be given to create a sovereign wealth fund through future surpluses of which the interest and capital at times must be available for development and other purposes, and that discussions should take place on the appropriate amounts of reserves required, and that the relevant legislation be finalised early in the Seventh Parliament – it is captured in our report.
Fourthly, the committee recommends that upon approval of the Bill the Minister of Finance should gazette the amendment of the GFRECA of 2003 to provide for a direct charge against the National Revenue Fund to be credited with a net amount of
R100 billion for the 2024-25 financial year from the GFRECA as well as R50 billion for the MTEF period.
The fifth recommendation is that the National Treasury together with the South African Reserve Bank should, within 60
days after the adoption of this report by the House, develop a set of terms and conditions or principles to ensure that funds are strictly utilised for their intended purposes to reduce government debt and stabilise the escalating debt service caused by the 2025-26 financial year, and National Treasury should publish the terms and conditions urgently to assist Parliament to continuously monitor the implementation thereof.
Lastly, whilst welcoming the Bill as a committee, as a critical piece of legislation in future the Minister of Finance should consider tabling such Bills during the Medium- Term Budget Policy Statement to create enough space for Parliament to adequately engage with the proposed legislation.
In conclusion, I wish to thank all committee members for their constructive contributions, stakeholders, media and the public as well as the committee support staff. Without all these role players this work would not have been a success. Therefore, the committee recommends to the House that the Bill be adopted without amendments. I thank you very much. Ngiyathokoza [Thank you.].
Debate concluded.
Declarations of Vote.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Deputy Chair, the EFF largely supports the findings, observations and recommendations of the Standing Committee on Appropriations regarding the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Amendment Bill. Firstly, we align with the committee’s recognition of the Bill’s provision. Yet, we assert that the measures should not serve as permanent features within the government's fiscal framework.
Furthermore, we share the committee’s concerns regarding the exorbitant liquidity management costs associated with the utilisation of the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account. And in light of this committee’s recommendation, we urge the Minister of Finance to prioritise the development of a comprehensive framework outlining the conditions for the utilisation of these funds. This framework should be subjected to parliamentary scrutiny before tabling of the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement, MTBPS, ensuring accountability and transparency in the allocation of public funds.
Additionally, Deputy Chair, we advocate for the inclusion of such bills within the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement affording Parliament sufficient time to deliberate and consult with relevant stakeholders. This approach aligns with our commitment to democratic governance and ensures robust decision-making processes.
In conclusion, Deputy Chair, while we acknowledge the necessity of the Bill in addressing the immediate fiscal challenges, we reiterate the importance of adopting a holistic approach to economic management and prioritise sustainable development, social equity and inclusive growth.
As the EFF, we remain steadfast in our pursuit of economic emancipation of all South Africans. It's about time that the South African Reserve Bank does something progressive in ensuring that it plays a role in alleviating poverty in this country, indeed. This proposal goes a long way towards ensuring that social estates that we envision as the EFF is realised. Thank you, Deputy Chair.
Mr D R RYDER: Deputy Chairperson, if you'd bought a Krugerrand in 2016, it would have cost you about R20 000. A good
investment because since gold price has moved from $1500 to
$2285 per ounce. At the same time, the rand has weakened against the dollar, meaning that your Krugerrand is now worth about R46,000.
The profit of R26,000, which is a close analogy for the money that is contained in the gold and foreign exchange reserve.
But though your personal wealth would have increased substantially, it could not put food on the table, a theoretical gain that does not help your actual cash flow. So, what the government has decided to do is to issue more currency into the market using this increased wealth that it has. It's kind of like increasing your overdraft on the basis of the improved security now that your Krugerrand is worth more.
Now, while it would have been nice to just leave the wealth to grow, leveraging the increased wealth could really be useful if you are using it for a project that will dramatically improve your life. Something like starting a business or adding a room in the house or buying some solar panels. Sadly, the gain will not be used in a responsible manner like this by our government. Part of it goes to pay drunk uncle Jacob's
credit card debt and is going to be fitted away on simple survival.
It's like waking up in January to the bills when you blew the Christmas bonus on stuff that you can't remember. That is the problem with the current dipping into the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account. The government is dipping into our wealth but not using the funds for any catalytic project that will have a long-term benefit. It’s merely ploy to keep the wolves from the door.
And the mechanism that is employed will almost certainly have an inflationary impact. In any market, artificially increasing the circulating money supply without a corresponding increase in industrial production leads to a decline in that currency's value. This doesn't mean that goods are actually scarcer, but rather that the currency used to buy them is more abundant, leading to higher prices.
Perhaps the saddest point is that by dipping into the reserve, the government is effectively acknowledging that the rand is not going to strengthen again, this is an act of surrender and acceptance that they've driven the currency into steady
decline through populism, bad judgment, policy uncertainty and a level of corruption that has much of the world rejecting us as trade partners.
Sesotho:
Re kgathetse ke merereo ya maqheku a hlokang kutlwisiso.
English:
South Africans must vote for a party that will rescue South Africa from 30 years of bad government. On 29th of May, vote for the DA. Thank you, Deputy Chair.
Ms L N MOSS: Deputy Chair, but the system of the government to draw another R150 billion on the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account, GFECRA balance will multicade physical rails by reducing going by R100 billion for the 2024-
25 financial year, R25 billion for the 2025-26 and R25 billion for the 2026-27 financial year.
As a result, debt services costs will decline by R30,2 billion over to 2024 by the Medium Term Expenditure Framework period, which is accompanied by reducing in the stock there. The reduction in our country’s debts will enable government to
release funds to expand on investment infrastructure for the building of roads, schools, hospitals and water and sanitation projects, amongst others which is critical for the creation of jobs.
We are of the view that reducing debt service costs is critical for growth and development. The Minister and Governor have agreed on a new framework for managing this in this requires an amendment to the GFECRA. The current value of the account stands at a positive balance of R500 billion. When the rand duplicates, this amount gains. So, this half a trillion- rand balance reflects the degradation of the currency over a long time.
Let me stress this hon members, this is ... [Inaudible.] ...by the SA Reserve Bank, SARB. In fact, hon members in 2023 when this account was in deflected, government credited this account by R28 million. Hon Chairperson and hon members, please note that this is done by mutual agreement between the Minister and Governor because some among us like jumping to treat to the dependence of SARB that our argument is misplaced, and it does not arise.
Let me assure South Africans that what is being done here is strict accordance with section 22(4)(2) of the Constitution of Republic of South Africa. The ANC supports the Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Amendment Bill.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Hon
members, I will call order now so that we allow one minute for delegates who are outside the virtual platform to join us. One minute.
Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
CONSIDERATION OF STATISTICS AMENDMENT BILL AND REPORT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES THEREON
Mr E Z NJADU: Good afternoon, hon Deputy Chairperson and all the members. The report of the Select Committee on Health and Social Services on the Statistics Amendment Bill, which is B31 of 2023 of National Assembly section 75, dated 23 April 2024.
The Select Committee on Health and Social Services, having deliberated on and considered the subject of the Statistics Amendment Bill, B31 of 2023 of National Assembly section 75, referred to it on 27 February 2024, reports that it has agreed to the Bill with proposed amendment and reports as follows - just to mention, which is clause 9, section 15 of the principal Act, which is a correction. The select committee upheld the Constitution and its mandate by recognising the importance of the public involvement in the legislative process further the committee conducted open meetings without exceptions. On 12 March 2023, the select committee received a briefing on the Statistics Amendment Bill, B31 of 2023, National Assembly.
Section 75, following this, the select committee invited stakeholders and interested persons to submit written comments on the Bill to ensure its accessibility. The committee advertised the Bill on various electronic media platforms.
Stakeholders and interested persons could submit their written submissions between the 14 March 2024 and 15 April 2024.
However, no submissions were received during this period. The parliamentary legal adviser confirmed that amendments are constitutionally and procedurally in order, with the meaning
of Joint Rule 161 and no amendment affects the classification of the Bill.
Statistics SA responded to the proposal amendments and agreed to them. The select committee considered and agreed to adopt the Bill with the proposed amendments. The recommendation of the Select Committee on Health and Social Services, having considered the Statistics Amendment Bill, B31 of 2023, National Assembly section 75, which was referred to it on 27 February 2024 and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism as a section 75 Bill, recommends that the Council pass the Bill with proposed amendments and the report to be considered.
Thank you very much, hon Deputy Chairperson.
Debate concluded.
Declarations of vote:
Sepedi:
Moh S B LEHIHI: Modulasetulo ...
English:
... the EFF support co-operation with Statistics SA and it’s representatives. However, our foremost priority remains with
the safety of our citizens. We do not compromise for the safety of our citizens. We do not cut corners and we do not share favours concerning the safety of our citizens. We therefore question the necessity for Statistics SA personnel to physically enter every household to obtain creditable statistics. Why can’t everything be done across the gate to guarantee the safety of the citizens? We have got no problem to be counted, but we must be counted without compromising our safety.
We advocate for a more discerning approach wherein law enforcement assistance or court warrants are sought when specific premises are flagged for irregularity, such as concealed occupants. So, we are not here to hide criminality, but we do not want to be treated as criminals and exposed to danger. Some of these Statistics SA officials are not vetted for some of the serious offenses. This approach should be the exceptions rather than the norm.
Regarding the proposed amendments concerning database sharing, the EFF urges caution as unintended consequences could compromise the independence and hard-earned credibility of Statistics SA. Presently, when Statistic SA reports on
anything nobody questions it. However, if these amendments are passed in their current form, it means that there is a risk that future pronouncements by Statistic SA on unemployment rates, for example, maybe met with scepticism as data may have been sourced from various other service providers, potentially undermining the veracity of the statistics. Why even venture into this abyss?
We envisage a truly independent and properly funded Statistics SA which should in fact be a Chapter 9 institution. We cannot be at the mercy of politicians as to when statistics should be released without addressing these concerns. The EFF cannot in good conscience support this otherwise reduce progressive amendments.
Sepedi:
Ke a leboga.
Ms N E NKOSI: Hon Deputy Chair, the Bill before the House seeks to enhance the role of the Statistician-General in co- ordinating the statistics ecosystem. We are in a digital age that requires the government to have quality data which will enhance decision-making and result in quality outcomes and
impact on society. Without quality information, we will not have the required evidence-based decision-making. In the period of big data and artificial intelligence, enhancing co- ordination and collaboration amongst the producers and data users is critical to ensure Statistics SA is in possession of useful data which focuses on various sectors and facets of human existence.
The Bill is critical as it empowers Statistics SA to develop and implement a national statistics system and a national strategy enabling the Statistician-General to have a comprehensive system enabling Statistics SA to harvest and disseminate data from and to the broadest sections possible. Harnessing this collaboration will ensure that a conducive environment for information sharing is enabled, which will impact the quality of statistics produced by Statistics SA and enhanced decision-making.
We have made an observation on the quality of spending in government and thus require an impact focus to advance the social and economic transformation of society. The new Bill mandates that all state institutions must have dedicated statistical units to improve government performance reporting
and other statistical reports across various sectors. This measure will enhance the quality of data and the scientific basis of decision-making to make a positive impact and improve public spending outcomes.
Statistics SA has been an effective state institution that respects human rights and works with law enforcement agencies to ensure its data collection does not make citizens vulnerable to crime. Thank you very much, hon Deputy Chair.
Question put: That the Bill, subject to proposed amendments, be agreed to.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
NATIONAL NUCLEAR REGULATOR AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Amendment Bill and Report of Select Committee on Land Reform, Environment, Mineral Resources and Energy thereon)
Ms T C MODISE: Hon Deputy Chair, the report on Select Committee on Land Reform, Environment, Mineral Resources and Energy on the National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill dated
7 May 2024.
The Bill was referred to the committee on 14 March 2024 where
... [Inaudible.] ... during the deliberation on 2 May 2024 the researcher ... public submission report detailed introducing the two submissions received, one was from Eskom and the other one was from form Western Cape Ministry of Local Government’s Environmental Affairs.
The latter could not be considered as ... [Inaudible.] ... Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, CoGTA, channels exist for other spheres of government’s legislative process including the comments on highlighting grammatical errors.
As the request was put forward to clarify several terms used in the Bill and the clarity is being sought regarding the process through which contravention of the legislation will be addressed.
A specific reference to clauses, including the inconsistency in the use of several terms in clause 1(b), (g) and (q) when compared to the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, glossary.
The clarification was sought whether the regulator may enforce a system of administrative fines via directives and criminalizing a certain aspect of noncompliance with required address in the regulator documents.
The department responded stating that the reference made to the IAEA glossary is not accurate. The glossary provides for member states but it’s a subject to the national law and how legislation changed the national circumstances ... [Inaudible.] ... the legislative terms ... [Inaudible.] ... glossary ... [Inaudible.] ... originated with ... [Inaudible.]
... it was ... [Inaudible.] ... to the state that the Bill is not aligned with the Constitution on the legislative ... [Inaudible.] ...
As the office of the ... [Inaudible.] ... the Bill ... [Inaudible.] ... if it did not pass the legal scrutiny.
Considering the response ... [Inaudible.] ... provided by the department, the committee will ... [Inaudible.] ... to acquire
... [Inaudible.] ... from State Law Advisor and later change in the court and found to be unconstitutional.
The State Law Advisor clarified that ... [Inaudible.] ... vetted by ... [Inaudible.] ... had ever been found unconstitutional.
The Select Committee on Land Reform, Environment, Minerals and Energy have ... [Inaudible.] ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): Sorry, Chairperson
...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E Lucas): We really ... [Inaudible.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): ... this is very bad. We can’t follow ...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E Lucas): Hon Modise ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): We can’t follow her. I suggest we pass this one and go to the next, and until the member sorts herself out wherever she is.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Deputy Chair, what were you waiting for? We’ve been subjected to this nonsense ... [Interjections.] ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE NCOP (Mr S J Mohai): ... [Inaudible.]
... be harassed by this loose member who’s ... [Interjections.] [Inaudible.] ... she wants ... [Interjections.] ...
AN HON MEMBER: It’s actually better than listening to what she’s actually saying.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E Lucas): Hon Modise, the last few sentences became really impossible to hear what you have been saying ... [Interjections.] ...
Ms M O MOKAUSE: We didn’t hear anything, the rest of the ...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E Lucas): ... because of your network that was very ... [Interjections.] ...
AN HON MEMBER: Haa [No], Mamokause [Ms Mokause], stop it!
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON (Ms S E Lucas): ... your connectivity is a problem. So, can you please sort the issues of connectivity whilst we go to the next order, and we will then revert back to you to deal with your specific order.
Hon Modise, did you hear me? Is it clear?
Ms T MODISE: Yes, Deputy Chair.
AN HON MEMBER: But she’s fine now, Chairperson ...
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Your
connectivity was extremely, extremely bad.
So, we will allow the next order to continue, and we will come back to you to conclude the business of the day with the order that you have been proposing. So, if you can just try to sort out your connectivity.
Hon delegates, we will now proceed to the Fifteenth Order.
SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Amendment Bill and report of Select Committee on Education and Technology, Sports, Arts and Culture thereon)
Mr M E NCHABELENG: Deputy House Chair, I’m presenting a report of the Select Committee on Education and Technology, Sports, Arts and Culture on the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sports Amendment Bill dated the 8 May 2024.
The Select Committee on Education and Technology, Sports, Arts and Culture, having received submissions on the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill, and having considered the written submissions, report as follows:
The draft Bill proposes to amend the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sport Act, 1997, so as to delete, amend and insert certain definitions to provide for consequential amendments in certain provisions.
To clarify that the institute is a public entity, the National Anti-Doping Organization in the Republic. To provide for results management.
To provide that investigations by the department must be conducted in a manner that is fair, transparent, just and equitable.
That primitive measures may only be imposed by the department after finding of non-compliance and to provide for matters connected therewith.
This is the process we followed.
On 26 March 2024 the National Assembly passed the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill, which was subsequently referred to the National Council of Provinces on 28 March 2024.
The select committee called for the written submissions by all interested parties on the Bill until 19 April 2024.
A written submission was received from the Western Cape Department of Sport, Recreation, Arts and Culture calling for an amendment to the wording in certain areas in the Bill.
However, in response to the written submissions by the Western Cape Department of Sports, Recreation, Arts and Culture, the SA Institute for Drug-Free Sport, an entity of the national Department of Sports, Arts and Culture, indicated that the amendment suggested by the Western Cape provincial department will not significantly affect the content within the Bill and may delay the adoption to the Bill, further risking South Africa’s compliance with the World Anti-Doping Agency, WADA, guidelines.
They, therefore, requested the members of the select committee to reconsider any further amendments to the B version of the Bill and accept the Bill as is; outcome of the select committee’s consideration of the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill.
On Wednesday, 8 May, the Select Committee on Education and Technology, Sports, Arts and Culture, having deliberated on and considered the subject of the SA Institute for Drug-Free
Sport Amendment Bill, referred to it as a section 75 Bill because that it has agreed to adopt the proposed Bill without amendments.
The committee considered the report on the process of finalizing the SA Institute of Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill and adopted the report without amendment and therefore, call upon the House to fully support this Bill. Thank you, hon Deputy House Chairperson. Thank you. Baie dankie.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): You are
demoting me to a Deputy House Chair? [Laughter.] It’s a bit too much.
Declaration of vote:
Ms K M MUTHWA: Deputy Chairperson, greetings to hon members of the House. The Bill, amongst other things, provides for an establishment of an Institute of the National Anti-Doping Organization in the Republic. A state entity responsible for fighting doping in sports.
This provision is related to another ... that of an adopting of a centralized stomping control programmes responsible for testing athletes with or without notice.
The EFF is pleased that the Bill makes provisions for the use of prohibited substance in case where medical reason exist for such use, and on condition that the need for such substance is reported to end sanctions by the anti-doping body.
Similarly, we welcome the establishment of an Anti-Doping Appeal Board which provides a mechanism for athletes to appeal the decision of the anti-doping body.
Taking into account of our history of exclusion here in the country and internationally, the Bill sets the standard for drug-free sport but it is also taking into cognisance the need of those who want to participate in sports but have certain medical conditions.
International sporting bodies such as those who vilified our own treasure athlete, Caster Semenya, with regulations that are degrading and invasive of privacy on grounds that are scientifically unjustifiable, regulations that are
incompatible with respect for women’s rights to body integrity, freedom from cruelty, inhumane and degrading treatment, dignity and non-discrimination, can learn a lot from this Bill.
We are also pleased that the Bill provides for sanctions against sporting federations that do not put in place proper mechanisms for dealing with doping.
The EFF, therefore, is in full support of mechanisms of cleaning up our sports to ensure that athletes with the best and natural ability can compete without having to resort to performance enhancing drugs.
It is for these reasons informed by the broad support displayed by public participation in the amendment of the Bill that the EFF is convinced that the Bill is in the best interest of all stakeholders who made their own inputs and not into the changes made.
As the EFF, therefore, we welcome the report and support the amendment Bill as tabled here. Thank you, Chairperson.
Question put: That the amendment Bill be agreed to.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution.
NATIONAL NUCLEAR REGULATOR AMENDMENT BILL ON LAND REFORM, ENVIRONMENT, MINERAL RESOURCES AND ENERGY
(Consideration of Bill and of Report of Select Committee thereon)
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): We must now return to the 14th Order tabled by hon Modise. Can we please come back to it. Hon Modise, I hope you have been able to improve your connection. And then you may present the report.
Ms T C MODISE: Thank you very much, hon Deputy Chair. Hon Mkiva will take it on my behalf, I have network problems at home.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: But we can hear you. Why are you relinquishing your ... [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Hon Mkiva,
can you please continue and table the report? Thank you.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: You are dodgy.
Mr M J MAGWALA: We welcome hon Mkiva. Come hon Mkiva.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Come, hon Mkiva, come.
Mr Z MKIVA: Allow me to table this report of the Select Committee on Land Reform Environment, Mineral Resources and Energy on the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill dated 7 May 2024. The Department of Agriculture Land Reform and Rural Development briefed the committee on 27 February 2024 on the Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill.
The Bill was referred to the committee on the 5th of December 2023, as a section 76 Bill. The committee called for the written comments on the Bill on 14 March 2024... [Interjections.]
Ms T C MODISE: Hon Chairperson?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Hold on
just a moment, hon Mkiva. The chairperson wants to say something. Hon Modise!
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Why is he fighting?
Ms T C MODISE: Hon Mkiva is supposed to read the Nuclear Amendment Bill, not the Land Bill. Thank you.
AN HON MEMBER: O tshegang wena?
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Can I have
order now? Hon Mkiva, the report that you are supposed to be reading is on the 14th Order, Consideration of Report National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill. That is the report we are supposed to be deliberating on now.
Ms M O MOKAUSE: Mkiva, you must leave this report.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): Can we have order here? This has nothing to do with the ANC. This is an issue which is procedural.
Mr Z MKIVA: Hon Chairperson, we can come back to this because I had opened another document. You can come back to me, and I will submit that, Bill. Can you move on to the next point now.
The DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF THE NCOP (Ms S E Lucas): This is the last item for the day. Order, hon members! Hon Modise, can you read the report.
NATIONAL NUCLEAR REGULATOR AMENDMENT BILL
(Consideration of Bill and of Report of Select Committee thereon)
Mr Z MKIVA: Chairperson, the report of the Select Committee on Land Reform that relates to the National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill section 75 is here. The Bill was referred to the committee on the 14th of March 2024 where after the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy briefed the committee on the 9th of April 2024.
On the 21st of March 2024, the committee placed an advertisement on the parliamentary website as well as on all electronic media platform calling for the public comments.
Only two submissions were received by the committee. During the deliberations of the 2nd of May 2024, the researcher introduced the public submission report details introducing the two submissions received. One was from Eskom and the other from the Western Cape Ministry of Local Government Environmental Affairs and Development Planning. The latter could not be considered as Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Cogta, channels exist for other spheres of government to interact with national departments in the legislative processes.
Eskom highlighted several concerns, including comments highlighting grammatical errors. A request was put forward to clarify several terms used in the Bill and clarity is being sought regarding the process through which contraventions of the legislation will be addressed.
Specific reference to clauses included inconsistencies in use of several terms in clause 1(b)(g) and(q), when compared to the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA’s glossary. And clarification was sought whether the regulator may enforce a system of administrative fines via directives and
criminalising certain aspects of non-compliance and requirements addressed in the regulatory documents.
The department responded stating that references made to the IAEA glossary is not accurate. The glossary is provided to member states but is subject to national law on how legislation changes national circumstances. The differences between glossary terms and legislative terms are as a result of this. Glossary terms are aligned with national legislation. It was further stated that it was incorrect to state that the Bill is not aligned with the Constitution or other legislative processes, as the Office of the Chief State Law Advisor would not have allowed to table the Bill if it did not pass the legal scrutiny.
Considering the response provided by the department, the committee wish to inquire from the state law adviser how many Acts signed into law by the President were later challenged in court and found to be unconstitutional. Chairperson, the state law advisor that clarified that none of the Bills vetted by herself had ever been found to be unconstitutional. Therefore, the Select Committee on Land Reform Environment, Mineral Resources and Energy having deliberated and considered the
subject of the national Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill, the National Assembly section 75 referred to and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism, JTM, as a section 75 Bill agrees to the Bill without amendments. That is the submission signed by the hon chairperson of the committee Ms T C Modise. The report is being put to the House for adoption. Thank you very much.
Debate concluded.
Question put.
Declarations of vote:
Mr M J MAGWALA: Deputy Chairperson, I greet you and the members in the Council, distinguished guests and all. The EFF supports the National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill. The National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill seeks to ensure that South Africa aligns itself with the international regulatory safety standards. To achieve this, we need to change the powers and functions of the National Nuclear Regulator Bill.
Our position as EFF is clear, we are holding on to stability, to energy supply, we must absolutely strive for a mix of energy sources, including the expansion of our nuclear
capacity beyond the Koeberg Nuclear Power Plant, which remains the only nuclear facility in Africa.
Nuclear must be a large part of our low carbon and efficient baseload source of energy. We must pursue this programme with the necessary agency, discipline and dedicated resources. We are unapologetic that South Africa should continue to maximise the use of coal and explore scientific technologies such as carbon capture and offsetting mechanism to ensure that we reduce emissions. Nuclear power will contribute as it is a low carbon source of electricity. Lastly, nuclear will give us the necessary energy security and independence, which is central to economic stability and security. We have witnessed in the past 15 years the damage caused by the unreliable supply of electricity on the economy because of electricity blackouts and loadshedding.
Hon members, we should immediately pursue a global co- operation with nations that have experienced a capacity to build large scale nuclear power plants. Countries such as Russia have done this many times, they have necessary experience and the correct political approach that allow for a build programme that is coherent, practical and will deliver a
nuclear power plant without unnecessary delays, including considering purchasing agreements.
Deputy Chairperson, lastly, nuclear energy would be central to the reindustrialisation of South Africa and African continent. The EFF supports the Nuclear Regulatory Authority Amendment Bill. Thank you.
Ms L C BEBEE: Hon Deputy Chairperson, the National Nuclear Regulation Bill has proposed an amendment to the National Nuclear Regulation Bill to align South Africa’s regulatory framework to align South Africa Regulatory Framework for nuclear safety with the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA,’s best practices.
The African National Congress supports the amendment to the Nuclear Regulatory Authority Amendment Bill since one of its primary objectives is to ensure Koeberg long term operation safety case is benched marked against the IAEA safety standards and international best practices. Put differently, the Nuclear Regulatory Authority Amendment Bill complements the African National Congress policy imperatives in the nuclear industry, as it empowers the National Nuclear
Regulator to oversee Koeberg long term operation in a manner that ensures that the plant complies with the nuclear safety standards to protect individuals’ society and environment against the identical hazards linked to the use of nuclear technology.
Chairperson, furthermore, prior to the amendments, the Nuclear Regulatory Authority was unable to exercise regulatory oversight over the assessment, manufacture of components, extended shutdown sufficient radiological hazard, radiation doses received by the flight crew and property exposed to radiation contamination during use intended for clearance by the South African National Defence Force, SANDF, to name a few.
Conversely, the omission of these activities not only prevented the Nuclear Regulatory Authority from fulfilling its mandate adequately and effectively but was also inconsistent with IAEA best practices. To remedy this, the amendments to sections 2 and 20 of the draft Bill provide an opportunity to broaden the scope of regulatory oversight and empower the NNR to regulate the omitted activities holistically.
Chairperson, more importantly, the amendment of section 2 of this Bill tasks the Nuclear Regulatory Authority with the possibility to oversee the crucial processes of selecting and evaluation sites suitable for the construction of nuclear power installations as part of the implementation of the 2500 megawatts nuclear new built programme.
In addition, to the above, the amendment of section 5 of the Bill empowers the Nuclear Regulatory Authority to exercise regulatory control related safety over the construction setting, decommissioning and closure of nuclear installations. This amendment is also attractive because it allows the Nuclear Regulatory Authority to play a critical role in ensuring that nuclear research reactors are designed and operated to achieve the highest safety standards that can be achieved. Therefore, this Bill allows the Nuclear Regulatory Authority to oversee the replacement of the Safari-1 with the reactor MPR so that the MPR can be designed and operated in such a way that all radiation sources remain under strict control. The ANC supports the Bill. I thank you, Chairperson.
Question put.
Voting
Bill agreed to.
Business concluded.
The Council adjourned at 14:39.
Audio
No related
Documents
Bills
- B18-2023 - Public Procurement Bill
- B31-2023 - Statistics Amendment Bill
- B7-2024 - Gold and Foreign Exchange Contingency Reserve Account Defrayal Amendment Bill
- B8-2021 - Preservation and Development of Agricultural Land Bill
- B4-2024 - Division of Revenue Bill
- B41-2023 - South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Amendment Bill
- B25-2023 - National Nuclear Regulator Amendment Bill