Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 04 Jun 2015


No summary available.








The House met at 14:00.


House Chairperson Mr C T Frolick, took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.






Ms S MCHUNU: Hon House Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates addressing the rising number of unemployed teaching graduates, especially black ones.


Rev K R J MESHOE: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ACDP:


That the House debates the implications of the decisions that was taken by the SA Football Association to make a payment of 10 million US dollars to the Confederation of North Central America and the Caribbean Association Football, given the present criminal investigations by the Federal Bureau of Investigations into the affairs of Football Association of South Africa, Fifa. Thank you.


Ms E N LOUW: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates the needs to separate our sports from politics and to prevent senior sports administrators from holding political office, as in the case of Danny Jordan, who is the President of Safa and a mayor of a municipality.


Ms D VAN DER WALT: Hon House Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates as a matter of urgency the scholar transport policy adopted by Cabinet last week. Thank you.


Ms A TUCK: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates investing more in research and innovation in order to create more jobs and more entrepreneurs.


Ms H O MAXO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates the ways Lonmin could have prevented the Marikana massacre, as shown by the Alternative Information and Development Center report entitled “Lonmin, the Marikana Massacre and the Bemuda Connection”, which shows that had Lonmin not engaged on illicit financial transfers, it will have been able to pay miners the R12 500 they demanded.


Mrs M R M MOTHAPO: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the mobilisation of state and civil society to deal with issues of crime in an integrated approach with active citizen involvement and co-responsibility.


Mr M HLENGWA: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the IFP:


That the House debates the socio-economic and political implications of the recent unemployment figures released by Statistics SA on youth development.


Mr W HORN: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the house, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the undemocratic and unconstitutional practices of the ANC in undermining the mandate of the Public Protector.


Ms N V NQWENISO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the EFF:


That the House debates the complicity of Botswana with the neo-colonial project of the United State through its support of the Africa Command Centre, a military project of the US based in Botswana, and what needs to be done towards isolating Botswana from the rest of Africa.


Ms D G MAHLANGU: Hon Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates building an inclusive society and economy to address the factors that still sustain inequalities through building capabilities and redressing the wrongs of the past. Thank you.


Mr M S F DE FREITAS: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the Road Accident Fund and how legislation in this regard can be amended to better serve road-crash victims. Thank you.


Ms M V MAFOLO: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates the extent to which local beneficiation could be affected in our mineral resources without undermining the unity of our people and their overall participation in all economic activities, without being prejudice by their geographical location. I thank you.


Ms Z B N BALINDLELA: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the urgent need to address the issue of raw sewage leaking into the tributaries that lead into the Midmar Dam in KwaZulu-Natal. Thank you, Chair.


Ms P S MABILO: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates strategies to capacitate communities and community organisations to assist in sustaining the rehabilitation of former prisoners, as well as their reintegration into community.


Mr T C R WALTERS: I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:

That the House debates the possibly identities of South African co-conspirators 15 and 16 and their involvement in the 2010 Soccer World Cup corruption scandal.


Ms N T NOVEMBER: Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the ANC:


That the House debates protecting and nurturing small businesses as they have the potential to uplift the country’s economy.


Ms K DE KOCK: Chair, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the Department of Social Development funding of non-governmental organisations, NGOs, and the effect this has on the availability of professional services in this sector.


Ms S J NKOMO: I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the IFP:


That the House debates the shockingly massive backlog of patients awaiting surgery at public hospitals around the country and how the Department of Health intends to undo this and prevent it from ever happening again. I thank you.


Mr J VOS: Mr Chairperson, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates the new job-killing visa regulations that were implemented without any regulatory or economic impact assessments being undertaken and urgently find solutions to strike a balance between our country’s safety and tourism facilitation. Thank you.


Mr H C C KRUGER: Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of the House, I shall move on behalf of the DA:


That the House debates women’s participation in the South African labour market which stands at just 45% and how this must be improved with the creation of more equal pay opportunity for women.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr M Q NDLOZI: House Chairperson, I move without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that the South African Football Association President, Danny Jordaan has confirmed that the 2010 Soccer World Cup Local Organising Committee, LOC, paid an amount of 10 million U$S to the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football, Concacaf, for what is called the diaspora legacy programme;


  1. further notes that law enforcement authorities in the US have interpreted this as a payment of bribe for South Africa to host the 2010 Soccer World Cup and have arrested some members of Federation of International Football Association, on charges of corruption and racketeering;


  1. acknowledges that Concacaf former general-secretary and member of Fifa has admitted that a Concacaf and as Fifa members, they received bribes which amongst others were meant to influence the decision on who host the 2010 Fifa World Cup;


  1. further acknowledges that the South African government has distanced itself from payments of bribe to any member of the Fifa executive or any continental football body for the purposes of hosting the Fifa Soccer World Cup;


  1. believes that the South African government and Parliament should never take the allegations of corruption and bribery lightly irrespective of where they come from;


  1. further believes that unless thoroughly investigated and exposed, the perception of the world will be that all of us in South Africa are corrupt and paid bribes in order to host the 2010 Fifa World Cup;


  1. calls on the South African law enforcement authorities to investigate the aim of answering the following questions:


  1. whether the local organising committee approved the donation of the money to Concacaf;
  2. who exactly approved the donation and, for what purpose;
  3. whether the donated money was used for football development in the Caribbean,
  4. whether there was other payments made to the LOC and its members, to the members of Fifa executive as alleged by Chuck Blazer;
  5. what happened to the profits of the 2010 Soccer World Cup in South Africa;
  6. whether South Africa gained, whether South Africa gained real economic value from hosting the 2010 Soccer World Cup and;
  7. why the LOC, specifically singled Jack Weiner as the person with judiciary duties over the 10 million U$S and further arranged for former President, Nelson Mandela, to pay a personal visit to him in Trinidad and Tobago, prior to the awarding of 2010 Soccer World Cup hosting rights


  1. confirms that South Africa’s probe into the scandal will prevent a possible situation where South African officials will be arrested and persecuted in other countries for crimes that our justice system can internally handle;


  1. further confirms that a speedy and prompt action of these developments is necessary and should be embraced by all members of Parliament.


Question put: That the motion be agreed to.


Motion objected to.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms L S MAKHUBELA-MASHELE: House Chairperson, I move without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes with great pride the conferring of a Legacy Award on Letta Mbulu by the International Women’s Forum on Friday, 22 May 2015, at the Sandton Convention Centre;


  1. further notes that this is due to her contribution to music and her role in the struggle  for a just and democratic society;
  2. recalls that this world acclaimed artist used her passion for music to provide hope, and tell a story that captivates many of her supporters;


  1. further recalls that her contributions have also been widely and internationally acknowledged;


  1. believes that South Africa is enriched by the tapestry of music and culture that embodies  her songs and dance; and


  1. congratulates Letta Mbulu for the award, and wishes her more success in her future endeavours.


Question put: That the motion be agreed to.


Agreed to.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Chairperson, I noticed that the member who just spoke now was not objecting to the motion of the EFF to investigate the allegations of corruption, she was raising her hand to be recognised by you, because she does not have the mandate of the Whipery of the ANC as a result.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Shivambu, she has just indicated again that she has objected to that motion.


MS N F SHIVAMBU: But corruption must be investigated.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, there’s an objection.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, most of the time we waste time here, for something that is absolutely for us to discuss. The comrades from the EFF know that the police have announced that they are investigating this matter. So, there’s absolutely no reason why we are asked to do what they are already doing.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order! Thank you, hon Chief Whip.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr B M BHANGA: House Chairperson, I move without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that the new SRC at the University of Fort Hare has pledged an astonishing R300 000 to provide meal allowances to students at the university currently going hungry;


  1. further notes that the money will be used to support the National Financial Aid Scheme, Nsfas, students as an interim measure until the university comes to the table with improved meal allowances;


  1. acknowledges that up until now, students were given a dismal R13 per day as a meal allowance;


  1. further acknowledges that R13 per day is an unacceptable amount and has led to hunger and malnutrition of thousands of students at the institution;


  1. congratulates the students of Fort Hare for their remarkable activism, show of solidarity and dedication to the cause of not having a single student going hungry; and


  1. applauds the new SRC at the University of Fort Hare for putting basic human rights first and for introducing this initiative to the institution for the first time in its history.


Question put: That the motion be agreed to.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon Bhanga knows that the ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Are you objecting, hon Chief Whip?




The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Thank you.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: He knows that it is not true.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, wait, Chief Whip! Hon members, when it comes to the motions without notice, it’s sufficient simply to say you object. If we allow debate after each and every motion, then we will sit here for a very long this afternoon. The objection, therefore, is in order. The substance can be dealt with outside the meeting.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, we thought that if we propose the amendment the ANC might be persuaded - just one line to the motion that was raised.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, hon member! The procedure according to which we work is that ... [Interjections.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: The DA can simply say, having taken ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, don’t amend the DA’s motion for them. Your relationship with the DA can be discussed outside the meeting. The Chief Whip is here.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr A M MATHLOKO: House Chairperson, I move without notice:

That the House –


  1. notes that as part of our responsibility as the economic emancipation movement the EFF embarked on a listening campaign in Mpumalanga, where we uncovered unspeakable levels of corruption and complete disregard for the well-being of our people perpetrated by the ANC;


  1. further notes that the residents of Tshotshotsho Village have no running water and only receive water from the municipality tanks which is sold for R2 a bucket, when there is a funeral or a wedding in the area;


  1. acknowledges that when the government decide to install water tanks in the village it will save lots of money for the government, as it will eliminate the need for maintaining and buying water tanks;


  1. further acknowledges that the residents of this village say that for any kind of a job opportunity that arises, people are asked to produce ANC membership cards before they can be considered for employment;


  1. urges the ANC to stop playing politics with the well-being of the poor and provide water to the people of Tshotshotsho.


Question put: That the motion be agreed to.


The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY: I object, hon House Chair.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms L S MAKHUBELE-MASHELE: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the ANC without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that General Assembly of the United Nation in its Resolution 66/127 designated 15 June as World Elder Abuse Awareness Day;


  1. further notes that the global population of people aged 60 years and older, will be more than double from 542 million in 1995 to about 1,2 billion in 2025;


  1. recognises that between 4% and 6% of elderly people have experienced some form of maltreatment in their homes;


  1. further recognises that the abuse of elderly people is a global social problem that affects the health and human rights of millions of senior citizens;


  1. believes that all human have the right to age dignity and free from neglect, abuse and violence;


  1. further believes that this abuse deserves the attention of international community; and


  1. calls upon all governments, civic society, churches and communities to protect its elderly citizens and report the abuses of elderly people to social workers and the police.




(Draft Resolution)

Mr M HLENGWA: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the IFP without notice:


That the House –


  1. congratulates A B de Villiers on winning five awards last night at the Cricket South Africa Awards;


  1. notes that Mr de Villiers has won the prestigious South African Cricketer of the Year award for the second successive year;


  1. acknowledges that it is important that such accolades are awarded to our sporting heroes as it keeps them motivated, and thus they always aim to succeed even more; and


  1. wishes all the winners including umpires, grounds staff and scorers, without whose contribution the game cannot be played, another great year on the field and that they keep shining bright.


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr M S MALATSI: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the DA without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that earlier today, the Hawks officially announce that they will conduct an investigation into South Africa’s possible involvement in the bribery allegations about the 2010 Soccer World Cup;


  1. acknowledges that the Minister of Sport and Recreation, the hon Mbalula has repeatedly denied that $10 million transaction ever occurred;


  1. further acknowledges that the head of the 2010 Local Organising Committee, nowadays part-time Mayor of Nelson Mandela Bay, Mr Jordaan, seems to contradict the Minister by admitting that $10 million transaction did in fact occur;


  1. calls on the Hawks to investigate this matter free from any political interference and in a transparent manner that will provide South Africa with the answers that we need; and


  1. also calls on to the Hawks to expedite this investigation in order to put the matter to rest and restore our nation’s international standing as soon as possible.


Mr M HLENGWA: I rise on a point of order. I know the motion I read won’t be objected to, but as a matter of procedure, could you please to it to the House. You jumped that.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): My apologies hon member. The Motion without Notice that dealt with congratulating A B De Villiers for achieving for the second year in a row South African Cricketer of the Year award. Are there any objections to that?




The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No objections. It was recorded.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms H O MAXON: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the EFF without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that the current Minister of State Security, David Mahlobo, and the former Minister of Intelligence, Siyabonga Cwele, who are responsible for managing spies are the ones that went to Mpumalanga to welcome back their ANC spies they have sent to destabilise the EFF, desperado;


  1. notes that their covert political agenda against the EFF failed dismally. We wonder why they had to make fools of themselves in this particular manner;


  1. further notes that while these two chief handlers of ANC spies claimed to have been welcoming over 1000 members of the EFF back into ANC, they were only welcoming back a handful spies of about 10 or so and the rest were rented crowd from the ZANC;


  1. their failure at intelligence operations is not something new. Siyabonga Cwele, has a wife who is in jail for drugs dealing. This happened under his nose when he was the Minister of Intelligence. Oh, what a shame. David Mahlobo is on record as admitting that conducting intelligence gathering from questionable blocs, which purports that the Public Protector and the Commander-in-Chief of the EFF, President Julius Sello Malema, are agents of the Central Intelligence Agency, CIA;


  1. further notes that incompetence of this Minister of State Security and this preoccupation with EFF, is a serious threat to national security; and


  1. notes that the EFF is leaps and bounds in Mpumalanga and is on course to take over municipality in Mbombela, Inkomazi, Ehlanzeni and others in the next local government elections. Down with spies down!


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): May I also just remind hon members that these different motions must be made available to the NA Table staff before 12 O’clock, I’ve just received a list of them as it is the agreement amongst the different Whips of Parties. Can we stick to that agreement, please?




(Draft Resolution)


Ms L S MAKHUBELE-MASHELE: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the ANC without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that two South African soldiers riflemen, Ashwin Zes and Zongezile Victor Nkohla were among the 125 soldiers, police and civilians that were posthumously awarded at the Dag Hammarskjöld Medal at the United Nations Headquarters in New York as part of the commemoration of the International of the UN Peacekeepers;


  1. further notes that the riflemen, Ashwin Zes and Zongezile Victor Nkohla died last year while serving in the United Nation’s organisation stabilisation mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo;
  2. recalls that about 3 358 soldiers, police and civilians died while carrying out the United Nation’s peacekeeping duty as a result of acts of violence, accidents and diseases;


  1. acknowledges the dangers and risks our soldiers have to go through as they discharge their duties to bring peace and stability in countries that are engulfed with conflicts; and


  1. we further salute their honour and bravery in which they carried out their mission as well as putting South Africa on the world map.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): The Chief Whip of the UDM


Mr L S KWANKWA: Ndicela ukuthetha ngesiXhosa kuqala ndithi, maqabane siyamosha. Apha bekukho isiphakamiso esiyilwayo ebesithetha ngemfundiso kwinto edibaniselene nabantu abadala nokuchasa ukuxhatshazwa kwabo. Abantu abasibukele emakhaya baza kuthini xa siza kuphikisa isiphakamiso esithetha ngomngeni okhoyo? Loo nto ayilunganga. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)

[Mr L S KWANKWA: First and foremost, I would like to speak in isiXhosa and say, comrades we are destructive. There was a proposed suggestion about raising awareness on issues concerning the elderly and the fight against their abuse. What are the people watching at home going to say when we object to such a proposal that addresses the existing challenges? That is not right.]


I understand that there are challenges where there are objections and counter objections ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, that is not a motion, you are ...


Mr L S KWANKWA: It is a motion in isiXhosa.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No, now you are introducing and prefacing what you are saying. You are out of order. Will you get into the motion please?


Mr L S KWANKWA: I move on behalf ... but what I said is indeed true.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): No hon member, you have to read your motion.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr L S KWANKWA: House Chairperson, I move on behalf of the UDM without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes with sadness that on 23 May 2015, it was reported that mathematician and Nobel Prize winner, John Nash, was killed in a car crash along with his wife in New Jersey;


  1. recalls that Mr Nash received his PhD in mathematics from Princeton in 1950 and he spent much of his time there;


  1. further notes that Mr Nash was awarded a Nobel Prize for economics in 1994, for his work on game theory and the mathematics of decision making;


  1. acknowledges that according to his biography, he began experiencing what he describe as mental illness in 1959 after marrying Alicia, and a film A Beautiful Mind was loosely based on his battle with schizophrenia;


  1. further acknowledges that the story of Mr Nash and his wife moved millions of readers and moviegoers who were inspired at his courage in the face of daunting challenges;


  1. conveys its sincere condolences to the Nash family, friends and former colleagues as his passing is a great loss to the academic community.


Agreed to.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: No, no Chair, a quick clarity through you.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Can I just complete this process please.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: No Chair, there is a huge confusion because we don’t know if the IsiXhosa part is part of the motion he read.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, that is why I asked the hon member to start reading the motion, and the motion that we have received here at the Table, deals with exactly the issue of the mathematician that has died in a car crash. I cautioned the hon member before he read that, that he should not preface his motion by making other remarks. This is not a free-for-all debate. You get up, you raise your motion and the House decide whether they agree with it or not. So, the preface is not part of the motion.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Yes, just before Chair, I think the hon member must be seriously warned and he must not do that again. We are dealing with serious business of the House and we don’t want to be confused, particularly IsiXhosa, it is not right.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Your concern is noted and it has been addressed. No hon members, no hon members, let us observe and obey the Rules of the House. We are at the Order were we deal with Motions without Notice. I’ve dealt with the matter of the hon Chief Whip of the UDM. Hon Chief Whip of the UDM, would you take your seat please, I want to put your motion to the House.

Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms S J NKOMO: House Chairperson, the IFP moves without notice


That the House –


  1. congratulates South African Airways (SAA) Cargo for issuing an embargo on the transportation of hunting trophies which became effective from 21 April 2015;


  1. acknowledges that this is the first major airline to put in place sending the South African trophy hunting industry into a tailspin;


  1. further acknowledges that global aviation giantEmirates Airlines, has also put in place this embargo which will come into effect from 15 May 2015;


  1. appreciates that this is a brave move by SAA Cargo which is a major stakeholder in the tourism industry in Africa and it has taken a proactive decision to help protect and conserve our rich and diverse natural heritage; and
  2. hopes that now other international airlines will follow suit and refuse to play a part in the wildlife trafficking supply chain.


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms C N MAJEKE: Thank you chair, I move on behalf of the UDM


That the House –


  1. notes that a small, solemn memorial service was held close to a recently discovered shipwreck where over 200 African slaves drowned to the bottom of the sea;


  1.  further notes that the Portuguese ship was sailing from Mozambique to Brazil when it sank in turbulent waters near Cape Town in december 1794;


  1. acknowledges that researches say it is the first time that the remains of a slave ship that went down with slaves aboard has been identified;


  1. further acknowledges that the director of the National Museum of African American History will be attending the public symposium, called “Bringing The Sao Jose Into Memory” in Cape Town today; and he has stated that locating, documenting, and preserving this cultural heritage through the Sao Jose has the potential to reshape our understandings of a part of history that has been considered unknowable”; and


  1. congratulates the researchers who have dedicated their time and restoring a part of history that is essential for Africans to know.


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr M S MBATHA: The EFF move without notice:

That the House –


  1. notes that the residents of ward 27 Kanyamazane in Mpumalanga were evicted from rondavels farms which they have lodged land claims and that residents have been going in and out of courts for the past 10 years and that these farms are under the claims


  1. further notes that the similar land claim was lodged by Matafeli community in Mbombela, that this community has been sent from pillar to post by the ANC government and the courts for over 10 years


  1. acknowledges that even the area where the Mbombela stadium is situated is under the land claim, and that there are about 12 villages who have lodged land claims on the Kruger national park and that all this claims have not yet been finalized, it does seems that all the claims in Mpumalanga take ridiculously long to be resolved


  1. further acknowledges that the ANC government has been moving at a snail pace when it comes to the matters of returning the land back to the black people from whom it was stolen, and that there is no political will, no administrative capacity to deal decisively with land reform and urges the ANC government to respect and restore the dignity of our people and make sure that the land claims and the land return to its rightful owners.


THE HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): I put the motion, are there any objections?


Hon member: We object


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): There is an objection.




(Draft Resolution)


Ms D CARTER moved without notice:


That the House –


  1. notes that Mr Mathew ‘Bushy’ McKelvey, a resident of Pietermaritzburg has officially broken a Guinness World Record for the longest distance covered on a motorcycle in a period of 24 hours;


  1. further notes that Mr McKelvey achieved this feat on the Phakisa Freeway in Welkom , covering a staggering 3 257.5 km at an average speed of 200 km per hour;


  1. recognises that Mr McKelvey accomplished this remarkable achievement despite being a double amputee;


  1. commends Mr McKelvey for dedicating the new world record to the awareness of Multiple Sclerosis (MS) and the help he can afford to the sufferers of MS; and


  1. congratulates him for his success, his endurance and his singular commitment to the betterment of humanity.


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION moved without notice:

That the House –


  1. on it’s next sitting discuss the ethicacy of fire pools and the fight against ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Chief Whip, you know that is not a motion without notice, you know that very well, so I will excuse you for this one, there at the back there another ... [Interjetions.], order hon members. Hon member at the back is that a motion without notice?


Mr M L W FILTANE: Yes it is


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Then you may proceed.




(Draft Resolution)


Mr M L W FILTANE: I move without notice on behalf of the UDM


That the House –


  1. notes the tragic death of a 12 year old student in KwaZulu-Natal Primary school who was shot dead during crossfire, after three gunmen entered their classroom to kill a teacher, Vusi Ntombela, a 47 year old man who was also the speaker of the Nguthu Municipality;


  1. further notes that this incident took place whilst the students were in the class writing their examination;


  1. condemns these killings that took place in an environment that is meant for acquiring knowledge;


  1. commends police for their speedy reaction who caught up with the alleged suspects who killed the teacher and the student; and 


  1. calls for a collective effort between the responsible departments to double up their security in ensuring safety at all our institution of learning.


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY: Chairperson, I move:


That the House, notwithstanding Rule 29, which provides for the sequence of proceedings, resolves that there will be no notices of motion and motions as referred to in Rule 97(g) on 9 and 10 June 2015


Agreed to.




(Draft Resolution)


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY: Chairperson, I move:


That the House –


  1. in terms of section 2(1) of the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act, 1998 (Act No 20 of 1998), and having due regard to the criteria listed in that subsection, determines the salary payable to the President of the Republic of South Africa at R2 753 689 per annum with effect from 1 April 2014; and


  1. in terms of section 2(1) of the said Act, determines the amount of R120 000 per annum as that portion of the remuneration of the President to which section 8(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1962 (Act No 58 of 1962) shall apply.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon members, I will now put the motion. Are there any objections? Order! There are objections. [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: Don’t tell me to sit down!


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members! Hon Shivambu, can you just take your seat, please! I’m still busy, and I will acknowledge you now.


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: I want to know, when do we make declarations?


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): I will acknowledge you now.



The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): I’m still in the process. [Interjections.]


Mr N F SHIVHAMBU: But you must caution your Minister of [Inaudible] ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon Shivambu, order! Hon member, take your seat please. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Hon member, take your seat please! Hon members, there are objections.


Question put.


Division demanded.


Mr M S MBATHA: Imali engaka! [So much money!]


Declarations of Vote:

The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon House Chairperson, and everyone present, we are here as Parliament to consider a very important matter. Let’s contextualize it; South Africa‘s economy is only growing at 1,4%, yet we are proposing that we should give the President a 5% increase. Surely, we should recognise the fact that it’s due to his bad political leadership that the people of this country are losing their work, but instead we want to pay him more. How can that be?


More seriously, it’s the fact that the President incurs many costs to the state. This is a crucial matter that means that we must assess the President. When we ask him to deliver a report, he considers it for months on end and then it takes too long to come here. Yet, this House wants to vote that we must give him an increase, for what reason?


And even more seriously, President Jacob Zuma, we have already given him a 100-year advance on his salary when we allowed him to stay in a house that was built for R200 million in Nkandla. [Applause.]


We simply cannot say that President Zuma must refuse to pay back money to the people of South Africa but, you and I, today, want to approve an increase for his salary.


Secondly, there is a section here that speaks to the tax matter; Im fascinated to learn other provisions in President Zuma‘s salary that says he must pay back the fringe benefit tax for his house in Nkandla. Has those provisions been made?

But, hon members let us not make the same mistake that Eskom made. Eskom paid its executives a bonus and an increase and the executives’ moved away, and today South Africans are facing load-shedding. You and I cannot give an increase to a leader who will leave South Africa’s economy in the dark and more South Africans without work while his worth gets an increase. [Applause.]


So, I am here to request - the Constitution makes it clear that the President is supposed to call and can put forward commissions of inquiry. He put one on the NPA boss then withdrew it, now we are paying an exit bonus to Mr Nxasana.


Hon members, South Africans deserve a better leader and better direction. We, as this House, in Parliament can make a strong statement that while South Africa’s economy is not growing at the right level, the President cannot get an increase that he is demanding. In fact, we must make a provision for him to pay back the R52 million back to the people of South Africa for his residential upgrades in Nkandla.


I oppose this motion. I don’t believe the President must get an increase, and I think this House must take a strong stance and hold him accountable for this economy going in the wrong direction and for his benefits in Nkandla.


Mr N V SHIVHAMBU: Hon Chair, the EFF stands here to reject with contempt the request of Mr Zuma, the President of the ANC, to receive a salary increase. As a matter of fact, as taxpayers, as this government, and as this Parliament, we pay for everything else that Mr Zuma does. We feed him, we dress him, we pay for his legal fees. We even built a cattle kraal and a chicken run. [Laughter.]


The official residences that he occupies in KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, Pretoria, and here in Cape Town, are paid by the state. His wives are paid by the state; his children are paid by the state; and on top of that we still need to give him an additional salary when workers are asking for a mere 10%. The public servants are asking for a mere 10% into their salaries to be able to take care of their daily lives, to be able to afford goods and services whose prices have increased across the board; petrol prices are increasing again now and food is expensive. But come here as this Parliament, which is supposed to be the representative of the people, to increase a salary of the President. We reject the increase request for the salary of the President.

In any workplace, salary increases and bonuses are given to people who are doing something. What is Mr Zuma doing? We really can’t give him the money; we do not want to give him the money. And I think we must appeal to the conscience of every Member of Parliament here, which ever political party you come from, let us not give this man a salary increase.


Dr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson, the procedure that ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Order, hon members!


Dr C P MULDER: The procedure that we are following this afternoon should be a mere formality. It has been that case since 1994. Each and every year, the practice was basically that the Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers would make a determination and that the President would then accept that, amend that, and it would be gazetted. Then the House would come together and move the kind of a motion that the hon Chief Whip of the Majority Party put before the House this afternoon.


It’s a formality; it should have been like this. It has been like this since 1994. Now, the question is: Why today, for the first time in 21 years, we have an objection to this motion? Why? [Interjections.] The mere fact that we have that kind of objection should indicate to us that there is a problem. And we know what that problem is. When the President stood here last week and he mocked the elected out there with regard to Nkandla, you should have expected this to happen.


We are talking about R246 million of taxpayers’ money being spent. Where? On the private residence of the President. Ordinary people out there, who every get up and go to work, struggle to earn a salary and pay their taxes are not all that happy about that kind of reality. We should understand that.


So, hon Chairperson, although there should have been a mere formality I cannot see my way up open for the first time in 21 years to vote for this motion. Why? I think its time to send a clear message to the President, to his own party and to the world out there that this is not right. We cannot accept that. So, in the light of that hon Chairperson I would like to move an amendment.


I hereby move on behalf of the FFP that all the words after “That the House” be deleted and be replaced, and indicate then that the salary of the President be reduced to R1. [Applause.]


Mrs C DUDLEY: Chairperson, sadly the ACDP will not be able to vote for or support this motion. It is very clear that the mood of the people in South Africa is something that will not support this and as representatives of the people that we are here to represent we cannot support this motion. Thank you. [Applause.]


Mr W M MADISHA: Hon Chair, it was last year when the President stood up here and said that he does not want any increase, yet he came back, of course, later and said that others gave him that increase. For us to once again rise and say that he must get it, it means there is a problem amongst some of us of course.


Let me emphasise that some amongst us here do not agree or refuse to agree that the people of South Africa are suffering. They refuse to agree that more than 40% of the people of South Africa are not employed; that the majority of South Africans who are employed are not getting a living wage. You don’t have to go far, go just outside the people who are giving you food here or who are transporting you home - how much are they getting? Less than R25000 and some less than R2800 - you can’t truly agree with that kind of thing. How much is the President earning? Over and above what he is earning, his wives are getting R2800 [Interjections.] for – please listen - R2800 – I am talking about airtime. They are getting about R3000 for groceries and we are talking about millions other R35 000. Underline R35 000 in their pockets; therefore, each and every month over and above that which the President gets, R15 million goes into his own massive household.


So, what is exactly happening to the people of South Africa? Please let us not agree with this; unless we want to destroy our country all together. All these thousands plus all those millions into his home, plus free transport, plus lots and lots of bodyguards and lots and lots of smiling and dancing. We can’t allow this kind of thing. Please don’t agree. Thank you very much. [Applause.]


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: The hon House Chair! [Interjections.]Hon House Chair!


Mr N T GODI: I pressed the “to talk button” because I thought to make declarations one does not have to take the long journey to the podium.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr C T Frolick): Unfortunately your request did not register here hon member.


Mr N T GODI: Alright. Hon Chairperson, [Interjections.] unfortunately it appears that politicking seems to affect almost anything and everything that we deal with in the House. The motion that has been put by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party is the product of the report by an independent commission. And I think as somebody has already indicated that this has been the tradition and this was suppose to be merely a formality because it is a second part to the first part that dealt with our own salaries. It is merely the completion of a process... [Applause.] ... and I think that in all fairness and in all reasonableness, there is no reason and there can be no basis for members to reject the motion as it stands. I think that the House should allow that motion to pass. Thank you.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon House Chair, I viewed the motions aside, separate from the motion because the motion is specific according to what the judge has suggested to this House for us to approve. We support the judge on his own decision that was not influenced by the motions from the other side. From our side we don’t believe that somebody is guilty before he has been sentenced. Even criminals in court ... [Interjections.] ... even prisoners – even though they may have killed people they get fed, they get housed, they get protected and they get all the other necessities of life and rights because in South Africa we are governed by the Constitution, we are not governed by emotions. In our case, therefore, we don’t believe that there is a conflation or the fudging of the views based on the emotions. We believe we must follow the law. I was quoting the Constitution in the law here and we, therefore, will support the judge in his proposal. Thank you.


Dr C P Mulder moved as an amendment: To omit all the words after ``That’’ and substitute with: the salary of the President be reduced to R1.00.


Question put: That the amendment as moved by Dr C P Mulder be agreed to.


Division demanded.


The House divided.


AYES - 89: America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Breytenbach, G; Cardo, M J; Carter, D; Chance, R W T; Chewane, H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Esau, S; Figg, M J; Figlan, A M; Gana, S M; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Hadebe, T Z; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hoosen, M H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; James, L V; Jongbloed, Z; Kalyan, S V; Kohler, D; Kruger, H C C; Krumbock, G R; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lorimer, J R B; Lotriet, A; Louw, E N; Mackay, G; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madisha, W M; Maimane, M A; Majola, T R; Marais, S J F; Marais, E J; Matlhoko, A M; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; Mc Gluwa, J J; Mcloughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mokgalapa, S; Motau, S C; Mubu, K S; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Ndlozi, M Q; Nqweniso, N V; Paulsen, M N; Rabotapi, M W; Robinson, D; Shinn, M R; Shivambu, N F; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steenkamp, J; Stubbe, D J; Swart, S N; Terblanche, J F; Twala, D L; Van Dalen, P; Van Damme, P T; Van Der Walt, D; Van Der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Volmink, H C; Vos, J; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G; Wilson, E R.


NOES - 201: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; Bam-Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, N R; Bhengu, F; Bilankulu, N K; Bongo, B T; Booi, M S; Boroto, M G; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Didiza, A T; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dunjwa, M L; Faku, Z C; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gumede, D M; Hlengwa, M; Holomisa, S P; Jafta, S M; Joemat-Pettersson, T M; Johnson, M; Kalako, M U; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, M D; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kilian, J D; Koornhof, G W; Kota-Fredricks, Z A; Kubayi, M T; Kwankwa, N L S; Landers, L T; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mantashe, P T; Maphatsoe , E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Maseko, L M; Mashatile, S P; Mashego-Dlamini, K C; Mashile, B L; Masina, M C; Masondo, N A; Masuku, M B; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mbete, B; Mbinda, L R; Mchunu, S; Mdakane, M R; Memela, T C; Mjobo, L N; Mkhize, H B; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga - Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokoto, N R; Molebatsi, M A; Moloi-Moropa, J C; Morutoa, M R; Mothapo, M R M; Motimele, M S; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, J M; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndabeni-Abrahams, S T; Ndongeni, N; Nel, A C; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nkwinti, G E; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Ntombela, M L D; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Oliphant, G G; Oosthuizen, G C; Peters, E D; Phaahla, M J; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, B A; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Scheepers, M A; Semenya, M R; Shabangu, S; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Smith, V G; Sotyu, M M; Thabethe, E; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tom, X S; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; v R Koornhof, N J J; Van Der Merwe, L L; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Xasa, T; Xego-Sovita, S T; Zulu, L D.


ABSTAIN - 2: Buthelezi, M G; Esterhuizen, J A.


Question not agreed to.


Amendment accordingly negatived.


Question put: That the motion moved by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party be agreed to.


Division demanded.

The House divided.


AYES - 203: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; Bam-Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, N R; Bhengu, F; Bilankulu, N K; Bongo, B T; Booi, M S; Boroto, M G; Brown, L; Buthelezi, M G; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Didiza, A T; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini, B O; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dunjwa, M L; Faku, Z C; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gumede, D M; Hlengwa, M; Holomisa, S P; Jafta, S M; Joemat-Pettersson, T M; Johnson, M; Kalako, M U; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, M D; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khubisa, N M; Khunou, N P; Kilian, J D; Koornhof, G W; Kota-Fredricks, Z A; Kubayi, M T; Kwankwa, N L S; Landers, L T; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Madella, A F; Madlopha, C Q; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadzi, D P; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlalela, A F; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlangu, J L; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Mantashe, P T; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapisa-Nqakula, N N; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Maseko, L M; Mashatile, S P; Mashego-Dlamini, K C; Mashile, B L; Masina, M C; Masondo, N A; Masuku, M B; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mbete, B; Mbinda, L R; Mchunu, S; Mdakane, M R; Memela, T C; Mjobo, L N; Mkhize, H B; Mkongi, B M; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mncwabe, S C; Mncwango, M A; Mnganga - Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mokoto, N R; Molebatsi, M A; Moloi-Moropa, J C; Morutoa, M R; Mothapo, M R M; Motimele, M S; Mpontshane, A M; Mpumlwana, L K B; Msimang, C T; Mthembu, J M; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndabeni-Abrahams, S T; Ndongeni, N; Nel, A C; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkomo, S J; Nkwinti, G E; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Ntombela, M L D; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Oliphant, G G; Oosthuizen, G C; Peters, E D; Phaahla, M J; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Plouamma, M A; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, B A; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Scheepers, M A; Semenya, M R; Shabangu, S; Shelembe, M L; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Sithole, K P; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Smith, V G; Sotyu, M M; Thabethe, E; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tom, X S; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; Tuck, A; v R Koornhof, N J J; Van Der Merwe, L L; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Xasa, T; Xego-Sovita, S T; Zulu, L D.


NOES - 88: America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Breytenbach, G; Cardo, M J; Carter, D; Chance, R W T; Chewane, H; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Dudley, C; Esau, S; Figg, M J; Figlan, A M; Gana, S M; Groenewald, P J; Grootboom, G A; Hadebe, T Z; Hill-Lewis, G G; Hoosen, M H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; Jongbloed, Z; Kalyan, S V; Kohler, D; Kruger, H C C; Krumbock, G R; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lorimer, J R B; Lotriet, A; Louw, E N; Mackay, G; Mackenzie, C; Macpherson, D W; Madisha, W M; Maimane, M A; Majola, T R; Marais, E J; Marais, S J F; Matlhoko, A M; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; Mc Gluwa, J J; Mcloughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mokgalapa, S; Motau, S C; Mubu, K S; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Ndlozi, M Q; Nqweniso, N V; Paulsen, M N; Rabotapi, M W; Robinson, D; Shinn, M R; Shivambu, N F; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Stubbe, D J; Swart, S N; Terblanche, J F; Twala, D L; Van Dalen, P; Van Damme, P T; Van Der Walt, D; Van Der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Volmink, H C; Vos, J; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G;Wilson, E R.


Question agreed to.


Motion accordingly agreed to.




(Member’s Statement)


Ms N R MOKOTO (ANC): Chairperson, the ANC government has committed to making education one of its foremost priorities which aim to ensure that every child has a textbook for every learning area and that the retrieval of textbooks is improved.


However, the ANC is shocked and dismayed by the conduct of the Western Cape Education department, which has denied learners from Maitland High School textbooks and study material since January. As the ANC, we find this unacceptable and deplorable, ... [Interjections.] ... especially with the exams coming up. [Interjections.]


Does the DA purportedly lie by stating that “where we govern, we have delivered the country’s best performance, ... [Interjections.] ... scores in education, health, service delivery and clean governance, remains disputable. In reality the delay in delivering books to the Maitland High School clearly shows that the DA government has no regard for education of our children and has performed dismally bad.


The ANC therefore supports thorough investigation into this matter. Those that are responsible must ... [Interjections.] ... be brought to book, exposed and penalised heavily. I thank you, Chairperson.




(Member’s Statement)


Mr A G WHITFIELD (DA): House Chair, last year before the general elections our number one President and number one jet-setter, President Jacob Zuma jetted into Port Elizabeth and misled the people of Nelson Mandela Bay when he promised that national government would fully fund the completion of the Nooitgedacht Water Scheme.


Last week, Minister Nomvula Mokonyane insulted the people of Nelson Mandela Bay when she announced a bail out of just R120 million for the R450 million water scheme. This is one quarter of the total required funding and is a desperate attempt to cover for the President’s broken promise.


Nooitgedacht has been a priority project for Nelson Mandela Bay for over seven years yet the metro has repeatedly stalled the project, squandered the funds, blamed national government and overseen massive water losses.


While the President floats about his fire pool at Inkandla ... [Interjections.] ... the people of Nelson Mandela Bay face imminent water shedding with metro-wide water restrictions hanging over their heads. Cutting water to residents is the solution that the ANC has chosen rather than fixing the broken infrastructure which has amounted to the tune of R4 billion.


The cost of water losses in Nelson Mandela Bay are the highest in any metro in South Africa at R329 million. This is a shocking R120 million up from the previous financial year or in ANC parlance, half an Inkandla. Over 33% of the metro’s water is lost due to unmaintained broken pipes and pumps. In contrast, where the DA government in Cape Town, we have managed to ... [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Ms N V NQWENISO (EFF): House Chair, the EFF condemns in the strongest terms the unlawful demolitions in Maiden farm Mthatha by the cowardly and spineless King Sabata Dalindyebo Municipality. This municipality has repeatedly demolished the houses of ordinary people against a court interdict which was presented to them on site by the sheriff of the court. But, regardless of these developments, they went ahead with their unlawful act, leaving many of our people including children, helpless and destitute.


This municipality reflects the character of the ANC government today, that it is a heartless government which does not respect the constitutional rights of our people to settle peacefully wherever they choose to as they claim this year is the year of the Freedom Charter.


This ANC government is hell-bent on stripping our people of their dignity and their humanity and it has demonstrated many times de to its failure to provide services that they have no interest in our people. Unashamedly so, this municipality also ordered an unlawful arrest of a Member of Parliament who was on site, questioning their criminal behaviour.


This municipality had acted in ways which suggest they are above the law by displaying the contempt to court and implemented the most despicable act on the vulnerable and the poorest of the poor in its jurisdiction. We want to ask the following questions: Why did they call the police to demolish the houses of the poor and barely leave the children and elderly in the open, exposing them to them to the cold and all sorts of things? What process did this municipality follow prior to the execution of the demolition? Thank you.




(Member’s Statement)


Ms B L ABRAHAMS (ANC): House Chairperson, the ANC applauds the opening of the new rehabilitation centre that brings hope to Soweto. The ANC is committed to strengthening the capacity of rehabilitation services in the Public Sector with the focus on mental health, physical disability, gender-based violence, childhood trauma and substance abuse.

As a result, it commends its government in Gauteng for the opening of the substance abuse treatment centre facility in Soweto which is situated at the back of the busy Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital, the first of its kind in Soweto. It administers inpatient treatment services, aftercare services and referrals to outpatient clinics and community based services for youth, mostly from the south of Johannesburg.


The centre is run by government and offers free assistance to all substance and drug addicts who want to end their addictions. The opening of this facility is also expected to assist in addressing the number of challenges such as the high crime rate which has been linked to the usage of drugs.


The ANC believes that this facility will assist in creating an environment that promotes positive individual behaviour in our communities, especially among young children and people. More of these facilities need to be built to lessen drug addiction in our communities. Thank you. [Applause.]




(Member’s Statement)


Mr M HLENGWA (IFP): Hon Chairperson, droughts are quite possibly the greatest single factor that influences the economics of livestock production farming in South Africa. Thousands of our livestock, particularly those situated in rural areas, continue to perish because of the ongoing dry conditions in our country.


Government assistance to the affected farmers in this respect of the supply of feed continues to be inadequate and greater relief is required. Government must intervene in this crisis as it directly affects the sustainability and food security of many farmers, their families and the workers as well as the greater community.


We therefore call the Department of Agriculture to prioritise this issue and provide the necessary assistance to our farmers. It is urgent that a multisectoral and interdepartmental approach is applied to ensure that we address the issue of food security in the country which weighs heavily on the viability of the farming sector given that 97% of the food in South Africa is only produced by 3% of the farming community.


Therefore, the urgency of this situation can not be overemphasised and moreover unviable farms at this point in time because of this crisis could result in job losses, which is something we cannot afford to have. I thank you.  




(Member’s Statement)


Ms C N MAJEKE (UDM): As we begin the 29th anniversary of the youth month, it is important that we focus on the critical challenges confronting young women. Many young women remain targets for gender-based violence. The recent United Nations 2010 report on violence against women in Africa indicates that the scourge of violence against women in Africa is still largely rampant, but hidden beneath cultural practices and beliefs.


Other reasons accounted for this situation are recorded as follows: The predominance of the system of patriarchy across the continent and our country is not immune, violence against women is accepted as a cultural norm in many of our communities and is often condoned by the communities, the stigma attached to the female victims has resulted in very low rates of reporting and some young women, particularly in the rural areas, do not report or are sometimes turned away by authorities who see violence against young women as not important.

The World Health Organisation reports that the health of young women is affected by a plethora of factors most of which revolve around lack of adequate health facilities and infrastructure. Promoting gender equity and empowerment of young women will be a benefit to our economy and the society at large. However, we still face a stumbling block with regard to prioritising women. The National Youth Development Agency, NYDA, must give the necessary attention to this area as it implements its programme during this month. I thank you. [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Ms J V BASSON (ANC): The ANC has recommitted itself to working towards free and compulsory education for all children as an immediate step. It has further committed itself to ensuring that at least 60% of schools are no fee schools. As a result, the percentage of learners who attended no fee schools increased from 62,4% in 2003 to 65,4% in 2004, according to the Statistics SA survey released on Wednesday, this week.


Delivering the results of the 2014 general household survey statistician general, Pali Lehohla, said that the percentage of learners who were exempted from paying school fees increased from 0,4% in 2002 to 65,4% in 2004, with Limpopo at 92% and Eastern Cape at 81% having the high proportion of learners. I thank you, Chairperson. [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Mr N T GODI (APC): The APC wishes to raise the plight of the former mineworkers who, due to the inhuman and exploitative policies in the past, were denied all the due benefits after leaving the mines. Subsequently, with the democratic dispensation, the need to redress this and pay the outstanding benefits led to former mineworkers being encouraged to make their claims. It however appears that the process has a lot of frustrations. Things tend to be slow and inefficient with people being sent from pillar to post, having to deal at times with uncaring and insensitive officials. This is sad and unacceptable.


Whilst a few live the nonracial dream in gated estates of the rich, the reality for former mineworkers and their families is different and depressing. They suffer starvation and diseases in the slums of the urban centres and the far flung rural areas without the requisite sense of urgency from the relevant government departments and the exploitative mining houses whose political representatives in this House could not be bothered.


The Departments of Labour and Mineral Resources must ensure that the mining bosses do more to locate and timeously pay the beneficiaries. Their current processes are feeble and misdirected. The Chamber of Mines is not bothered. Some former mineworkers here in Khayelitsha had to go to court just to access their Unemployment Insurance Fund, UIF. The APC hopes that with the new capable director general the Department of Labour can do better in assisting former mineworkers. Let us remember ... [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Mr G S RADEBE (ANC): The ANC welcomes home the 500 EFF members from Mpumalanga who defected on Saturday in Nelspruit stadium. [Applause.] Leading the walk back was the radical EFF former chief whip in the Mpumalanga legislature, Ayanda Tshabalala, and the former provincial spokesperson, Mpumelelo Masina, and other senior members in the province, the region and the branches.


Indeed, these senior provincial members confirm that the EFF leadership leaves much to be desired. It turns the party into a destructive force out of settling political scores with those disagreed with. The group also accused the EFF of financial mismanagement and exploitation of women and nonexistence of internal democracy and process of fighting corruption.


The ANC welcomes back these members who realised that their trust in the EFF was misplaced and that the ANC was their only political home. After considering the future of the country, these members felt that they could no longer effectively contribute unless they join the party that will help the country achieve its potential. Their decision ... [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Mr G R KRUMBOCK (DA): If the Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs wants to be taken seriously by this House, he needs to quit political gerrymandering, muzzle double talk from his mayors and stamp out thuggery from his party supporters. When I asked the Minister a question whether he could guarantee that the thousands of pensioner rate payers living on fixed incomes in uMngeni will not be prejudiced by his nightmare plan to merge uMngeni Local Municipality with Mpofana Local Municipality, I received no such guarantee.


Instead, his vague answer referred to significant rates, based within the farming community and tourism establishments and income from the local government equitable share. A strange answer indeed considering that uMngeni Local Municipality’s rates income is R144 million while Mpofana Local Municipality’s is only R9 million. Both ANC local municipalities, however, initially rejected the merger proposal.


All that changed by 16 April. The Mpofana Local Municipality mayor shamelessly told the Municipal Demarcation Board public meeting that council had approved the merger, even when minutes indicated it had not. She licked her fingers provocatively and ululated that Mpofana Local Municipality wanted to taste the uMngeni honey. Your chief financial officer, CFO, said Mpofana Local Municipality was bankrupt. Another ANC official spoke of Bantustans. Do they not read your memo, Minister?


On 30 April, ANC thugs broke up the demarcation board meeting in Howick using loud hailers, chanting “kill the boer”, “whites must leave”, and invading the stage. So much for transparency and democracy!




(Member’s Statement)


Ms R S VAN SCHALKWYK (ANC): Chairperson, the struggle for social justice is an ongoing endeavour, and as such the ANC government uses legislation to prescribe sectoral determination for minimum wage and basic conditions of employment to ensure workers live in decency. Therefore, the ANC welcomes the upward adjustments of South Africa’s hospitality sector minimum wage in line with the Basic Conditions of Employment Act which empowers the Labour Minister to adjust wages in this sector. This will take effect from 01 July 2015.


In addition, the hospitality sectoral determination will also regulate working hours and other basic conditions of employment for workers in the hospitality sector. The ANC views this initiative as a mechanism to protect workers’ rights and to bring about equality in the workplace. I thank you. [Applause.]




(Member’s Statement)


Mr M A PLOUAMMA (Agang): Chair, AgangSA believes that the existence of labour brokers in this country is an insult to the workers and citizens of this country. AgangSA moves that there must be a total ban of labour brokers. It is our firm belief that the existence of labour brokers amounts to exploitation and new type of slavery.


Government must be serious to protect the vulnerable workers. It is time for our people, particularly workers, to benefit from this hard-earned democracy. We should not sacrifice the dignity of our people and chew scraps on the table left by the capitals.


This democracy will be meaningless as long as it is not benefiting the majority of our people. We must make it unlawful for these capitalists to rob our people. Thank you.




(Member’s Statement)


Ms D D RAPHUTHI (ANC): Chairperson, Cuba has finally been lifted from the USA’s terrorism black list. The ANC hails the United States’ official removal of Cuba from its list of state sponsors of terrorism on Friday, 29 May 2015. Up until that date, America officially considered Cuba to be a state sponsor of terrorism. However, this is no longer the case. The Secretary of State John Kerry signed off on rescinding Cuba's state sponsor of terrorism designation exactly 45 days after the Obama administration informed the congress of its intent to do so on April 14 2015.


The step comes as officials from the two countries continue to hash out details for restoring full diplomatic relations, including opening embassies in Washington and Havana and returning ambassadors to the two countries for the first time since the US severed diplomatic relations with the island in January 1961.


The ANC salutes President Obama for taking this progressive step as well as President Raul Castro for choosing to cut loose the shackles of the past and calling for the embargo to end. South Africa had consistently called for the release of the Cuban heroes and the lifting of the trade embargo against Cuba. At the level of the government and the ruling party ... [Time expired.] [Applause.]




(Member’s Statement)


Ms J F TERBLANCHE (DA): Chairperson, the desperation that sets in when a failing and vote shedding ANC local authority is being put under pressure by the community it is supposed to serve was once again emphasised during the budget debate in the Tlokwe Municipality in Potchefstroom.


May I remind the House that ever since the ANC councilors turned against the former ANC executive mayor Mapetle Mapetle, an investigation by the Hawks involving him is still continuing and voted him out of the office. The ANC had been on the retreat in the Tlokwe Municipality.


This resulted in the infamous Tlokwe by-elections which saw the dismissal and resignation of some Independent Electoral Commission, IEC, officials who were involved. I will not go into it as it still remains sub judice. It also saw the abuse of state resources in contested wards through the distribution of food parcels and blankets personally supervised by the Minister responsible for food parcels.


In the latest desperate attempts the Tlokwe Municipality, through its parachuted-in executive mayor Kgotso Khumalo decided to purchase 12 000 units of paraffin of 20 litres each per month at R20,75 per liter for the next three years. This is shocking as the price of paraffin is regulated at R7,00 per litre or R5,00 per litre wholesale.


This is another case where state resources are being abused ... [Time expired.]




(Member’s Statement)


Ms N P KHUNOU (ANC): Chairperson, the ANC welcomes the arrival of 48 engineers from Cuba, 12 women and 36 men who arrived in South Africa recently. These engineers will mainly be involved in improving service delivery through the construction of government subsidised settlements, houses, the provision of water, planning and project management, sewage and bulk infrastructure basic services supply.


Their fields of expertise include civil engineering, hydraulic, structural and mechanical engineering as well as project management. The recruitment of these Cuban engineers who landed in the Free State province is part of the partnership between South Africa and Cuba that spans more than 10 years. They are on contract for three years and will be strategically placed throughout the province, mainly in the municipalities in rural areas to assist with the infrastructural programmes.


The ANC believes that these projects will further strengthen the relationship which was formed between the late President Nelson Mandela and Fidel Castro forward. It is very difficult to separate the Cuban people from Africa. During our liberation struggles, the Cuban people stood with Africa.  Who can forget how Cuba, despite its limited resources further restricted by the United States economic blockade, supported the struggles of liberation movements of South Africa, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Angola, Namibia and ... [Time expired.]




(Minister’s Response)


UNGQONGQOSHE WEZOKUTHUTHUKISWA KOMPHAKATHI: Ngiyabonga Mphathisihlalo, iyamangaza indaba yaseTlokwe yamaphasela okudla. Ngiyabona ukuthi abanye bethu ngathi babekhona ngesikhathi sika-Joseph Goebbels ngoba ilokhu iphindiwe le nto. Uhlelo lokutakulwa kwabantu abahlaselwe ububha, phecelezi i-social relief of distress, ngeke luphele; luzohlala lukhona njalo.


Okwesibili, neqembu laleli lungu elihloniphekile ebelikhuluma liyakwenza nalo. Sinezithombe zalapho sasihambise uhlelo oludidiyelwe lokubhaliswa komphakathi, phecelezi i-integrated community registration outreach programme, i-Icrop, khona kodwa bayishintsha i-Icrop bafaka imibala eluhlaza okwesibhakabhaka kwaze kwasiza ukufika kwezisebenzi zikahulumeni ezazingahambisani nale nto eyayenziwa, zabayekisa into ababeyenza. Kukhona lapho sibe nokhetho khona, babemukelisa abantu izinkwa ngalo lolo suku lokhetho. [Ubuwelewele.] Ngakho-ke iyinkinga into yohlelo lokutakulwa kwabantu abahlaselwe ububha, namaphasela okudla ngoba wonke umuntu uyayenza, yenziwa yizinhlangothi zonke. Kungcono ngoba thina umthetho uyasivumela futhi asikhethi; siya nalapho singafunwa khona. Ngiyabonga. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu speech follows.)


[The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Thank you, Chairperson, the Tlokwe matter concerning the food parcels is astonishing. I see that some of us were present during the time of Joseph Goebbels because this keeps on being repeated. The programme of relieving people who are suffering from distress, known as the social relief of distress, will not stop; it will always be available.

Secondly, the party of the hon member who was speaking, also does this. We have pictures of where we conducted the program of registering the community, known as integrated community registration outreach programme, Icrop, however they changed Icrop and put on blue colours thanks to the arrival of government employees who were against what was happening, they stopped them from what they were doing. There was a time when we had elections, they were handing out bread on that very same day of the election. [Interjections.] Therefore this thing of rescuing people from poverty is really a problem, the same goes for the food parcels because everyone is doing it, it’s being done by all sides. It’s better for us because the law allows us and we do not discriminate; we even go to places where we are not welcome. Thank you. [Applause.]]





(Minister’s Response)


The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Chairperson, in response to the issue of Cubans in the Free State - to those who are saying they are talking about substandards - we were with the Cubans in the trenches against the murderous apartheid regime, including some who were beneficiaries of that regine who are here today. We defeated them with the Cubans.


We are saying, in terms of scientific co-operation in whatever field, we will continue to work with whomever we want if we will benefit from it. We hope that our people who were denied education in terms of the scarce skills are going to learn a lot from that co-operation. Therefore, we will always encourage such; it is not for the first time, it has been continuing. Our young built environment specialists will learn a lot from that.


The second point is related to the issue of education, in particular Maitland High School in the Western Cape. Certainly, the Western Cape province, led by the DA, which has been boasting of service delivery in relation to books, asking us all sorts of questions. If there is such in the Western Cape, in Maitland High School, we must ask, why? We are going to request the Minister to investigate that and expose them for not caring about the education of black children. Thank you. [Interjections.]




(Minister’s Response)


The MINISTER OF WOMEN IN THE PRESIDENCY: Chairperson, just to respond on the issue of the status of women in South Africa. We know that as a country we have many challenges when it comes to issues of equality and equity, including violence faced by women in our country and the various programmes created by government. I intended to address those issues. If you look at the Equality Act, one of its objectives is to make sure that women are treated the same and work towards ensuring that equality prevails in the country.


The recent amendments of the Equity Act are part of those processes where government is commited to ensuring betterment and change in lives of women in our society. My responsibility is to make sure that it does happen. What is very important when we want to empower women is to make sure that young women or young girls do go to school. The education of the girl-child is critical in addressing that and the skilling of women in our society is key.


If women are going to be left behind in empowerment programmes, we will not be able to defeat inequality and violence in our society, as we work with various government institutions and civil society. We need every member of society to be at the forefront of fighting this scourge. This is not new, it has a history, and patriarchy, culture and traditions contribute to it. The mindset of various people in our society on how women should be treated also has to change. This House has the responsibility of being and example to societies on how best to treat its women. Thank you.




(Minister’s Response)


The DEPUTY MINISTER OF MINERAL RESOURCES: Chairperson, let me start of by thanking the hon Themba Godi for raising this very important matter relating to former mineworkers. I can just say that we have been working very hard on this matter, at least for the past three years, to get it to where it is today. This is a position that has improved substantially from the past.

Last week on Friday, Dr Motsoaledi launched Project Ku-Riha, which is a project to pay out money to former mineworkers. Already, we have identified 100 000 who must be paid and we will continue to pay them. On Friday we started the payment process and we are going to continue in that regard. The Department of Health and the Medical Bureau for Occupational Diseases, MBOD, are busy processing another 500 000 to check how many of them are eligible for payment. Therefore, we are busy with that.


Secondly, on Monday, this past Monday, we worked with other departments - the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, the Department of Agricultural, Fisheries and Forestry, the Department of Mineral Resources and the Department of Labour. We were in the Eastern Cape to meet stakeholders, including former mineworkers, in a very big programme rolling out in the Eastern Cape, Ncera, the macadamia plantations roll-out programme, which is a massive programme including communities and former mineworkers as communities and in their own right.


Therefore, the plight of former mineworkers is not forgotten. Over and above that we have, over the past few years, including last year, launched special clinics for former mineworkers. We have one of those in Mthatha next to the Nelson Mandela Academic Hospital where we have already seen over 4 000 former mineworkers. We launched another one in Carletonville. We have already seen over 3 500 of those former mineworkers. In Kimberly we have seen close to about 500 of them. They go through a process of examination, administration and rehabilitation and receive payment where they need to be paid. Therefore, this matter of former mineworkers is not forgotten. This government of the ANC ...


... uyaqhuba kumcimbi wabasebenzi basemigodini. [Kwaqhwatywa.] [... is making progress within the issue of mineworkers.]




(Minister’s Response)




... okokuqala mandibulele ohloniphekileyo uHlongwe, ndiza kuthetha naye uMphathiswa uZokwana. Injalo loo nto, amafama aseFree State, Northern Cape, North West, naKwaZulu-Natal besikhe sathetha nawo ngalo mcimbi. Bendisiba ukhona apha uSekela Mphathiswa uCele, ndiyabona ke ukuba akakho. Ngoko ke ndicinga ukuba ndiyithethe le nto.

Okwesibini, ndililungu lekomiti leziseko eziluncedo zophuhliso zikarhulumente kuMasipala oMbaxa weNelson Mandela. Besinentlanganiso noMphathiswa wezaManzi, ohloniphekileyo uMphathiswa uMokonyane, unenkqubo yokuzisa amanzi apha eNelson Mandela asiyiyiyo indlalo, yinyani leyo kwaye uza kuyenza kuba sele eqalile ukuyenza kwamanye amaphondo. Nale ikwinkqubo yakhe yokuyenza le bnto. Ndiyabazi abantu bala masipala kwaye ndiqinisekile ukuba nabo bayandazi ngokupheleleyo andisokuze ndithethe into engeyiyo.


Okokugqibela, kumba waseKing Sabatha Dalindyebo, sicela amaLungu eNdlu yoWiso-mthetho, abantu bokuqala ukugcina umthetho noMgaqo-siseko wesizwe, abe ngawo aqwalasela ukuba abawophuli umthetho wesizwe. Abantu baseMthatha banqandiwe ukuba bangawuthathi umhlaba bengawunikwanga, bona baya emhlabeni bengawunikwanga bencediswa lilungu leNdlu loWiso-mthetho. Urhulumente ulungile ukubamba abantu xa besophula umthetho. Enkosi, Sihlalo. (Translation of isiXhosa speech follows.)


[... first let me thank hon Hlongwe, I will speak with hon Minister Zokwana. It is like that, we talked about this issue with farmers from Free State, Northern Cape, North West, and KwaZulu-Natal. I thought hon Minister Cele will be present here, I can see that he is absent. Therefore I think I must talk about this.


Secondly, I am a member of the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Municipality Government Infrastructure Development Committee. We had a meeting with the Minister of Water and Sanitation hon Minister Mokonyane, she has a program of bringing water in Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Municipality and that is not a joke, it is the truth, and she will make it because she has already started in other provinces.  This is also in her program. I know people of that municipality very well and I am certain that they know me as well, I will never tell lies.


Lastly, on the issue of King Sabatha Dalindyebo Municipality, we would like hon members of the Legislature, first people who must comply with the Constitution of the country, to be the ones who see that they do not break the law of the country.  People from Mthatha have been stopped from using land that has not been given to them, they occupied land without permission with the assistance of a member of Legislature. Government is doing justice when arresting people who commit crime. Thank you, hon Chairperson.]




Mr M S MOTIMELE: Hon Speaker, hon Ministers, hon Deputy Ministers, hon Members of Parliament, guests in the gallery, comrades and compatriots the ANC supports the report on the Defence Review 2014 and would like to urge and appeal to all hon members in this House - all parties in this House - to support this report because the Defence Review impacts on all our security, our beloved country, our region and the entire continent.


This Defence Review should be understood as a body of public policy that a government pronounces as its guidelines for the Defence objectives and functions of its armed forces. This Defence Review clearly identifies the possible threats to a country’s national security, society, economy, territory and environment and provides options to government on how the Defence Force should deal with such threats.


Through the numerous interactions with individuals, nongovernmental organisations, civil society, academics and state agencies in the consultation process of both the Defence Review Committee and the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, we confirmed what our people expect of the Defence Force. The wide consultation in all, more than 450 interactions, and especially the representativeness of it, led to the conviction that this Defence Review can indeed be truly viewed as a genuine product for all South Africans by all South Africans.


It is therefore without hesitation that the committee will throw its weight behind the Defence Force to realise the desired end state of the Defence Force as depicted in Planning Milestone 4 of the Defence Review 2014. As the joint standing committee report provides, the Defence Review 2014 was tabled in Parliament in June 2014 and referred to the joint standing committee for consideration. The Minister briefed the joint standing committee on the Defence Review on 24 October 2014. The Minister formally introduced the Defence Review on 6 November 2014. The SA National Defence Force appeared before the joint standing committee and made presentations on the Defence Review on 13 November 2014.


The committee published the report for public comment in the national newspapers and social media platforms in January 2015. The committee held public hearings on the Defence Review on 20 February 2015. We thank all those South Africans who made public submissions; we are greatly indebted to their contributions.

Public submissions did not only support the Defence Review, but called for significant increase in defence expenditure. Among those who made public submissions are the North West province, uMkhonto weSizwe, Military veterans, Institute for Security Studies, University of Johannesburg and the University of Cape Town centres for the study of democracy.


The committee deliberated and discussed the draft report on public hearings on 19 March 2015. Let’s be reminded that the constitutional mandate of the Defence Force is to defend and protect the Republic, its territorial integrity and its people. It is in pursuit of this mandate that the Defence Review sets out a clear unambiguous path for us to follow.


At this stage, I extend my gratitude to the Minister and her team for the work well done and all members of the Portfolio Committee and the Joint Standing Committee on Defence for taking time to consider and deliberate on this strategic intent of our government that will ensure that there is peace and stability in our country and on the continent. Indeed, this policy is a milestone towards ensuring peace and friendship as the Freedom Charter begs earnestly all of us to rise to. The ANC supports the report. I thank you.


Mr D J MAYNIER: Speaker, the SA Defence Review 2014 is the most important review of Defence Policy in more than a decade and has major implications for the future of the SA National Defence Force. The Defence Review is a monster document, spanning 344 pages and was produced following 436 stakeholder meetings, scrutinising 76 public submissions, over a period of more than three years, and cost the taxpayer more than R11 million.


There are officials, some of whom are present today, who have devoted nearly a decade of their lives to the Defence Review. We must therefore thank them and thank all members of the SA Defence Review Committee, who have worked so hard over so many years to produce the Defence Review.


Now, the Defence Review made a brutally honest assessment of the Defence Force. The Defence Force, according to the Defence Review is,


... in a critical state of decline, characterised by force imbalance between capabilities; block obsolescence and unaffordability of many of its main operating systems; a disproportionate tooth-to-tail ratio; the inability to meet current standing defence commitments; and a lack of critical mobility.

The Defence Review also found that, and I quote:


... even with an immediate intervention, it could take at least five years to arrest the decline and another five years to develop a limited and sustainable defence capability.


Think about that: “It could take five years to arrest the decline and another five years to develop a limited and sustainable defence capability.”


There is therefore an element of urgency, every day wasted talking about the Defence Review rather than implementing the Defence Review accelerates the decline of the Defence Force. But of course when the Defence Review was finally tabled in Parliament, remarkably given the urgency, it was completely ignored. Repeated high-level interventions by the hon John Steenhuisen, the Chief Whip of the Opposition, were required to first, establish the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, and second, then force the Joint Standing Committee on Defence to begin work on the Defence Review.


The fact is that had we not intervened, the Defence Review would still be in the storeroom gathering dust in the bowels of this Parliament. It was clear form the start that my ruling party colleagues, serving on the committee had absolutely no intention of taking the Defence Review seriously, despite knowing that everyday they wasted accelerated the decline in the Defence Force.


The committee fiddled and faffed for nearly a year with the Defence Review. However, in all that time, the committee spent only a couple of hours working on the Defence Review. I, in the end, tabled a document containing 21 proposals for recommendations and aimed at strengthening the Defence Review. But, when it came to deliberations, the committee was not prepared for me: to present my proposals, motivate, deliberate, vote or to include my proposals in their final report.


The committee, for some reason followed a process which ...


Mr J M MTHEMBU: Speaker, can the member take a question on his proposals?


Mr D J MAYNIER: Not from you! Can I continue?


The SPEAKER: Proceed, hon member.


Mr D J MAYNIER: The committee, for some reason, followed a process which seemed to be designed to wreck any chance of reaching consensus on the Defence Review and to wreck any chance of opposition parties supporting the Defence Review.


In the end, deliberations that lasted no more than 30 minutes, the committee rubberstamped the Defence Review. The delay in dealing with Defence Review has caused enormous frustration and has delayed the implementation of the Defence Review until the 2016-17 financial year.


Speaker, it is shameful and should never have been allowed to happen. We have stated repeatedly that if the Defence Review does not succeed, the Defence Force will not succeed. We know that the Defence Review is the last best hope for the Defence Force. We also know that there is much to recommend in the Defence Review, including: The investment in new capability especially in the Special Forces; the focus on training of future Defence leaders in the Defence Force; and the emphasis on military discipline in the Defence Force.


We would, therefore, have liked to support the Defence Review, but we are regrettably not able to support the Defence Review for several reasons.

First, it is clear; the Defence Force will trigger a massive new arms deal including new armoured personal carriers, fixed wing aircraft, helicopters and ships, potentially costing billions of rand. However, we never received a detailed briefing on the capital acquisition programme and so cannot be sure what it is if we are agreeing to if we support the Defence Review.


Second, it’s clear that the Defence Review will trigger a downsizing and rightsizing of the Defence Force, which may result in the separation of more than 20 000 personnel from the Defence Force itself, costing millions of rands. However, we never received a briefing on the proposed downsizing and rightsizing of the Defence Review and so cannot be sure what we are agreeing to, if we support the Defence Review.


Third, the Defence Review utilised a cost-estimator model, which we believe may not have correctly estimated the cost of implementing the Defence Review. But, of course, we never received a detailed briefing on the cost-estimator model and so cannot be sure that the cost of the capital acquisition programme has not been front loaded, meaning only the cost of acquisition as opposed to the total life-cycle cost of the capital acquisition programme has been factored into the costing of the Defence Review.

And we cannot be sure that the cost of downsizing or rightsizing the Defence Force has been factored into the estimated cost of the Defence Review. If this is so, then the Defence Review has not been properly costed and the estimated cost of implementing the Defence Review has been massively understated.


Of course, this is exactly what happened during the last Defence Review, with such disastrous consequences where we bought equipment that we could not afford, and which today goes a long way to explain why soldiers are still in barracks, why ships remain alongside and why aircraft remain in hangars in the Defence Force today.


Finally, in the end, the Defence Review’s proposed end state, which is a Defence Force comprising of 189 personnel, up from 93 000 personnel – 158 combat units consuming R88 billion per year up from R43 billion per year or 2,4% of the GDP, up from 1,1% of the GDP is simply not affordable given the tight fiscal environment and competing demands for finance, particularly from the energy sector over the next 10 to 20 years.


You must wonder: How did we get ourselves into this mess? Well, the answer is simple: The process was flawed and so the outcome is flawed. The SA Defence Review committee never discussed the affordability of the Defence Review with the National Treasury. It conducted 436 meetings but not one of those meetings was with the National Treasury. The Minister evidently forgot the iron law of public policy making which is, “you cannot do what you cannot fund.” It was in retrospect, Minister, a monumental mistake.


Now we have a constitutional responsibility to consider the financial implications of policy documents in this Parliament. We cannot sit back and ignore the hard questions about the financial implications of the Defence Review. So, for that reason, we propose that the Minister withdraws the Defence Review from Parliament and within the next six months: First, commissions and independent audit of the cost estimates used in the Defence Review; secondly, consults the National Treasury on the affordability of the Defence Review; ... [Applause.] ... and retables a revised Defence Review together with the military strategy and long-term defence development plan, which is properly costed and affordable in this Parliament.


We must ensure that the Defence Review succeeds so that the Defence Force succeeds. We have to get this right! And the only way to get this right is to table a revised Defence Review which delivers realistic and affordable proposals to arrest the critical state of decline in the Defence Force. I thank you. [Applause.]


Mr N M PAULSEN: Hon Speaker, our Defence Force upon which our sovereignty and safety depends has been in a permanent state of crisis for sometime as a result of bad political and policy choices taken by this government since 1994. The fact that it has taken two decades for the revision of defence policies since the release of the 1996 White Paper on Defence raises serious questions about the lack of vision and foresight by both the political and military leaders in the country.


Our Defence has no strategic ability as shown by the great loss of life that our Forces suffered in the Central African Republic. The crisis in our Defence is deepened by the lack of clear lines of command. This was vividly illustrated during the recent xenophobic attacks where the Minister of Defence said on national TV, that the army would never be deployed to deal with that crisis as they are only trained to kill.


A few hours later, hon Minister, you were on national TV announcing that the army was going to be deployed to the townships to deal with xenophobia. What kind of an army gets deployed to reply to an incident of one individual who gets attacked with an okapi? [Interjections.] The Minister does not know what military jurisdictions are there, and our President would use the military for whatever purposes that suit him. Our military currently lacks the ability to provide strategic airlift capability that is able to project and sustain combat forces over extended distances and the ability to extended maritime protection capability inclusive of inshore and offshore patrol capability.


The backbone of our Defence Force, namely, the soldiers, as people who risk their lives for our national security, should be taken care of through salaries and working conditions that would inspire them to commit more to the country. All military reservists who are currently employed the same as farmers, employ seasonal labourers must be employed on a permanent basis.


Soldiers must be equipped with skills other than those using guns. We must equip our soldiers with social responsibility skills such as medical skills and capacity to respond to all manner of social crisis we face. It is not clear how the proposal to rightsize the Defence Force would affect the livelihood of those who are viewed as redundant and face the possibility of losing their jobs. The EFF calls for a rethink in the manner we go forward to rejuvenate our Defence Force. While continental stability is important, the country should guard against playing big brother to rest of the continent.


More importantly for our sovereignty, the Defence Force must never be used for the protection of the narrow interests of the incumbent political leaders as is the case now. As a matter of fact, Minister, the greatest threat to security in South Africa is not external aggression, but the inability and permanent incapacity of the current government to provide sustainable economic power, jobs and other basic social services. The inability to deal with the pressing challenges of poverty, unemployment and underemployment are the major reasons why we should all be scared and afraid. Thank you very much. [Applause.]


Mr M A MNCWANGO: Hon Speaker, as we draw our mandate directly from the Constitution, it is incumbent upon us as Parliament to investigate and make recommendations regarding the overall state of fitness and preparedness of our National Defence Force. I think the Defence Review 2014 Report is doing just that. Our Defence Force is a veritable pillar in defence of our democracy and the way of life which extends beyond our borders into the greater regional and continental and everchanging realm of geopolitics.

South Africa’s economic and political integration in SADC and in the AU, in pursued of its strategic and national interest has led to greater involvement on the continent. Africa remains our core market and it is imperative therefore that we ensure continental stability at all times. Our military is not only playing the role of a National Defence Force but also response to the regional and continental security challenges where it becomes part of the regional, continental, and international peace-keeping efforts under the auspices of the AU and the UN respectively.


We compliment and support the South African diplomatic efforts in many areas beyond our borders and are looked upon as leaders on the continent bastion of peace and security. As new challenges arise, they necessitate a new defence posture which necessitates a certain level military capabilities and readiness.


The Defence Review 2014 does not speak to strategic issues only, but it also seeks to capacitate the Defence Force to respond to the new challenges. This report on the review of South African Defence speaks to a number of strategic issues of which all are of great importance and also of concern to the IFP.


However, whiles it is clear form the recommendations of the Defence Review 2014, that the state of our Defence Force at this juncture requires urgent and massive resourcing, we must always be mindful and carefully balance the needs of defence against the greater needs of our people. Defence policy must be within our means.


With finer fiscal monies at hand defence must be looked at together with the greater umbrella of national priorities. There is still major disparity on socioeconomic level in this country. Basic service delivery and the host of other issues are actually still glaringly looking at the face of this government and this is why it is imperative that we balance our Defence Budget with the greater need of our country’s development goals.


Taking the above caution into consideration the IFP supports this Defence Review Report. [Applause.]


Adv B T BONGO: Hon Speaker, hon Ministers and Deputy Ministers present, Members of Parliament, and fellow South Africans, the Defence Review is a direct response to government priorities and government objectives, particularly Outcome 3 and Outcome 11 in terms of government priorities. It is also in direct response to the National Development Plan – chapter 14 – that we need to ensure that we build safer communities.


In this regard, domestic stability should be enhanced through fortified borderlines in order to prevent any form of illegal entries into the country. In 2010 his Excellency President Zuma and the Cabinet ordered the return of the Defence Force to the border duties mainly to safeguard land, air, and maritime borders.


This call by His Excellency to return to the border duties has a significant implication to the resourcing of the Defence Force because effective protection of the borders requires, among others, three things, which are: a sustainable development of a significant number of army units, lightweight aircraft and helicopters; secondly, a sustained electronic surveillance with land and air reaction forces to be always available for the counter illegal intrusion; thirdly, a sustain air and maritime patrol to protect the coastline.


Border security is a defence of a territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country. And this does not only require the Department of Defence to deal with it, but it also requires the Department of Home Affairs, the Department of Police, Department of Tourism and the Department of State Security.


So, on the issue that was raised by the hon Maynier, the issue of funding, I don’t think it is relevant. Because what is required by government in the main, you don’t start by pricing, you start by coming with a policy document so that it can guide you, you will then look at the issues. [Applause.] So, National Treasury will be able to meet with all these departments that I have mentioned to look at all issues that relate to this funding. The implementation of this Defence Review does not necessarily mean that we must look at the fiscus of the Department of Defence alone, but to look at the whole security cluster that is responsible for this particular purpose.


Military doctrine for conventional workforce is not sufficient for the border safeguarding operation due to the nature of adversaries and their activities. Border safeguarding entails the challenge of overseeing approximately 4 800km of land border and many points of entry. This task is entrusted to the landward arm of the SA Defence Force with the assistance of the SA Air Force as well as other government departments and Sars.


There is a vast distance involved in the safeguarding of borders. The land boarder is about 4 471km long, while the sea border is 2 798km long. So, South Africa would not have a force to cover this entire border in terms of men and women that are deployed on the ground. Instead of deploying these men and women on the ground, the SA National Defence Force needs to use technology as a force multiplier.


Now, the Area Defence is composed of two, very critical issues, namely, border control and protection which entails defending the border against military threat and against crossing by armed and unarmed individuals and groups, and the second one is an area protection, which provides defence in depth against military incursion by external military forces as well as firm base from where mobile operation can be conducted.


Within the primary defensive orientation of the SA Defence Force there is a high premium placed on firepower, night fighting ability, manoeuvring, quick reaction, surprise and technical mobility. In 2013-14 financial year the SA National Defence Force deployed two more companies in the Northern Cape and the North West as part of phase 4 of the border safeguarding Operation Corona.


There is an increased number of companies which are not sufficient to deal with the border control. We have been informed by your department that we need 22 companies as opposed to the 13 that are there now. But this that has happened already has increased the number of soldiers to 2 000.


Border safeguarding has been rolled out under the Operation Corona with the phase 3 that is underway. So, the first milestone of this Defence Force optimises boarder safeguarding capability. It is against these background that as the ANC we feel that when it is completed it will make sure that the territorial integrity of the Republic will be enforced and South Africans ... [Time expired.]


Mr S C MNCWABE: Speaker and hon members of the House, South Africa’s Defence Force is currently ranked fourth on the African continent in respect of its military strength and fire power. The question however is for how long we will be able to maintain this ranking.


In her budget speech on 19 May 2015, the hon Minister of Defence and Military Veterans said that Parliament’s continued delay in approving the Defence Review is stalling the immediate implementation of a long-term plan to arrest the state of decline in our military. The NFP accepts the need for parliamentary oversight, but we are concerned that parliamentary bureaucracy could impact negatively on the preparedness of the SA National Defence Force to execute its constitutional mandate.


We are also mindful of the comment made by the hon Minister in the Budget Vote that —


... a critical finding of the Defence Review is the mismatch between resources allocated to the Defence Force and its commitments.


The NFP also agrees with the hon Minister that the demands placed on our Defence Force, both domestic and international, are not sufficiently catered for in its budget allocation. It would be of great detriment to the country if we continue to neglect the needs of our Defence Force. In view of the urgency for this august House to approve the Defence Review 2014, we welcome the approval and recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on Defence and, in particular, the suggestion that the Defence Review should be sensitive to gender issues. We also share the concern of the Joint Standing Committee on Defence regarding the implementation of right-sizing the objectives of the Defence Review, in particular the loss of employment posts proposed in Milestone 1.


However, despite our support for, and approval of, the Joint Standing Committee on Defence’s report, and despite our concern about the Defence Review and the procedures surrounding its analysis and interrogation by the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, the NFP would also like to see the SA National Defence Force and hon Minister comply with the prescribed accountability and transparency provisions. In particular, the Joint Standing Committee on Defence should receive regular briefings on operations conducted by the Defence Force, the military preparedness of the Defence Force, and defence acquisitions. Most importantly, replies to written parliamentary questions should be made within the prescribed timeframe of Parliament.


Through increased co-operation between the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, the Minister of Defence and Military Veterans, and the SA National Defence Force leadership, we will be able to halt the decline in the standard of preparedness of our Defence Force and ensure that the citizens of our country are adequately protected and served and that our sovereign integrity remains guaranteed. The NFP supports the Joint Standing Committee on Defence’s report. Thank you. [Applause.]

Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Speaker, ons moet hier onderskei tussen twee aspekte: aan die een kant die Verdedigingsoorsig en, aan die ander kant, die verslag van die Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Verdediging wat nou gedebatteer word.


Ek wil vir die agb Minister sê – en almal weet dit – die kernprobleem van die SA Nasionale Weermag is finansies. Ons het nou die tweede Verdedigingsoorsig sedert 1994. Dit word baie duidelik aanbeveel dat, as ’n mens gaan kyk na die take wat tans opgelê word aan die Weermag en as ons gaan kyk in terme van die vredesoperasies wat hy moet onderneem, ons minstens 2% van die BBP nodig het in terme van die begroting van die SA Nasionale Weermag. Tans is die begroting in die omgewing van R45 miljard. Daar word eintlik aanbeveel dat ons aan die einde van die dag R55 miljard moet kry, met ander woorde ’n verdubbeling van wat ons tans het. Dan sê dit dat dit afhang van die Tesourie.


Minister, jaar na jaar in die begrotingspos Verdediging en Militêre Veterane stem almal saam dat ons geld nodig het. Ek wil vandag vir u sê: As ons aan die R11 miljoen wat spandeer is aan hierdie verslag waarde wil toevoeg, dan het die tyd gekom dat daar ’n politieke wil moet wees om dan erkenning en uitvoering te gee daaraan. Dan praat ek nie net van politieke wil van die agb Minister nie, maar van die ANC regering. Dan moet ons ook sê dat ons nie vir nuwe wapentuig kan vra as ons bestaande wapentuig het soos die Gripen-vegvliegtuie wat tans in die stoor weggebêre is nie. Dan het ons nie ’n goeie saak om na die Tesourie toe te gaan en te vra vir meer geld nie, want die Tesourie gaan sê, maar jy het geld gehad. Jy het duur toerusting aangekoop, en jy gebruik dit nie.


Die laaste aspek, agb Minister, en wat ek ook wil sê oor die verslag is dat dit ’n aanbeveling is van die Verdedigingsoorsig dat die twee komitees, naamlik die Gesamentlike Staande Komitee oor Verdediging en die Portefeuljekomitee oor Verdediging en Militêre Veterane saamgevoeg moet word in een komitee. Oor die verslag wat tans op die Ordelys is, het die komitee gekom en gesê hulle aanvaar nie daardie aanbeveling nie. Daarom sal die VF Plus teen die verslag wat tans op die Ordelys is, stem. Ek wil vandag vir u sê om twee komitees te hê, is onnodig. Ek weet dit is ’n oorblyfsel van die ou 1993 tussentydse Oorgangsgrondwet wat dit bepaal het. Dit het tyd geword dat daardie twee komitees saamgevoeg word in een, want ek wil vir u sê die portefeuljekomitee het maar eintlik net ’n komitee geword militêre veterane. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)


[Dr P J GROENEWALD: Hon Speaker, we must draw a distinction here between two aspects: on the one hand the Defence Review and, on the other hand, the report by the Joint Standing Committee on Defence that are now being debated.


I want to tell the hon Minister – and everyone is aware of that – the central problem of the SA National Defence Force is finance. We now have completed the second Defence Review since 1994. It is clearly recommended that we need at least 2% of the GDP in terms of the budget of the SA national Defence Force, when one looks at the tasks that the defence force have to perform and the peacekeeping operations that it has to perform. Currently the budget is in the region of R45 billion. It is actually recommended that we, at the end of the day, must get R55 billion, in other words double the amount that we currently have. That depends on the Treasury.


Minister, year after year in the Budget Vote both Defence and military veterans agree that we need money. I want to tell you today that if we are going to add value to the R11 million that was spend on this report, the time has come for the political will to acknowledge and implement this. And I am not only referring to the political will of the hon Minister, but also of the ANC government. We also have to admit that we cannot ask for new weaponry if we have weaponry like the Gripen fighter jets that are currently in storage. We don’t have a good case to take to the Treasury and to ask for more money, because the Treasury is going to say, you had money and you bought expensive equipment, yet you don’t use it.


Hon Minister, the last aspect regarding the report that I want to refer to, is that the Defence Review recommends that the two committees, namely the Joint Standing Committee and the Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans must combine to form one committee. Regarding the report that is currently on the Order Paper, the Committee declared that they don’t accept that recommendation. That is why the FF Plus will vote against the report that is currently on the Order Paper. I want to tell you today that it is unnecessary to have two committees. I know that it is a remnant of the old 1993 Interim Transitional Constitution which determined it. The time has come that those two committees are combined, because I think the Portfolio Committee has only become a committee representing the military veterans, I thank you.]


Mr B A NESI: Speaker, hon Minister, Deputy Ministers and hon members, the 1992 Ready to Govern policy document of the ANC provided a vision of a new SA National Defence Force that is loyal and upholds the Constitution of the Republic, a Defence Force that is accountable to the public through Parliament and respects the rights of the soldiers as citizens, and a Defence Force whose professional conduct is guided by the code of conduct based on universally accepted democratic principles. This vision does not relate to the military command, discipline and the uniqueness of the environment of what has become the SA National Defence Force today. The document also calls for the ongoing transformation of the defence military structures and better conditions of service.


Allow me to educate you without ambiguity. The 2014 Defence Review rejuvenation strategy, as presented, is found wanting. Firstly, I say this not because of the noises being put forward by the Institute for Security Studies, the mouthpiece of the opposition parties, but because of a critical examination of the real issues on the ground as they unfold. My brief will cover the following points: rationale for the existence of the SA National Defence Force, SANDF, succession and talent spotting, and the rejuvenation of the SANDF.


The rationale for the existence of the SANDF, without going into specifics, is the following. The SANDF was formed, amongst other objectives, to be much more representative of the South African population, especially the black majority. What we see now is a force that is run by remote control, by former members of the SA Defence Force, SADF. Examples are abound, but one needs to look no further than the current staffing of December 2014 and January 2015 where the reserve force was populated with the remnants of former SADF members.


The current, bloated reserve force members comprise 85% retired SADF members, former soldiers. The question is the following: Is it because the members are unable to run the SANDF? Do they lack capacity, or are they being destabilised from inside to ensure that the transformation agenda is not realised? Speaker and hon Minister, we urgently need to find answers to this question. I think hon Maynier, if he is patriotic enough, can shed light for us in this regard because he knows too much. [Interjections.]


Succession is about talent spotting in order to rejuvenate the Defence Force. Is there such a thing in the current Defence Force? The answer is clearly no. They never considered such dangers, as we are currently training thousands of young people in the Military Skills Development System, MSDS, programme. After equipping them with military skills, they are sent off into oblivion without absorbing them, yet we have aging, tired, psychologically unstable members in the Defence Force. Why can we not, Minister, create a budget and allow most of the old guys to retire? This needs a timeframe and targets. Therefore, the Minister’s argument resonates with the ideals of building a people’s army.


Unfortunately, the EFF member talking about deploying the SANDF into the communities is not talking about the Defence Force that we are talking about. We are talking about a people’s army, an army that is within our society, that defends its people, and that defends its sovereignty. [Applause.]


In conclusion, transformation in the SANDF is obsolete. It has no capacity, no agenda, nothing. It is our responsibility as the ANC to assist this institution, as it is one of the units that must drive the transformation agenda in building the people’s army. We therefore propose ...


... asisayi kugxeka nje thina Mphathiswa, sakugqiba singakuniki isisombululo. Siza kukuxelela thina ngoba kaloku sithi abantu abaphethe i-ajenda yotshintsho. Aba bakhonkothayo siza kubamamela nje sidlule, kaloku kufuneka sihambile. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)


[... we will not just end at criticising you hon Minister, and not give you a solution. We will tell you because we are the ones with the transformational agenda. We will just listen to those who are barking and continue, because we need to move forward.]


... that we identify within the Defence Force people who are capable and who can assist in articulating the interests of the people and of the people’s army, people who can ensure that the transformation agenda is taken forward and the decline is arrested as a matter of urgency. [Applause.]


Mr M S MBATHA: Hon Chair, I just want to establish whether it is parliamentary to say ‘ukukhonkotha’? [to bark.] [Interjections.] That’s a role of a dog. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon members!


Mr M S MBATHA: Ukukhonkotha ... [Barking ...]


... can only be done by a dog.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): I heard you. Yes. Hon members, this expression has been used before in this House, and it has been allowed. Thank you. [Interjections.]


Mr W M MADISHA: Hon Chairperson, Cope supports a twofold approach to the Defence Review. Firstly, this House should ensure that the rule of law applies and is seen to be applying. All must be equal before the law.


Secondly, the Defence Force must have an adequate budget, good organisational capabilities, high morale and a full state of preparedness at all times.


Cope applauds the decision of the committee to receive input from the public. This is especially important in developing our country’s Defence Strategic Trajectory. Once again, we want to emphasise that the big issue will be the budget.


Cope endorses the submission that the defence budget be set at 2% of GDP. Chopping the defence budget is a very dangerous practice, with very serious consequences. A defence force takes time to build up and to equip properly. That is why we fully support setting the budget at 2% of GDP. Government must work around that.

Cope also fully supports the need for a White Paper on Defence every five years so that our Defence Force can keep pace with what is happening in peacekeeping, while preparing for other eventualities.


Cope does not agree that the Chief of the Defence Force should act as the head of the force. The Defence Secretary is there as head and accounting officer. Should the antithesis be the case, we want to emphasise that we are going to have very serious problems of dictatorships and coups, etc.


Cope supports the CSIR recommendation of a Chief Defence Scientist who would take over duties from the current Defence Research Development Board. Any modern defence force has to have scientific research support.


Cope also assents to the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 of 2000, which requires women to play a genuinely significant role in peacekeeping. Let us act in earnest to recruit capable women into the Defence Force, and to provide for the framework and the facilities that will encourage women to join in large numbers. [Time expired.]


Mr S N SWART: House Chair, the ADCP has repeatedly called for an increased budget for the SA National Defence Force, SANDF, over many years. In this regard, we support the call by the Minister and other hon members for a budget of 2% of GDP. This is critical for the implementation of the Defence Review.


Yes, the SANDF must manage its budget correctly, but it is undeniable that successive budget cuts have undermined its capability in various areas, including the ability to carry out its peacekeeping mandate. If the funds are not made available, can the SANDF be expected to carry out operations in the rest of Africa, given that it is hard-pressed to maintain even its current commitments?


This is a critical aspect for the Defence Review. We need more troops, not fewer, and we need to know the troops are deployed, properly trained, transported, protected and supplied. We, in this Chamber, need to ensure that there are proper funds to ensure this.


Soldiers on the ground are unable to question political decisions that may result in them being placed in harm’s way. They are expected merely to obey orders. I am reminded of Alfred, Lord Tennyson’s famous words in the poem, The Charge of the Light Brigade:


Theirs not to reason why,

Theirs but to do and die.


However, it is our responsibility as MPs to ask the hard questions. We expect honest and full answers – answers that do not jeopardise the safety of our deployed troops, but answers on policy issues.


When considering the Defence Review, we share concerns about deficiencies in oversight and, in possibly, a degree of lack of urgency. This review came up already in 2012. This has been referred to by previous speakers. We note the proposal for the establishment of a single oversight committee, and we share the view that why should there be two portfolio committees dealing with this? Surely, we can save funds? However, this proposal was rejected by the defence committee.


We note that Milestone 1 calls for a reduction of personnel, from the current 97 000 to a total of 72 000. We have concerns about that because one could lose experience. Milestone 2 looks at an increase to 101 000. The question then, hon Bonga, is about funding. It is critical. Everyone has referred to that. Even the committee report reflects concerns and raises issues about that. Will there be sufficient funding to manage this process of first reducing and then increasing the number?

Lastly, the question arises: Will the National Treasury be willing to release the estimated additional R55 billion? Without this funding, the Defence Review will not be able to be implemented. I thank you.


Mr L R MBINDA: Hon Chair, hon members, MaAfrika, sons and daughters of the soil, I had a chat with the former President of the country, Mr Motlanthe. He told the hon Mbete, the Speaker, that, as from today, she must not take my time, especially not for greeting. She must only count the time that I am using for speaking. [Interjections.]


As the PAC, we feel that the position of South Africa on the continent and the role we play in peacekeeping and peacemaking requires a defence force with appropriate capacity. The review has correctly found that the state of the Defence Force is not good and there is a need to enhance the capacity and capability of the Defence Force.


The country that neglects its Defence Force cannot guarantee its security. If South Africa cannot guarantee its security, it cannot guarantee the security of the continent. Africa needs peace and stability to develop. South Africa has a crucial role to play in ensuring peace in Africa. So, we cannot depend on outsiders, like America and the European countries. That is why the PAC supports the Defence Review.


Mr D D GAMEDE: Chairperson, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, Members of Parliament, ladies and gentlemen, indeed this is the year of the Freedom Charter, at the same time we salute all the young people of the 16 June for their role in the struggle and the life that we have today. [Applause.]


Let us again revive our collective memory that the National Development Plan advocates for a state that is capable of playing a developmental role. We wish to suggest strongly that the national security is a fundamental requirement for the development and even prosperity. As we build the national democratic society, we indeed should do so through a secure, capable and a developmental state that can assert its national sovereignty.


Domestically, our national security focuses on South Africa’s sovereignty and related priorities, which include but are not limited to territorial integrity, constitutional order, the wellbeing and upliftment of the people and the growth of the economy. At the regional front South Africa’s national security hinges on the stability, unity and prosperity of the Southern African region, and the African continent in general.


It is a common cause, therefore that South Africa in partnership with like-minded African states, has a vested interest in contributing to democracy, the promotion of economic advancement and pursuit of peace, stability and development in the African continent.


The International Monetary Fund, IMF, projects that between 2013 and 2017, Africa will have 10 out of 20 fastest growing economies in the world. South Africa must then penetrate these markets and enhance its share of intra-African trade by negotiated market access for South African exports through the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements.


South Africa must further, in terms of both its continental leadership role and its own national interest and in partnership with other like-minded African states, play a leading role in conflict prevention, conflict resolution, post conflict reconstruction and security sector reform. This will manifest in contributions to the security of the UN, the AU, and the SADC countries.


In view of what we have said here and more, the future force design will amongst others pursue a balance of capabilities that adhere to the strategic concepts of rapid reaction operations for interventions, expeditionary operations to project forces for protracted periods, complex war fighting within the typical physical and human dimensions of the battle space.


The focus of the future force generations must therefore extend to, inter alia, “enhanced early-warning intelligence and domain awareness”; projectable medium landward forces with enhanced firepower, manoeuvre and protection for a range of complex contingencies; versatile littoral maritime forces with credible deep-water abilities; and multi-rolled lighter forces for border safeguarding and other protections.


There are some who in this House and in the public domain have made certain unfounded claims about the SA Defence Review 2014, these claims mainly pivot on cost as we have heard. They argue against the defence review on two mainly points: Firstly, that the defence review is not costed. Secondly, that the defence review has not been negotiated with the National Treasury. The two arguments I have alluded to, however demonstrate a complete of no understanding of the government planning cycle and the technocratic nature of planning and budgeting.


The building of a financial requirement is always premised on the following steps: Firstly, a policy, which informs your approach, the “what”; secondly, a strategy, which spells out how you are going to achieve the policy the “how”; thirdly, a plan, which spells out the action steps and the resources required, “With what”. A plan only has validity when there is a detailed resource requirement attached, that is the budget, which is the cost.


So until such time as the Defence Force Review is approved by Parliament, the National Treasury remains guided by the 1998 review. So for us to cost the SA Defence Review before it has been past by Parliament, would be premature.


Last but one thing, since the dawn of democracy the country South Africa had to deal with different forces from the TBVC states, Transkei, Bophuthatswana, Venda, and Ciskei. All soldiers were amalgamated into one united SA National Defence Force. This is the Force protects and treats all people equally. In fact, prior to 1994, there were 100 regular soldiers and 400 reserve force for a population of about 36 million South Africans. Five million of those were whites and the rest were blacks, coloureds, and Asians. These soldiers provided protection for a few.


Today, with a population of ±53 million, we have a Defence Force of ±90 000 regular and only 23 000 reserve force and these soldiers protect everybody and every space; unlike before when the defence force was used to protect the interests of only the few residents of this country.


Lastly, all provinces had Bantustans prior to 1994. As I have said, they all had their mini-soldiers. They were all amalgamated hence the SANDF that we have today. As I did say, the ANC supports this report.


However, I wish to commend on what hon Maynier says, for your information, in meetings hon Maynier only concentrated on acquisitions. What does the department acquire for arms and so on? Who apply for tenders and so on? The budget for the Department of Defence is only 1,7 of the gross domestic product, GDP, hence if we adopt this report it will be 2+% plus of the GDP.


Hon Maynier speaks in forked tongues. He says we must not delay the review because soldiers suffer, but at the same time, he says we must postpone the review for six months. Now, which is which?


Hon Groenewald, I respect you as a former General in the former army. There is only one committee, the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, not two. That is why the committee resolves that we cannot have the other new committee. So there is only one. We deal with the Defence Review only when we are at the Joint Standing Committee on Defence. With this clarification, I then hope that you will support this report. [Applause.]


We also appreciate the notes that have been read by hon Madisha in supporting the recommendations of the committee, and hon Swart. We want to thank the Minister, the Deputy Minister and all the officials for availing themselves all the time when we call them. It must be clear that when we call them, and they come.


Lastly, as the desert, hon Maynier boycotted the workshop on the SA Defence Review, where we all had to get all the information, ask questions, and engage. He did not attend that workshop. I’m afraid he then misleads his party on most of the things. Thank you very much. [Applause.]


Debate concluded.


The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: House Chair, I move that the report be adopted.


Motion agreed to.


Report accordingly adopted (Democratic Alliance, Economic Freedom Fighters and Freedom Front Plus dissenting).




There was no debate.


The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the report be adopted.


Motion agreed to.


Report accordingly adopted.




Mr A F MAHLALELA: Hon Chairperson and hon members, we are here to present an interim report of the Portfolio Committee on Health on the Medicine and Related Substance Amendment Bill. The Bill was referred to the portfolio committee for its consideration and report back to the House. This Bill seeks to amend the Medicines and Related Substances Act of 1965 in order to establish a new regulatory authority for all medicines and medical devices called the SA health product regulatory authority which will be known as Sahpra to replace the current Medicines Control Council, MCC.


The committee conducted public hearings and, having taken into consideration some of the valuable submissions, decided to make further improvement to the Bill as introduced. This, therefore, necessitated that the committee should go beyond the proposed amendment, by including the amendment of section 18(a) of the Act. The Assembly in terms of Rule 249 subsection 3(b), however, provides that a committee may - if it is considering a Bill that amends provisions of legislation - seek the permission of the Assembly to inquire into amending other provisions of that legislation.


The request of the committee, therefore, to this hon House, is to amend section 18A which deals with bonusing. The new amendment to section 18A that we propose will read as follows:


18A Bonusing

Subsection 1 No person shall supply ... [Delete the word “product” and replace it with “medicines”] ... medical devices or In Vitro Diagnostics, IVDs according to a bonus system, rebate system or any other incentive scheme.



Subsection 2 Not withstanding subsection (1), the Minister ... [In relation to subsection (1), we are proposing the addition of, ... “in consultation with the pricing committee referred to in section 22(g)”] ... may prescribe acceptable and prohibited acts.


We therefore as a Portfolio Committee on Health, hereby recommend to the National Assembly as required by Rule 249 subsection 3(b) of the Rules of the National Assembly, to be granted a permission to include the amendment of other provisions of the Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Bill as referred to the committee by the House. Thanks very much.


There was no debate.


Permission accordingly granted to the Portfolio Committee on Health to inquire into amending other provisions of Medicines and Related Substances Act, Act 101 of 1965, in terms of Rule 249(3)(b).




Mr B L MASHILE: Chairperson, I need to indicate that the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs met on 12 May, to receive a briefing from the Parliamentary Legal Advisor on the Constitutional Court judgment in the Mail and Guardian Media Limited and others vs MJ and others which is CCT136/12 OF 2013, in respect of the declaration that section 21(5) of the Refugees Act 1998 is inconsistent with section 16(1)(a) and (b) of the Constitution, hence invalid.


This is a section of the Constitution that talks to freedom of press and other media as well as the freedom to receive or impart information or ideas. The court, however, suspended the declaration for two years to enable Parliament to correct this constitutional defect. The period that was given was two years which will expire on 26 September 2015, and Parliament has to attend to this matter now. On consultation with the Department of Home Affairs and the Ministry, and given the time that is left to the expiry date of 26 September 2015, it was agreed for the committee to introduce and correct this constitutional defect.


The committee met on 19 May 2015 to receive the briefing on the committee Bill and the requisite memorandum to request the National Assembly to grant permission to introduce the Bill. The committee deliberated and agreed on the memorandum, as it appears in Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, ATC, of 20 May 2015, page 1949.

So, the purpose of the Bill to be introduced is to amend section 21 subsection 5 of the Refugees Act of 1998, so as to confer discretion upon the Refugee Status Appeals Authority to allow the public and media access to its proceedings in appropriate cases. The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs is hereby, in terms of Rule 238 of the National Assembly Rules, requesting the permission of the House to introduce - in terms of Rule 230 subparagraph 1 - the following legislation in the House, namely, The Refugees Amendment Bill 2015. So, I request your permission, Chairperson. Thank you very much.

There was no debate.


The Chief Whip of the Majority Party moved: That the House, in terms of Rule 238(3), give permission that the legislative proposal be proceeded with.


Motion agreed to.


Permission accordingly given to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs to proceed with the legislative proposal.




The MINISTER OF ARTS AND CULTURE: House Chair, hon members, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, distinguished guests, since the advent of our democracy our government has embarked upon transformation of the heritage landscape in our country. This has been characterised by building of new monuments, memorials, statues and museums as well as changing names of geographical features in honour of the events of epochs and people who have distinguished themselves in shaping the history of our country.


Since the proclamation of the legacy project by the Cabinet in 1998, a number of legacy projects have been implemented and supported. These include the Nelson Mandela Heritage complex, in Qunu, Mthatha and Mvezo; Chief Albert Luthuli Museum, including the restoration of the church in which he was a deacon, where his body was laid in state as well as the restoration of his grave; Samora Machel monument, eNcome (Blood River) monument and museum, Freedom Park, Lilies leaf and Steve Biko projects, Nelson Mandela Statue at the Union Building and the soon to be unveiled Bhambatha statue and Matola Raid Monument and Interpretative memorial centre.


In addition to the commemorative structures that have been completed, there is a wide-range of Memorials and Museums that are still in the making. These include, J L Dube Interpretive centre, Ingquza Hill, O R Tambo, Sarah Baartman Centre for Remembrance, ‘Vierhoek Museum a National Heritage Monument or the National Heroes Acre.


The latter project will culminate in the installation of about 500 statues, an Iconic Heroes Acre that would be stark reminder of those heroes and heroines who brought us all to the freedom we enjoy here today.


Furthermore, the Department of Arts and Culture is developing in co-operation with other departments and provinces the liberation heritage route. This will include sites in South Africa as well as across our borders, particularly in the SADC region. In the area of naming significant progress has been made. Today the names of our geographical features such as cities, towns, rivers, dams and airports have been changed and thus have been given new identities that reflect the post colonial and post apartheid era. Places like, O R Tambo International Airport, Bram Fischer International Airport, Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital, Steve Biko Academic hospital, Joseph Nkani or Market Theatre and other significant name changes that had occurred, that is testimony to the changing heritage landscape of our country.


However, the recent spate of vandalism and the burning of statues as calls of eradication of apartheid and colonial symbols which are correct for the call but should be discouraged when people take the law into their own hands. No statues should be destroyed. What started as an isolated act in the University of Cape Town, soon spread to other parts of the country.


We must at this point commend the students of the UCT for taking up the issue of the transformation of these symbols, but we must condemn those political parties who rode on the bandwagon of a very important matter that is affecting our society. [Interjections.] It’s you! [Laughter.]


The Cape Town Campaign was followed by sporadic acts of statues being vandalised and painted in Port Elizabeth, Uitenhage, Johannesburg, Pretoria, Durban and Ficksburg. A statue of a horse and horseman was broken in Uitenhage such that the horseman was removed from the statue of the horse, but we must also remember that there are some other previous incidents such as the statue of Chief Tshwane, which was vandalised when it was painted with the colours of the old South African flag.


I am saying that those who have discouraged and condemned what has happened recently should also discourage and condemn what happened earlier on. As part of the response to these incidents and following debates, the Department of Arts and Culture convened a national dialogue of a range of key stakeholders.


This dialogue was held on 17 April 2015 at the Freedom Park in Pretoria within the Tshwane Metro. A range of stakeholders who represented a cross section of diverse views were invited and participated actively. These included political parties represented here in this Parliament. I must say that most of them participated, perhaps with an exception of one or two. But we should thank those who took up this very important matter.


We also invited interest groups, traditional leaders, youth formations and the students from the UCT, Rhodes University and University of KwaZulu-Natal. The consultative meeting generally agreed and acknowledged that the pace of transformation has been slow even though the legal framework existed. The meeting was also open to the scrutiny of the very same legislative framework and we were saying that if there are gaps, let those gaps be dealt with. What ever we do we should ensure that we do it within the rule of law.


One of the major outcomes of the national consultative meeting was a production of a 20-point resolution featuring prominently among these resolutions are the following: The intensification of popularising campaigns about South Africa’s key national symbols in schools for greater civic awareness and national consciousness; using existing laws for the transformation removal, transfer or replacement of any statue, public symbol or place name; government and stakeholder to make emphasis that the attacking and the defacing of statues is unlawful and criminal, and call for law enforcement to act and prevent these unlawful incidents; and the communities to work with law enforcement agencies to report unlawful acts; ensuring that a special interest group, political formations or cultural communities that seek to protect symbols should do so without incitement or re-introduction of symbols of the past regime; ensuring that any change or effort to transform or preserve the national symbols should be based on proper and effective consultation with all affected sectors of society in the event where certain symbols are removed from public spaces, it is preferred that the common park of symbols and statues with the thematic narrative of the evolution of our history be created as an inclusive space to properly reflect South African history.


In the instances where after an audit and consultation there might be a need for disposal of some of the symbols and statues these should also be guided by removal and relocation guidelines as per the National Heritage Resources Act of 1999. Creating a special purpose task team to assist with conceptualisation implementation and the fast-tracking of transforming these symbols; ensuring that the whole process should be driven with a sense of urgency that has clear roadmap, milestones and verifiable targets.


I am glad to announce that I have appointed that task team to take the consultative process to all provinces, and as we speak they are in provinces. This is a task team of experts in the field of arts, culture and heritage.


On 2 June 2015 that team was in Limpopo at the University of Venda and the second one is happening today at the KwaZulu-Natal at the natural science museum in Durban. We hope to finish these consultative before the end of July this year and present a comprehensive report that clearly gives a roadmap to the way forward.


We think that everyone of us have a responsibility to ensure that ours is a changing heritage landscape and we still urge those who would encourage vandalism, destruction to stop that destructive thinking because it is not going to help the country. [Applause.] If there are symbols that have to be changed, those symbols would be changed. But even the changing of those symbols would be subjected to a thorough process where everybody would be consulted including those who would have a different view in terms of those statues.


It is going to happen with everybody participation we hope that our heritage landscape will change as we continue to do that. And those who are on the sideline and are just talking must come up and join the forces going forward because part of the problem is that when you are invited you don’t come. That is a show of cowardice you are not sure of your views whether your views will be defeated. I hope the EFF is going to grow; it is one year old now it is going to grow and support the process including the Chief Whip of the EFF who has been invited to come and engage.


Uthanda ukukhuluma kakhulu la baba, ake uze nje sihlangene sonke ubeke imibono yakho; sibone ukuthi uhamba ufikaphi. Ngiyabonga.  [Applause.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)


[You like to comment much here sir, kindly engage with us and state your views; so that we can see how far you can go. Thank you.]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I wanted to make a point of order and I did not want to disturb the Minister ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon member, what is your point of order?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Yes, the photo that was appearing here was not the photo of the hon Minister ... [Interjections.] I don’t know but I think it is wrong to portray a different image when a different person is speaking. Is it the statue of a different Minister or ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you, hon Ndlozi. Your point of order is sustained. We apologise to you hon Minister for the picture that appears on our screens.


Mr G A GROOTBOOM: Hon House Chair, hon Minister, Leader of the Opposition, hon Musi Maimane, members and guests in the gallery, when we talk about status I want to remind this august House that status are just inadmant objects both to comemoreate a historical event or thelife of an influencial person. But times change, and status that commerate figures from the past, which might have been appropriate are no longer fitting. But whatever the case maybe, defacing, removing or destroying status do little to deal with the real issues at hand. As was experienced in Russia – the communist would know – “The statues of Lenin and Stalin are down but the fight against their ghost is much harder.” The same applies to our country, the statue of Rhodes might be gone but the removal of his ghost proves problematic.


It must be clear to us all that we cannot erase history and we cannot escape the fact that our heritage, as South Africans, is entertwined. We, as the DA admit that the statue of our colonial passed will be a constant reminder of the lost of our dignity. But at the same time it could be symbolic of our victory over apartheid. The challenge of our time is to build a new heritage and a new vision for an inclusive South Africa.


We cannot make a better yesterday, while the ANC and the EFF are focused on the past the DA is looking towards a future to create a society whwere there is freedom, fairness and opportunity. And the questions are not: Can these status be removed? Can these monuments, which can be a bitter reminder of our collective pain be erased? And the quesitioon that we must really focus on, is how do transform society so that the pain that is triggered by this statues is lessened.


The National Heritage Resources Act makes provision for the removal, renaming, relocation, protection and the management of our heritage resources. The onus remains on the Minister who may reject or approve the removal or name change. A change in the heritage ma     is not indicative of a transformed society. But transformation places a burden on us to correct history, to correct the wrongs of the past. And the history of South Africa has been unkind to people of colour. The contributions made by black people to the collective history of the world remains ignored. And we are here, placed in this particular point and place in history so that we can correct the injustices of the past. We are here to make sure that there is fairsness in the way in which history is portrait and a skewed history in which the ANC tries to steal the past as if it belongs to them only.


The DA wants to ensure that we create opportunity and freedom for the cultural expressions of all South Africans. Together we can create a new identity, a new history, a new legacy, a new pathway into the future wehre there is freedom, fairness and opportunity.


In closing, hon Chairperson, the DA believes that our labours should not be about creating monuments on hills or status in parks. Labours, monuments and statues are when a young person can find a job. When a person with disability can get access to the ordinary life that others take for granted. And this is the future that the DA envisage. I thank you. [Applause.]


Dr H CHEWANE: Hon Chair, up until yesterday I was a practicing medical doctor for 10 years, and when I came into this Parliament I was greeted by a monstrous horse raiding statue ... [Interjections.] ... of a political ... and a mass murderer Louise Botha who presided over antiblack racists and white ethnic settler republic in the former Transvaal. I also understand that on the Parliament gardern there is a statue of Queen Victoria who provided the intellectual, cultural, spiritual and the zombification of black people in Africa as a whole.


This Victoria statue holds the symbol of globe representing the gradient racist expansion, British colonial projects which sought to conquer Africa and its people for the benefit of Europe.


Prof C T MSIMANG: Hon Speaker, it is trite to say that symbols represent differing ideas to different peoples at different times. South Africa, being made up of many diverse cultures, peoples and traditions and given our stormy history through the ages of colonialism, minority rule and now constitutional democracy, has a myriad of symbolic reminders of this past.


These reminders, often in the form of statues, are but symbols representing ideas, belief systems, oppression, freedom, sorrows and triumphs. They point the way forward by remaining reminders of the past. We must see them in this context.

Mr Heinrich Zimmer provides us with a concise overview of the nature, and perennial relevance of symbols. He states and I quote:


Concepts and words are symbols, just as visions, rituals and images are; so too are the manners and customs of daily life. Through all of these, a transcendent reality is mirrored. They are so many metaphors, reflecting and implying something which, though thus variously expressed, is ineffable, though thus rendered muliform, remains inscrutable. Symbols hold the mind to truth but are not themselves the truth; hence it is delusory to borrow them. Each civilisation, every age, must bring forth its own.


Toppling of statues has been an unfortunate practice that has been carried out through the ages by many peoples, attempting to eradicate parts of their histories. Unfortunately, this is tantamount to burying ones head in the sand. History cannot and should not be erased. Our history, through the symbols of statues of the past, should stand together with statues of the present, as a reminder of where we came from, where we are presently and where we wish to be in the future. They are nothing but the embodiments of ideals, as expressed through the great personalities of the time.


We in the IFP remain in full support of the transformation within our institutes of higher learning, but call for this to be done in a manner similar to the peaceful transformation that occurred in government, as we became a democratic and free South Africa. I thank you.


Mr M L SHELEMBE: Hon Chairperson, members of the House, South Africa, along with nearly 190 other countries, is a signatory to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation’s, UNESCO’s, World Heritage Convention, where the emphasis is on the notion of collective universal cultural rights. Signatory states have an obligation to observe that each culture has a dignity and value which must be respected and preserved.


Our Constitution and legislation also makes provision for the protection of our collective heritage and as South Africans, we should respect that.


The recent campaigns to remove certain statues have created division amongst the people of South Africa. Whereas we respect the right of people to have strong views, we must be cautious of ill-considered actions, which are high in symbolism but thin on substance.


Whilst we support the revolutionary change that seeks to address the negative history of the past, we should be cautious that we do not divide our society. We favour an evolutionary approach, based on well considered intentions and the rule of law.


Above all, the NFP believes in political engagement, which is rooted in dignity. It cannot be said that the recent defacing of statues and flinging of human waste at them resemble a pragmatic approach to change, nor a dignified one. Most importantly, we do not believe that it has contributed to nation-building either.


The campaigns to remove certain statues have confronted us with a question which has been lingering long in the minds of our people: How do we build an inclusive nation? Do we build by destroying, or do we build by creating?


The NFP believes that the answer lies in creating. Let us not try and sanitise our collective history and pretend that it did not happen. Let us rather focus on creating a new history for future generations, which shows that we had built a nation from diversity, mindful of our painful past, yet with hope for the future.


Let us build more statues to reflect our history, as it is unfolding now. If a statue is truly offensive to the dignity of our people, at large, let us follow correct procedures to remove them and place them somewhere else where they can retain an educational value and continue to accurately reflect our history. Let us not bow to ill-considered empty gestures that do nothing but sow division amongst our people. Let us continue to build a new democratic heritage that accurately reflects who we are and the values we embrace. I thank you.


Mr M L W FILTANE: Hon Chair, Steve Biko once said and I quote:


As long as blacks are suffering from inferiority complex as a result of 300 years of deliberate oppression, denigration and division, they will be useless as co-architects of a normal society where man has nothing else but man for his own sake.


In this regard, he called for liberation from mental enslavement.


The historical and heritage symbols play an important part in defining our present, the past, and are a reality, upon which a discourse on defining the future or explaining the past can be located. We do not need statues whose presence insult us to remind us of our past, any more than Israel needs a statue of Hitler to remind Jews of how their state came into being. No, we have history books and classes to teach us that.


On the other hand, removing them without redressing the social constructs that placed them there in the first place becomes a political farce, which hurls insult at the generations who suffered bona fide pain and humiliation at the hands of those whom the statues celebrate.


However, the debate about symbols and building a democratic heritage cannot be an isolated one but an integral part of the broad socioeconomic transformation of our society.


When the youth of our country begin dismembering symbols of the past, they are not only referring to our colonial past, but to us, their parents and leaders in charge. They are telling us, as they have been every day, through service delivery strikes, through often violent and always organised discourse, such as the xenophobic attacks, that they have lost faith in us, their leaders, that our actions no longer represent their interests. They are telling us that they have waited long enough for us to do what they are now doing themselves.


Can anyone amongst us here, who have trivialised to politicking their earnest frustrations, explain, why, we still have demarcations such as native yard and native unit, NY and NU, in Mdantzane, just to mention it? Have we offered them an education that rightly empowers their mind and fills it with believe that they too will be productive contributors of their society one day?


It is becoming increasingly difficult to reason with a populace that watches it’s leadership indulge in ridiculous acts, defends themselves unreasonably and then turns around and says to it, be reasonable. What should be done with our statues and symbols is the least of our problems.


Hendrik Verwoerd once said and I paraphrase, “why spend money educating the black child, when all we want them to be is our tea girl and garden boy”. Now compare that with the kind of education that you get.


We emphasise that this debate must not be divorced from building our united South Africa that takes cognisance of the histories, heritage and collective memories of all its people.


The dictate of the Constitution, that South African belongs to all who live in it, demands that we collectively, as a people, define our legacy, history and heritage. Thank you.


Ms S P TSOLELI: Ke a leboha, Modulasetulo ya tshwereng mokobobo ... [Kena hanong.] [Thank you, House Chairperson ... [Interjections.]]


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair! I was just saying ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Wait, hon Ndlozi. I did not recognise you. Wait! Can you please sit down, hon Tsoleli? Hon Ndlozi?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I was saying that, taking the colour of the jacket into cognisance, I hope she is going to agree that statues must fall, because if she will not do that it is going to be very disappointing to that revolutionary colour. [Interjections.] You cannot negotiate that apartheid statues must stay. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Tsoleli, continue. Please sit down, hon Ndlozi. Hon member, please sit down. Haai!


Mof S P TSOLELI: Modulasetulo ya tshwereng mokobobo, ke isa tlhompho ho Ditho tsa Lekgotla la Ketsamolao. Ke re ho Maafrika Borwa ka bophara, dumelang!


Pele nka kena tabeng ya ka ya sehlooho, e re ke leke ho hlalosa ho mohlompehi ya qetang ho botsa ka bokgubedu bona. Ke tla mo hlalosetsa hantle ka puo ya ka eo ke tswallwang ho yona, hore ... (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)


[Ms S P TSOLELI: House Chairperson, I salute Members of the National Assembly. To all the South Africans at large I say, greetings!


Before I continue with my speech, let me provide clarity to the hon member who just asked about this red colour. I will clarify it thoroughly to him in my mother tongue, that ...]


... Mna, phakathi kwe-ANC ne-SACP, andingomgqakwe, andiloveza ndlebe, kwaye andisosiza Nanina! [Ezandleni.] [Interjections.] Njengoko, ububomvu endibunxibileyo bubonisa apho ndisuka khona! [Interjections.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)


[... Between the ANC and SACP, I am not an illegitimate or adopted child, nor am I a child of a newlywed woman from a previous relationship! [Applause.] [Interjections.] Therefore, dressing in red indicates where I am from! [Interjections.]]


Botjhaba mona Afrika Borwa bo thehilwe ka ho kenyeletswa ha batho ba neng ba kotetswe mehleng ya pele, le ka ho ntshetsa pele twantsho ya ditsela tsa kgethollo e mabapi le kahisano le sepolotiki. Sena se etsahala ka lebaka la diphetoho tse tlisitsweng ke mmuso wa ANC. Diphetoho tsena di etsahala ka monyebe hobane ho dula ho ena le tshita ekasitana le dinyewe tse tliswang ke ba ntseng ba dumela hore kgatello ka ba basweu e sa ntse e lokile Afrika Borweng e ntjha.


Ke ka baka lena, ho fetolwa ha mabitso a mebila mane Tshwane [Pretoria] ho phephetswa makgotleng a dinyewe. Sena se tiisa hore le ha re fumane tokollo ya sepolotiki ka selemo sa 1994, maemo a jwale a bontsha a sa ntse a re etsa makgoba. A re utlwisa bohloko, mme a re hopotsa ka ho nkelwa moruo le ho hatellwa moruong. Sena ke hobane ka mehla, batho ba rona ba lokela ho tobana le diemahale tsa batho ba re sotlileng ka dilemo tse fetang makgolo a mahlano. (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)


[Here in South Africa, our heritage was established through the inclusion of people who were previously marginalised, and by also developing ways that are against social and political discrimination. These happen because of the changes that have been brought by the ANC government. These changes occur at a slow pace because there are always obstacles or cases brought by those who believe that discrimination by white people is still acceptable in the new South Africa.


It is due to this reason, that the changing of road names in Tshwane [Pretoria] is being challenged in courts. This proves that even though we gained political freedom in 1994, the current conditions seem to still portray us as slaves. They are hurting us, they remind us of being stripped of our economy and being economically oppressed. This is because every day, our people have to face statues of people who oppressed them for more than five hundred years.]


Chairperson, a walk down Adderley Street in Cape Town, just behind us, is a reminding example from a sitting, relaxed, yet dominant statue of Jan Smuts to that of Van Riebeeck. A walk by an African, a coloured or a Khoisan descendant is a painful reminder of subjugation. A similar experience is felt in Bloemfontein, Pretoria, Pietermaritzburg, Graaff Reinet and elsewhere in South Africa.


The African, coloured and Khoisan people are still regarded as people who do not have heritage. When we raised the need to transform the landscape to feel accommodated, we get lame excuse that are about excessive cost implications and inconvenience to the city maps and directions. The guardian of white monopoly and an excluding heritage do not care about the painful feelings of the previously marginalised groups in this country.


In doing so, these groups undermine the sacrifice that leaders, kings and queens, such as Maqoma, Hintsa, Cetywayo, Moshoeshoe, Manthatisi, Chief Luthuli, Solomon Mahlangu, Andrew Zondo and others have made. I want to remind this House that people lost their lives in order for us to be free. A freedom cannot be separated form heritage. [Applause.]


This resistance towards transformation is a betrayal of the struggle. It is our duty to continue to fight until South Africa’s heritage landscapes tell a story of all South Africans.


Sihlalo, ukuba xa sixoxa ngenguqu kumasiko nencubeko yethu sijonge nalamagama angendawo awemveli kodwa asatyenziswayo ngenxa yokukrikriza nokuxhathisa kwabo bakhusela inqubo yobukhoboka kanye nobukoloniali. Zimbalwa kakhulu iidolophu nezixeko ezaziwayo ezitshintshwe amagama ukuhambelana nenqubo kumaxesha esiphila kuwo, nokuboniswa izimvo zesinitsi.


Kwesonzame zenzekileyo ukubonakalisa inguqu, singakhanyana oomaspala abafana noMsunduzi eMgungundlovu [Pietermaritzburg], iMangaung [Bloemfontein], umaspala we Nama Khoi oseSpringbok, iMbombela eNelspruit, kunye nezinye.


Lamgama kufuneka etshintshiwe, awakhangeleki kungamagama oqobo, aye engasincedizi ukulwa neezinguqu kufuneka uba zenzekile kwincubeko yethu.


Kunyanyanzelekile ukuba sikhawuleze ngalenqubo yokutshintsha amagama ngoba asikhumbuza ubukhoboka, sifake lawo amagama oqobo nafunwayo sisininzi seli. Kutheni sizakuma neMpuma London [East London] eMzantsi Afrika? Yintoni iFree State? Yintoni iKwaZulu-Natal? (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)


[Chairperson, when we debate changes to traditions and culture we must look at the nontraditional names that are still in use because of resistance by those who defend slavery and colonialism. There are very few towns and well-known cities that have had their names changed in line with modern times and to reflect the views of the majority.


Amongst efforts to reflect change we can mention the municipalities such as Msunduzi in Mgungundlovu [Pietermaritzburg], Mangaung in Bloemfontein, the Nama Khoi Municipality in Springbok, Mbombela, formerly Nelspruit, etc.


These names have to be changed; they do not sound like proper names and they do not help us to reflect the change that has to happen in our culture.


We have to speed up the process of renaming because the old names remind us of slavery, and we have to use proper names that appeal to the majority in this country. Why do have to persist with East London in South Africa? What is Free State? What is KwaZulu-Natal?]


Nelson Mandela, the father of our democracy, stated during the official opening of Robben Island Museum in 1997, and I quote:


Our cultural institutions cannot stand apart from our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. Within the context of our fight for a democratic South Africa and the entrenchment of human rights, we cannot afford exhibition in our museums depicting any of our people as lesser human beings.


Sometimes in natural history a museum is usually reserve for the depiction of animals. Can we continue to tolerate our ancestors be shown as people locked in time?


In this reflection, Nelson Mandela was giving us, the collective citizens, a lead to take the transformation of the heritage sector to the next level. Mandela thought that the people who tortured him had changed. He thought that the people he negotiated with during the Convention for a Democratic South Africa, Codesa, were honest. He did not know that the sooner, the very same people that he had forgiven would block the very same nation-building process that they whole-heartedly promised to spearhead. [Applause.]


In South Africa, everyday, Africans are reminded about their history and the suffering that is less important than those of horses and dogs. This is because the depiction of history captures horses and dogs to the exclusion of many women – black or white – who perished in the concentration camps. It dispels the suffering of children who died during the times of wars.


Despite concerted efforts to transform the narrative of the 1899-1902 South African wars, colonial guardians still relate to this as an Anglo-Boer War.  There is undisputed historical evidence that Africans, Indians, Chinese and Russians participated in this war. [Applause.]


ANC e tsitlallela boleng ba phediso ya kgethollo le ho aha Afrika Borwa e kopaneng. Ka hoo, ho bohlokwa hore phetolo ya matlotlo a rona e etswe ka ho akarelletsa Maafrika Borwa ohle. Re leboha Yunivesithi ya Stellenbosh ka ho tlosa sehopotso se sebe sa Verwoerd bekeng tse pedi tse fetileng. [Mahofi.] Motho eo, nalane ya hae e tletse boikakalopi ba kgethollo bo tshabehang mme bo sa hlokeng sebaka botjhabeng ba rona.


ANC e etsa kgoeletso ho mafapha ohle a puso ho tlosa ka molao diemahale, ditshwantsho le dihopotso tsohle tse phahamisang kgethollo efe kapa efe. Ba di tlose ka molao! 


Mohlomong sena se tla fana ka thuto ho bao ba sa ntseng ba keteka botaki ba apartheid ka hore baetapele ba apartheid ba ne ba le hlwahlwa. [Kena hanong.] Ke ha fela tsena di tlositswe moo Afrika Borwa e tla qala ho utlwa monate wa tokoloho. Ke a leboha. [Mahofi.] (Translation of Sesotho paragraphs follows.)


[The ANC is determined to end discrimination and build a united South Africa. Thus, it is important that the changing of our heritage sector be conducted in a way that will include all South Africans. We thank the University of Stellenbosch for removing the horrible statue of Verwoerd in the past two weeks. [Applause.] That person’s history is full of all forms of horrible discrimination, which do not deserve a place in our culture.


ANC is making an appeal to all government departments to legally remove all statues, pictures and monuments which promote any form of discrimination. They should remove them legally!


Maybe this will be a lesson to those who are still celebrating the arts of apartheid by thinking that apartheid leaders were brilliant. [Interjections.] It is only when these have been removed that South Africa will start to enjoy the fruits of freedom. I thank you. [Applause.]]


Dr P W A MULDER: Agb Voorsitter, as ’n mens na die debat luister, dan is daar basies twee benaderings wat gevolg kan word as jy oor standbeelde, simbole en beelde praat. Die een benadering is ’n insluitende benadering en die ander een is ’n uitsluitende een.


Wat is die probleem? Die probleem is dat om baie redes het ons ’n verdeelde geskiedenis. Die Suid-Afrika van vandag het eers in 1910 tot stand gekom. Dit is maar ’n 100 jaar gelede. Hier, op verskillende maniere, is ’n lang geskiedenis van voor 1910. Afrikaners is met die oorlog hierin gedwing. Die gevolg is dat daar verskillende interpretasies van die geskiedenis is en daar is verskillende helde.


Die uitsluitende wyse is om te sê net wie tans in beheer is besluit wie die helde is; besluit wie se standbeelde uiteindelik daar is; en vermy dan alle ander standbeelde en ander verdere geskiedenis. Die probleem daarmee is dat geen regering permanent is nie. Kom ek gee ’n voorbeeld. Kom ons aanvaar dat die PAC die volgende regering hierna is. Dan moet ons die standbeelde van Hani en Zuma verwyder en vervang met standbeelde van Sobukwe en Makwetu. Kom ons aanvaar dat daarna kom die EFF aan bewind, en dan moet ons in elk geval vir agb Malema en agb Ndlozi standbeelde oprig en die ander verwyder. [Tussenwerpsels.]


Die probleem daarmee is dat as u na die Britse parlement toe gaan – u kan gerus soontoe gaan – dan staan daar ’n standbeeld van Cromwell. Hy het die monargie vernietig en eintlik die parlement tot niet gemaak. Daarna het dit weer omgedraai. Hy het die koning Charles 1 se kop afgekap. As jy ’n entjie aanstap dan staan Charles 1 en Cromwell se standbeelde daar. Altwee is nie noodwendig gewilde figure nie, maar hulle verteenwoordig die geskiedenis.


Kom ek vat ’n ander voorbeeld. As jy na ons kasteel hier in Kaapstad gaan kyk, het dit ’n geskiedenis wat verskillende interpretasies het van onderdrukking of kolonialisme. Bo die kasteel het die vlae van die verskillende tydperke gewapper. Ek hou nie van die Britte en die Union Jack nie. My ouma was daarteen vanweë die konsentrasie kampe, maar die Union Jack, die Hollandse vlag en al die ander vlae het daar gewapper. Dit was die insluitende benadering.

Die ANC het beswaar gemaak. Al die vlae is weg en ons het nou slegs die een benadering. My ouma Maria Mulder was 16 jaar oud in die konsentrasie kamp waar haar ma dood was. Haar boetie, Gerrie, is dood op drie jaar omdat mense wie se ouers nog geveg het, of wie se pa nog geveg het, helfte van die kos rantsoene gekry het van mense wie reeds oorgegee het. Die kleintjie het daar gesterf, en sy moes as ’n 16 jarige die kleintjie begrawe. Ek was geleer om my voorouers te eer en te respekteer, soos u almal hooplik ook geleer was.


Daar is ’n monument by Merebank opgerig waar Gerrie se naam staan. Die vraag is, moet ons dit vernietig? Moet ons dit wat sy gesien het as ’n geveg teen Britse imperialisme tot niet maak?


Die Vryheidsmanifes sê Suid-Afrika behoort aan almal wat hier woon, swart en wit. Die VF Plus glo dat ’n insluitende benadering die verstandige benadering is. Kom ek voeg by dat ek persoonlik reeds in 1995 voorgestel het dat hier ’n groot standebeeld van Mnr Mandela moet kom. Dit het nie gebeur nie. Ek hou niks van koningin Victoria nie, maar sy staan hier buite omdat dit deel van ons geskiedenis is. Dit is die uiteindelike manier wat almal insluit na buite toe en nie wegjaag nie.


U kan nie vir my sê dat ek deel is van Suid-Afrika nie en dat my belasting geld goed is, maar nie my helde en my verlede nie. Dan, wat die toekoms betref, gaan ons nêrens om ’n nasie hier saam te stel nie. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)


[Dr P W A MULDER: Hon Chairperson, when one listens to the debate, then there are basically two approaches that one may follow when talking about statues, symbols and images. The one approach is an inclusive approach and the other is an exclusionist one.


What is the problem? The problem is that for many reasons we have a divided history. Today’s South Africa came into existence only in 1910. That was only 100 years ago. Here, in different ways, there is a long history from before 1910. Afrikaners were forced into that because of the war. The consequence is that there are different interpretations of history and there are different heroes.


The exclusionist way is to say that only those who are currently in control decide who are the heroes; decide whose statues finally appear; and then avoid all other statues and further history. The problem with that is that no government is permanent. Let me give you an example. Let us accept that the PAC will be the next government. Then we must remove the statues of Hani and Zuma and replace them with statues of Sobukwe and Makwetu. Let us accept that after that, the EFF comes into power, and then in any case we will have to erect statues for the hon Malema and hon Ndlozi and remove the rest. [Interjections.]


The problem with that is that if you go to the British parliament – I can recommend that you go there – then there is a statue of Cromwell. He destroyed the monarchy and actually abolished parliament. After that he turned it around again. He chopped off the head of King Charles I. If you were to walk on a little way, then the statues of Charles I and Cromwell are there. Neither of the two is necessarily a popular figure, but they represent history.


Let me take another example. If you look at our castle here in Cape Town, it has a history that has different interpretations of oppression or colonialism. Above the castle flew the flags of the different dispensations. I do not like the British and the Union Jack. My grandmother was opposed to that because of the concentration camps, but the Union Jack, the Dutch flag and all the other flags flew there. That was the inclusive approach.

The ANC objected. All the flags have been removed and now we have only one approach. My grandmother, Maria Mulder, was 16 years old in the concentration camp where her mother died. Her little brother, Gerrie, died at age three because people whose parents had fought, or whose father was still fighting, received half of the food ration of people who had already surrendered. The little one died there, and she as a 16-year-old had to bury the little one. I was taught to honour and respect my ancestors, as I hope all of you were also taught that.


A monument has been erected at Merebank on which Gerrie’s name is written. The question is, should we destroy it? Should we do away with that which she saw as a fight against British imperialism?


The Freedom Charter says South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white. The FF Plus believes that an inclusive approach is the sensible approach. Let me add that I myself as long ago as 1995 proposed that a large statue of Mr Mandela should be erected here. That did not happen. I do not like Queen Victoria at all, but she is standing here outside because that is part of our history. That is the eventual way which includes everyone outside and does not chase anyone away.


You cannot tell me that I am part of South Africa and that my tax money is acceptable, but not my heroes and my past. Then, as far as the future is concerned, we will get nowhere in composing a nation here. I thank you.]


Mr M G P LEKOTA: Thank you House Chair. My dear friends, I do think that we must live life as it is and not as we wish it. While I sat there listening to this debate, I thought, if the Bible did not include the word devil, what would be the meaning of God? Or if the word devil was the only one spoken about in the Bible and the word God was not there, what would be the meaning of devil? Meaning comes from these contradictions in life.


If there was no slave-master, how could you talk about a slave, because against what would it be compared? It would mean nothing. So the reality of life is that we can never tell history. We can never talk about each other. If there were no tall people, then there would be no short people. If we were all the same height, life would lose meaning; words would mean nothing.


I do want to say that when we defeated apartheid, there were some human beings who upheld apartheid and others who were against it. However, if we are going to allow our children and great grandchildren to know what is good and bad, we have got to tell them about both God and the devil. We’ve got to talk about all of this. If we remove something and say it is not allowed in life then we will not be able to say anything. Even when people improve or change from what they had been wrong about and become something else, we would not understand it if there were not two opposing conditions.


Therefore, I say that in 1994 when we came to power we had to deal with a number of issues – statutes and statues. There were laws which said that it was wrong to cross a road or a junction if the traffic light was red and not green. That was right. It was red whether it was during apartheid or after apartheid. It is still right today. You don’t cross a junction if the traffic right is red. It’s wrong today, just as it was wrong during apartheid.


That being the position, we had to choose what the right things were and what things were not right. Systematically therefore, we had to decide what the things were that we had to get rid of. [Interjections.]


Please listen! Get rid of the things ... [Time expired.]

Rev K R J MESHOE: Chairperson, the ACDP welcomes this debate ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order hon members! My apologies, hon Rev. Hon members, there is a lot of noise. Can you reset the Rev’s time please? Hon members please don’t cause the delay because of the noise. Thank you. Go ahead hon member.


Rev K R J MESHOE: Chairperson, the ACDP welcomes this debate on the relevance of symbols in building a new democratic heritage in light of recent campaigns to remove certain statues.


Some of the actions by haters of our colonial past was shocking and in some cases disgusting. When protesters go around carrying human waste, and splash it on statues, their own self-respect and dignity is undermined. Such people, particularly from institutions of higher learning, should be encouraged to rather use debate and persuasion to object or advance their beliefs, and not subject themselves to such unacceptable behaviour that no self-respecting person would resort to.


We all know that South Africa has a shameful past, where many atrocities were committed in one form or another. There is nothing we can do to change what happened back then, nor should we attempt to blot it out. We should not allow anger and bitterness over our evil past to dictate South Africa’s future. We should not be angry forever because that would affect our personal and our country’s health, and our relationships with one another.


The ACDP supports government’s policy on national reconciliation, nation-building and social cohesion. We believe that much of the country’s past should be preserved, alongside the new South African ethos and the unifying symbols we are creating. Those who disagree must argue their case rather than resort to criminal activities against our national heritage.


The value of preserving history is even acknowledged by the medical profession. When patients visit doctors for the first time, they are asked about their medical history. Depending on the severity of what they are suffering from, they might even be asked about the medical history of their grandparents. This information is needed to decide on the best possible treatment.


Statues and monuments are part of our history. Our children and future generations will learn and remember. As we erect new statues and create new symbols, we should keep as much of the past as possible in the interest of national reconciliation and nation-building. Thank you.

Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair, I want to ask the Rev a question.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, no, no, please don’t do that, hon Ndlozi! You have not been recognized yet you continue to speak.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Sorry.


Rev K R J MESHOE: I can take it here.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you, hon Meshoe.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I wanted to ask ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Meshoe has gone. Please sit.


Mr S M JAFTA: Hon House Chair, I think as South Africans we must welcome the revival of the debate about how South Africa should confront the symbols of the apartheid era in order for this country to focus on building a new democratic heritage. However, we must also remind the people that South Africa had attained its political freedom and that the people have the freedom of speech as stated in the Constitution of this country - therefore have the right to bring forward any matter for debate which is necessary to build the new South Africa.


We therefore must condemn the violent destruction of any symbol of the past or present by any South African. We know as a fact, that the history of our country is bad and painful to others, but we cannot throw it away as if we want the people to believe that there was no South Africa before 1994. We need to know where this country comes from and generations to come must know the real history of their country too.


That is why the AIC believes and supports the idea that those symbols or statues representing the apartheid era which are offensive to other citizens of this country must be taken away from the public sites and be kept in special museums and heritage sites for those South Africans believing in them and for the historical records.


When engaging in these debates, trying to heal the bitter wounds of apartheid, we must reassure every citizen of this country, black and white, that they have a future in a democratic South Africa. We must remind ourselves and South Africans about the ideas for this country to adopt the new national anthem and new national flag in 1994. We must call for all South Africans to unite in a common sense of belonging and national pride.

I wish to remind this house of Marx’s words when he said andI quote:


Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past.


The renaming of towns and streets should be part of the national drive to make South African cities and street names sound more inclusive and less reflective of the apartheid past. Thank you. [Applause.]


Mna M A PLOUAMMA: Mohl Modulasetulo, ke kgopela go bolela ka Sepedi. Seo ke nyakago go se bolela ke gore re mo re lego gona ka lebaka la ge re kile ra swarela batho bao ba ilego ba re gatelela pele ga 1994. Batho bao ga ba leboge ge re ba swaretše. [Tsenoganong.] Ke nagana gore go ba swareleng ga rena – re etilwe pele ke ANC, a ba leboge le gore go tsogela mmušo maatla ga rena go ile gwa fedišwa ka therišano e sego ka ntwa ya madi. Ka fao ke re dihlwadieme tšeo re nago le tšona ga di sepelelane le mantšu a ANC e ratago go a bolela a gore: We had colonialism of a special type.


Ge o ka lebelela mo Afrika-Borwa, ga gona sehlwaseeme seo se tšweletšago batho ba baso. Dihlwadieme ga se tša rena,le maina a naga ga se a rena. Ka fao mohl Tona, rena ba Agang SA, re a go thekga gore ka nnete, ka bjako ka mokgwa wo go ka kgonagalago, a dilo tšohle di fetoge ka semolao.


Ga re dumelelane le batho bao ba nyakago go šomiša tsela ya go thoma go tsogela mmušo ka boradia. Go tsogela mmušo mo go se go molaong ... [Tsenoganong.] Ga ke tsebe gore ‘bogus’ ke eng ka Sepedi ... [Tsenoganong.] ... feela le a nkwešiša. Go tsogela mmušo maatla o kukwa ke maikutlo, o se na lebaka.


Seo re se kgopelago ke gore mmušo wa ANC, ka ge re o hlompha gona bjale, o tsebe gore dihlwadieme tšeo di re kweša bohloko. Ge batho ba gaborena ba tsena ka gare ga toropo ba bona sehlwaseeme sa Paul Kruger ba gopola ka mokgwa wo ba swarwago ka gona le ka moo ba šomago ka gona. Batho bao ba bego ba ba gateletše ba sa ba gopotša gore le ge ba thopile mmušo, bona ba sa laola mekgotha, ka gore ba sa na le dihlwadieme tša bona ka gare ga ditoropo.


Ke kgopela gore le ge e baba nnete ye, re kgotlelele. Ka boikokobetšo ke kgopela gore ANC e ete tshepedišo ye pele. Etang pele ka ge le sa buša. Ba ba etago ba tšhela dihlwadieme ka tšeo ba di tšhelago, ba ka lesa go dira seo ge le ka eta tshepedišo pele gore mafelelong re be le Afrika-Borwa yeo e bontšhago gore bontši bja badudi ba yona ke batho ba baso le ge e le gore re amogela merafe ye mengwe yeo e lego gore le bona ke badudi ba Afrika-Borwa gonabjale. Feela re se ke ra lebala le gatee gore naga ye ke ya Afrika ka fao e swanetše go hloma dihlwadieme tšeo bontši bja tšona e lego tša batho bao ba dulago fa. Ke a leboga. (Translation of Sepedi speech follows.)


[Mr M A PLOUAMMA: Hon Chairperson, I am going to debate in Sepedi. We are where we are right now because we have made reconciliation with those who oppressed us before 1994. Even so, they are not grateful for us having forgiven them. [Interjections.] I think that it was the ANC that led us to forgive them – let them also be grateful that our rise against apartheid has ended peacefully through negotiations only and not bloodshed. The statues in the country are not in line with what as the ANC use to say: We had colonialism of special type.


By observation, throughout the country there are no black South African statues. The statues are not ours, even the names of the settlements are not of our origin. Therefore, hon Minister, as the Agang SA, we support the motion indeed, and we propose that the changes be effected as urgently as possible.


We do not approve of the people who want to take this as an opportunity to rise against the government. This uprising is illegal ... [Interjections.] I do not know what ‘bogus’ is in Sepedi ... [Interjections.] ... but you understand me. It is inappropriate to rise against the government without valid reasons.


As much as we respect the ANC-led government, we would like them to know that those statues are offensive. When our fellow South Africans walk and see the statues of Paul Kruger they are reminded of how they are ill-treated and the poor working conditions they experience. It is as if they are still being reminded that even though they have won the struggle, the oppressors are still in in some sort of power.


Although the truth hurts, I request that we be patient. With due respect, I ask the ANC to spearhead this process. As the ruling party the onus is on you to take the lead. Those who deface the statues with paint will stop doing so if you spearhead the process so that we can have a South Africa which shows that the majority is the blacks and yet welcoming other races as citizens. However, we must not forget that South Africa must erect statues which show the majority of the citizens. I thank you.]


Mr L R MBINDA: Hon Chair, if we are very serious more especially about transforming this country, I am talking about radical transformation, we need to start changing South Africa to Azania. [Interjections.] South Africa is a colonial name, I must remind you. A country cannot be named by its geographical position. Azania is the name that must be adopted by this House.


The PAC agrees with the concept of symbols and statues in building a new society. The relevance stems from the fact that history must be depicted correctly and accurately. We currently live in a society that is reflective of a false history - a highly incomplete history and history that reflects white supremacy life.


Going to the recent events of removal of statues, as the PAC we support the removal of statues of apartheid - but propose they should be kept in a safe place for storage, and not just be destroyed. The history of a transformed nation cannot be depicted by the prominence of individuals who perpetuated genocide. People like Paul Kruger, Rhodes and many other colonial generals. As we can see, you do not find the statues or symbols of nurses and doctors - we find those of bloodthirsty military individuals. It is clear that the concept has been violated and is reflective that our society has not transformed.


Where are the statues of our African heroes like Thomas Sankara, Kwame Nkrumah and Julius Nyerere? What’s more, the history of the last state of the struggle has been depicted partisan as we do not see critical people on those symbols and statues. People like the longest political prisoner in South Africa which actually happens to be Japhta Masemola, sentenced in 1962 until 1989, you must count 27 years. There was no break to Victor Verster or Pollsmoor. The first modern time political prisoner to be convicted in South Africa is John Nkosi of the PAC of Azania. Besides from a policy perspective, we have personalised statues too much. The statues we have represent personalities rather than events.


As the PAC we don’t see symbols and statues that are depictive of political prisoners and prisoners of war and the hanging of many of our soldiers. Likewise, we don’t see the glorified places like Mapungubwe being displayed prominently in our social space. Neither do we see the great trade that happened before the arrival of European settlers. Izwe Lethu!


Ms P T VAN DAMME: Hon Chairperson, South Africa’s first democratic elections signalled an era of hope; hope for a new South Africa; hope that all South Africans will finally be equal; and hope that uhuru will be realised. The South Africa we live in today is sadly not yet uhuru. The recent state of protests, vandalism and destruction of statues said to represent apartheid, symbolise the continued disdain of many young people for conditions in present day South Africa. Many young South Africans, particularly the born-frees, have too realised that it is indeed not yet uhuru. Our born-frees have realised that the struggle continues and uhuru and our dreams of a rainbow nation remain elusive.


Finweek recently ran a cover story about young people living in South Africa. The magazine call them young, black and angry, and correctly so. While our young people now have the political rights that the generation before them didn’t, they too still fight the struggle. Our born-frees struggle is not one for political rights, but against rampant unemployment and education system that sets them up for failure.


A recent South African Institute of Race Relation study on the born-frees, found that government has failed to provide great majority of this group of decent schooling, vocational training, access to the labour market and business incentives. This is indeed true if one looks at the statistics. The majority of primary schools cannot provide adequate training, writing and mathematical skills to most learners. For those who have overcome these challenges and make it to university, only 38% are likely to obtain a three to four-year degree within five years. Even for those who graduate are likely to find work as the unemployment rate for graduates has doubled since 1994. That is why today 70% of young black people between the ages of 15 and 24, our born frees, are unemployed. For coloured people of the same age, unemployment rate is 55%, for Indians are 40% and white people 22%.


The ANC is failing our people and is failing young black people in particular. As results of these dire conditions, it is no wonder that our young people feel a great sense of alienation from government and in particular the ANC, and that is why they’ve taken to the streets in protest.


The statue movements are yet another on a long list of service delivery protests that have engulfed South Africa of the last number of years. Some of course, saw the statue movements as an opportunity to jump on the band wagon of populism to fuel the indiscriminate destruction of statues, including the vandalism of the park in the Eastern Cape commemorating Saartjie Baartman’s life.


It is absolutely important that we as parliamentarians have constructive discussions about our shared public spaces and what they need to look like. No one has a monopoly on the truth. Universities as the intellectual hearts of our country should also be leading constructive debates on this important issue. I emphasise constructive here. Flinging poo and singing one settler, one bullet is in no way helpful.


In having these constructive discussions, we need to do so in honesty, and if we are honest with ourselves the truth is in plain sight. While it is indeed apartheid that has caused many of South Africa’s trouble, the biggest portion of the blame lies with the party that has governed this country for the last 21 years. It is not the statues that cause our problems, but it is the ANC. It is the ANC that has failed to create a fully inclusive country; it is under the ANC that employment has soared; and it is under the ANC that children in the townships and rural areas continue to receive inferior education.

My challenge today to South Africa is for us to rise to the intellectual challenge of incorporating statues into powerfully inclusive spaces that affirm our vision for the future. We need our public spaces to be a constant reminder of our past, so we remember never to go back. It is much easier to tear down, than it is to build. Let us choose reconciliation over revenge, and let us look to the future and not the past.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order hon, members. There is a lot of noise, continue.


Ms P T VAN DAMME: Through you hon Chairperson, I would like to today provide the ANC with things that do need to fall, unlike statues, the symbols and monuments of our current struggles that must fall. Hostels must fall, unemployment must fall, unequal education must fall, corruption must fall, patriarchy must fall and racism must fall. Those are the things that need to fall. South Africa has given the ANC 21 years, and you have shown that you are not up to the task. The DA is the only party in South Africa that has a political will to make sure that all our current struggles fall. [Applause.]


We stand today with the hardworking and freedom loving people of our country who want to live and raise their families in safe communities. We stand together with South Africans who want to build a country where all of us, regardless of our backgrounds, make progress together. We recognise that the injustices suffered by previous generations harm those who follow. Many born after 1994 still feel the effects of the past, and it is important that those are redressed. The blame for South Africa’s failures needs to be placed at the right door. Let us direct our anger to the ANC through the ballot, and not at statues. Thank you, hon Chairperson. [Applause.]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon Chairperson, Nelson Mandela postulated that heritage awakes a mixture of emotions and it should illuminate changes that have taken place in South Africa. He characterized our heritage as a joint heritage that acknowledges commitment to democracy, tolerance and human rights. This is the blueprint of how we should deal with our heritage.


It is however important to note that, as Mandela pointed out, we have an obligation to join together heritages that are different and sometimes hostile to each other.


Since the advent of democracy, while a lot has been achieved, as the Minister has indicated, we are continually held to ransom by malicious and right-wing movements that pose and use vast resources, whose sole purpose is to stifle transformation and protect minority heritage and symbolism within the South African landscape, taking advantage of our world-class and most progressive Constitution.


By the way, courtesy of the ANC, the Constitution. [Interjections.]


It cannot be right ... [Interjections.] It cannot be right that the country’s heritage and symbols, despite positive changes that have taken place, accommodating all who live in it, as the Freedom Charter dictates, remain dominated by statues, plaques, place names, cadastrals, city, town and street names and memorials of white colonial males, dogs and horses to the exclusion of the rest of South African society.


As the heritage cannot be separated from history, it is not correct that representation of the country’s heritage is still skewed. It is a fact that South Africa has a rich heritage that predates the arrival of colonialists during the 15th century. This was manipulated together with its history and pushed to periphery and some to extinction, whilst the heritage of Europe was brought to the country. As a result, African original places were given names of Europeans. This disconnected Africans from their own heritage. Place names reflected a particular meaning.


Land plays a fundamental role in the practice of heritage. Colonialism and land dispossession meant that the African race could not practice their heritage, they could not access certain mountains and rivers that were part of their economic, social and spiritual heritage. In many instances, their ancestral graves became part of white farms and not only were they not allowed to access them, but white farmers destroyed some of them. The colonialism and apartheid stripped the African people of their dignity, their daily lives and their eternality. It is this painful disconnection from their heritage that the ANC has striven to restore.


Philosopher and revolutionary, Frantz Fanon, observed in the Algerian scenario that colonial domination because it is total and tends to oversimplify, very soon manages to disrupt in spectacular fashion the cultural life of a conquered people. This cultural obliteration is made possible by the negation of national reality and by the new legal relations introduced by occupying powers, by banishment of the natives and their customs to the outlying districts by colonial society, by exploitation and by systematic enslavement of men and women.

This is how African heritage was treated in South Africa by the white minority government – of which Maimane is now a leader of that cohort. [Interjections.]


While successive ... [Interjections.]


HON MEMBERS: Honourable!


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon Maimane is the leader of that cohort. [Interjections.]


While successive colonial and apartheid governments viewed African heritage with the aim of distorting and destroying it and them condemning it to extinction and secrecy over a period of 400 years, the ANC’s view has always been different. This is precisely because the ANC views history as an important factor to the modalities of nation-building.


An HON MEMBER: The most corrupt party ...


Mr J L MAHLANGU: During the 51st conference of the ANC, the ANC resolved that the arts and culture component within the ANC social transformation committee must lead in the transformation of arts and culture and the promotion of a South African identity drawing on the rich heritage of our country. To reinforce the role of family in moral regeneration, to support measures necessary for family revival, that the ANC must lead in the promotion of our national symbols as a mechanism for building a new South African identity, particularly the adoption of the national anthem of the country as an official version of the ANC gathering. That the ANC must protect cultural heritage including history as part of major contributions to South African national identity and ensures ways to keep the history alive and pass it from generation to generation. That the government must expedite the programme to develop heritage sites and the ANC must lead the promotion of heritage and historical memory at the local level, through all forms of remembrance.


In this regard, I believe that the Department of Arts and Culture will include in its programmes a remembrance of the more than 200 Mozambican slaves who perished right here in Cape Town on Clifton beach 200 years ago, 27 December 1794 in a Portuguese boat, the São José-Paquete de Africa, which were transported as cargo – goods to be sold in Brazil, not as human beings. [Interjections.]


Mindful of the dialectic relationship between history and heritage, the ANC believes that, in commemorating the country’s heritage, diversity should be the driving force. As a result, the ANC has commemorated struggle heroes, some of whom did not emerge within the ANC. Some that had no political leanings at all. We all need to agree that South Africa’s heritage is not reflective of its citizenry. Where else would you find a scenario where a country’s heritage reflects the history of the minority? How could such an exclusive heritage promote inclusion to you, hon Mulder? It cannot be true. It cannot be expected in the CBDs of Cape Town, Pretoria, Bloemfontein ... there is no Africanisation of those cities. It is all European. We all have an obligation to ensure that current statues are removed in order to usher new ones. Some of them could even be taken to the apartheid museum, if that would help. [Interjections.]


Coming back to some of the comments by my colleagues ... I must have the last speaker from the DA, to say ... There is nothing called “born frees”. [Interjections.] There is nothing called “born frees”. Because the DA has been advocating and inviting us to go where they govern, some of us took the challenge and visited the suburbs of Cape Town – all windows facing the ocean. Beautiful. Who lives there? [Interjections.]


An HON MEMBER: Where do you live?


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Go to Gugulethu. It was so sad ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon members!


Mr J L MAHLANGU: In Gugulethu where you govern, children have no playgrounds. They play ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon Steenhuisen!


Mr J L MAHLANGU: They play in graveyards. [Interjections.] Graveyards! When the white children in the suburbs have got more grounds, more stadiums, more swimming pools! [Interjections.] It is scandalous for yourselves to claim to be doing anything when you have so much... when you’ve treated blacks so badly. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order, hon members!


Mr J L MAHLANGU: And some of those in your fold ...


Mr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson ...


Mr J L MAHLANGU: ... have the audacity ...

Mr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Mahlangu, please sit. Hon Mulder, I will attend to you just now.


Hon members, you are drowning the speaker at the podium. We cannot hear him. [Interjections.] Please don’t do that. [Interjections.] Order, hon members!


Hon Mulder?


Mr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson, I am sure the hon member would like to debate, so I am sure he would not mind to take a very easy, simple question. [Interjections.] He has a lot of time. Take a question, hon member. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Tat’ uMahlangu, uyafuna ukuthatha umbuzo? [Mr Mahlangu, do you want to take a question?]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: I have a lot of things to say. Listen ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Uyafuna okanye awufuni ukuthatha umbuzo? [Do you want to take a question or you don’t?]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: No, I’m not taking your question. I’ll take it outside once I’m done, okay?


Mr C P MULDER: No, no, take it inside! You ... [Inaudible.] ... inside.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): No, hon Mulder!


Mr C P MULDER: Use the R10 million that you wasted to build parks!


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Agb Mulder, ek verwag nie dit van jou nie! [Tussenwerpsels.] Asseblief! [Hon Mulder, I do not expect this of you! [Interjections.] Please!]


Hon Mahlangu, please continue.


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Kayelitsha, Gugulethu, Nyanga ... all those places where our people live ... some of whom literally live on the streets ...


The CHIEF OF THE OPPOSITION: Where do you live?


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Chief Whip of the Opposition ...


Mr J L MAHLANGU: It is so bad. It is so scandalous; you should be ashamed of yourselves. In a country where you arrived less than 400 years ago ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Mahlangu ...


Really, hon members, I don’t expect the Chief Whip of the Opposition – who is supposed to be guiding the members – to be the one who does this to the member at the podium. [Interjections.] Hon members, please! We only have a few minutes to finish. Can we please allow the speaker to continue? [Interjections.]


Wat is nou verkeerd met julle? [Tussenwerpsels.] [What is wrong with you now? [Interjections.]]


Hon members, please! Order!


Gaan voort, buti. [Interjections.] [Laughter.] [Continue, bhuti.]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Thank you. Well, it is true that recently they ... the DA appointed Musi Maimane to lead them in order to protect white privilege. [Interjections.]


But, to the EFF ...


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Order!


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon Musi Maimane.


The CHIEF OF THE OPPOSITION: Point of order.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Steenhuisen?


The CHIEF OF THE OPPOSITION: For the second time, can you please instruct the speaker to refer to hon Maimane as the hon Maimane.


Mr J L MAHLANGU: I said so.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): How did you hear that, because you were busy making noise? [Interjections.]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Listening is always a skill, Chief Whip. [Interjections.]

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): All right, continue, hon member. Every member of this House is an honourable member. Thank you.


Mr J L MAHLANGU: To the members of the EFF ... [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Nee mense, asseblief! [No people, please!]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Just to say to hon Chewane that today you read from the correct speech. Congratulations. Not the one that you read ... you know ... you messed up that day.


But now, let me perhaps just help. You know, the Minister referred to the consultative forum that took place in Pretoria. [Interjections.]


Ja, it doesn’t matter!


So, in that forum, the UCT students came and they said they actually feel very bad about what Members of Parliament had done. They embarked on a matter of the transformation of their institution. Amongst other issues, was this Rhodes issue. And what did the EFF do? They jumped. They went for the statues. That was not their purpose. So it is dangerous ...


Kunento ekuthiwa kuthenga ikulumo. Nawuthenga ikulumo ongayaziko ukuthi ivelaphi itjhingaphi ... [There is something called “meddling”. When you involve yourself in something of which you don’t know the whereabouts ...].


You would always cause expensive mistakes. And that is what the EFF has done.


As I conclude, hon Mulder ...


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Chair, on a point of order. This is a misrepresentation of facts.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ndlozi, let me recognise you first.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: But is said point of order! [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Will you please allow me to recognise you?


Mr M Q NDLOZI: I said point of order. [Interjections.]


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Yes, but you continued to speak.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: Okay. Point of order.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: This is a misrepresentation of facts because the EFF was the first to start this debate.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Thank you.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: We are the ones that stood at that podium and said statues must go down.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ndlozi, thank you.


Mr M Q NDLOZI: So you are supposed to learn from us. You must consult us on the removal of statues.


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Ms M G Boroto): Hon Ndlozi, thank you. You have made your point. It is not a point of order; it is a point for debate. Continue, hon Mahlangu. [Interjections.]


Mr J L MAHLANGU: Hon Mulder, I think we must all be reminded that South Africa is constituted of 1 221 473 square kilometres. It does not grow. It will not grow. That is the totality of South Africa. More than 80% of that land is occupied by minorities. So, it cannot be correct that every time issues are raised, you want to believe that we must come up with new things and new places. This country will not grow! So, the totality of this country belongs to all who live in it. And all those who live in this country should have an equitable share of the landscape and the heritage of this country. Kealeboga. God bless you.


The CHAIRPERSON OF THE HOUSE (Miss G BOROTO): Bekusikhulumi sokugcina selanga, ngokutjho njalo sithi, iNdlu le ivaliwe. Siyathokoza. [That was our last speaker of the day; by saying so we mean that the House is adjourned. Thank you.]


Debate concluded.


The House adjourned at 18:23.







National Assembly and National Council of Provinces


The Speaker and the Chairperson


  1. Membership of Committees


(1)      Ms NR Bhengu (National Assembly) and Mr TC Motlashuping (National Council of Provinces) have been elected as Co-Chairpersons of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee on Probing Violence Against Foreign Nationals with effect from 04 June 2015.




National Assembly and National Council of Provinces


1.       The Minister of Environmental Affairs


  1. Yearly Report to Parliament on international environmental instruments for 2014-15, tabled in terms of section 26(1) of the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No 107 of 1998).


National Assembly


1.      The Minister of Social Development


  1. Draft regulations for approval by Parliament, submitted on 4 June 2015 in terms of section 43(4)(a) of the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2013 (No 7 of 2013).


  1. Directives submitted to Parliament on 4 June 2015 in terms of section 44(7)(a) of the Prevention and Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2013 (No 7 of 2013).




National Assembly


  1. Report of the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs on the Disaster Management Amendment Bill [B10 - 2015 (National Assembly – sec 76) dated 3 June 2015:


The Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, having considered the subject of the Disaster Management Amendment Bill [B10 – 2015] (National Assembly – sec 76), referred to it and classified by the Joint Tagging Mechanism (JTM) as a section 76 Bill, reports the Bill with amendments [B10A – 2015].


The DA has reserved its right to vote on the Bill.


Report to be considered.



No related


No related documents