Hansard: NA: Unrevised hansard

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 30 Aug 2022


No summary available.



Watch: Plenary



The House met at 14:03.

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.

The Speaker announced that she had been informed that Ms S Gwarube had been designated by the Democratic Alliance as the Chief Whip of the Opposition.

The vacancies which occurred in the National Assembly owing to the resignations of Mr P G Moteka and Ms C Seoposengwe had been filled, with effect from 2 August 2022, by the nominations of Mr T Mogale and Ms M M Matuba respectively.

The vacancy which occurred owing to the resignation of Ms A Steyn had been filled by the nomination of Ms A M van Zyl with effect from 10 August 2022.

The members had made and subscribed the oath in the Speaker’s office.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: On a point of order.

The SPEAKER: I am not allowing a point of order. I am recognising ... Sit down.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I want to make a point of order.

The SPEAKER: Hon Floyd, can you please sit down and then you raise your point of order. I have now called on the President.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But I am permitted in terms of these Rules to raise a point of order.

The SPEAKER. No, actually you are not until such time I have given you the opportunity to take the floor.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Please recognise me. I want to speak.

The SPEAKER: Please sit. I ask Mr President ...

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I want to raise a point of order first.

Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, you are out of order. There is a point of order being called. You are out of order, Speaker. And you are the one who is disrupting the President. You are disrupting the President. Allow the point of order before the President speaks.

The SPEAKER: Hon Malema? Hon Malema?

Mr J S MALEMA: Allow the member before the President speaks.

The SPEAKER: No, no, I will ...

Mr J S MALEMA: You are disrupting the President yourself. Protect him.

The SPEAKER: Hon member, I will throw you out. I will throw you out.

Mr J S MALEMA: But this is nonsense that when we speak you tell us to throw us out. What do you mean by that? Is nonsensical. This is nonsense. Is nonsensical.

Ms A GELA: They are also nonsense, Malema. They are also nonsense. Don’t abuse our Speaker like that, Malema.

The SPEAKER: Hon members?

Mr J S MALEMA: You can’t fight people speaking, threatening to throwing them out of the House.

The SPEAKER: Hon member Shivambu, we have not as yet got to the point of questions hence I am stopping ... But I have called somebody. Once he has spoken then you will raise your point of order. Hon Shivambu, I am listening and will you please listen too. Just learn to listen because is not as though you will not be given your opportunity to raise your point of order. The point I am raising - immediately after this I will call on the President and now you are saying point of order.




The SPEAKER: What point of order is that.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Listen to that. This is what I want to speak to that in the last sitting of this House when we are taking questions to the President of the ANC, he says here that we can’t just block all Members of Parliament on the virtual platforms because that equals to evicting them from Parliament.


In terms of Rules of the National Assembly, we are permitted perpetually to make interjections to point some of the wrong doings that happened from where you are now. But in the last siting of Parliament you just cancelled all of us here. You have never allow us any space to talk. We wrote to you to indicate that what you effectively did was to evict of all of us from Parliament and that is unconstitutional. To deny Members of Parliament their rights to speak here in Parliament. And we have written to you on several occasions that instead of this hybrid session which was just possible under the stricter COVID lockdown regulations. Why can’t you constitute ourselves as a Parliament, all of us.


They burnt the building where we supposed to be meeting and now we are reduced to this virtual sitting where you have got the power to just evict everyone else out of Parliament and deny them of their constitutional right and obligations to raise necessary intervention whenever there is wrongdoing happening in this particular House.


The SPEAKER: Okay.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: That’s the point of order that we are raising that a proper Constitution of this House has to be all us permitted to gather. It was understandable under COVID regulations and lockdown but currently that cannot make sense that we are not gathering all of us to hold this President of yours accountable in terms of what transpires in that particular House. That’s the point of order I am raising on.


The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Shivambu. You have made your point. May I now address you. You have raised your point. Taken note of. Allow me to address you and give me that opportunity. Hon members, in terms of Rule 26(2)(3), the Speaker must maintain and preserve order of and proper decorum of the House.


Rule 81 of the National Assembly provides circumstances when the Speaker can control microphones in the Chamber. The Rule state that, in the event of a member not showing due respect to the authority of or not obeying an order or ruling or direction of the presiding officer or acting in a disruptive or grossly disorderly manner in the House the presiding officer may disable or switch off the microphone being used by such a member or order that that be done.


Further hon Shivambu, Rule 82 provides that before proceeding in terms of sub Rule 81, the presiding officer must inform the member and the House of the intention to do so. Now I do not wish us to go back to the debate of 4 June or whatever the date and be subsequent disturbances in the House. But, I would like us, I have heard you and I hope you have listened to me and you are well acquainted with the Rules. I want us to proceed now.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker?


Mr J S MALEMA: On a point of order, Speaker.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker? Speaker?


Mr J S MALEMA: On a point of order, Speaker.


The SPEAKER: Sit down, hon Shivambu I have not given you the floor. Hon Malema?


Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, two points that I would like to raise with you. The fact that you say you don’t want to go back there is highly respected but it is befitting that before we proceed, you present a report of the cases that were reported to you on sexual harassments by the security on how they went about dealing with the eviction of female members. So, it is important that we get that report and through that report perhaps there could be some recommendations, I don’t know, where you now announce how such matters would be handled going forward. That’s number one.


Number two, Speaker, we were meeting in a manner we are meeting now during COVID-19 and we cannot when the regulations have been scrapped continue to meet in this manner we are meeting because you are doing this deliberately to protect the executive to be held accountable properly because you are micro managing us through switching off the microphones and then removing some of us from the platforms. All we are asking is, let this Parliament be postponed today and there must be a proper sitting of Members of Parliament, all of us under one roof.


The SPEAKER: Order, hon members. Order! Will you please allow Mr Malema who I have given the platform to finish what he is saying. Order! Order!


Mr J S MALEMA: Thank you.


The SPEAKER: Yes, continue.


Mr J S MALEMA: Yes, I am finishing, Speaker.


The SPEAKER: Yes, finish.


Mr J S MALEMA: The way we are constituted; it is extremely wrong. There are no longer COVID restrictions. Postpone the sitting. Arrange a proper venue and allow all of us to come under one roof because the way you are doing is tantamount to protecting the President of the ANC and the executive from being held properly accountable to Parliament. It’s our duty to hold these people accountable but the way you have arranged you have made it so easy to cut us out, switch off the mics because you can do so willy-nilly unlike when we are physically all there to hold the exceptive accountable, including him. This President who is running away and you remain quiet.


The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Malema. I have understood the issue you are raising and that is a matter which is on the table where members are calling on us to go back to a physical form of sitting. Just to say on 7 September, next week Wednesday, all the Chief Whips of the different parties will be meeting with the Speaker. And one of the items on the agenda is this particular issue. Is that satisfied you?


Mr J S MALEMA: And the report on the abuse of our female members?


The SPEAKER: The issue of ...


The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: I have a right to speak as a member of this House. Thank you very much, hon Speaker, according to our Rules, today's business is about the questions to the President because this is the House where the executive is held accountable to Parliament. Then the other reports of the sexual harassment and also the issue of the bigger venue or rented venue, that one will be discussed next week. That was the agreement in the Chief Whips Forum where all Chief Whips were represented. We discussed this matter and the Speaker and all the Presiding Officers will give us a report in that particular meeting, not today. Today's sitting is about the questions to the President. I thank you.


The SPEAKER: Hon members! Order! Before I take your hand, hon Mkhaliphi, if I may respond to the issue which has been raised by hon Malema, one, there is an issue which has been responded to by hon Dlakude, but there is a matter which also, hon Malema, has raised, of the report on the matter which was raised here in this Chamber on the last day. Now, just to say that that report indeed was received. That report is going to be discussed by the Whippery on the seventh of Dec... of ... on Friday actually. It is on your ... on the agenda of your meeting of the Rules Committee. But, in addition, if I may say this, actually, hon members of the EFF, because you are the complainants, you also are aware that I have given you a copy of that report. So, it is not like you are not familiar with the report and the issues coming out of that report. As complainants, you have been afforded a copy of the report so that when you interact with the Whips on Friday, at least you will be conversant with the issues in the same way that it affects me as a person who was presiding on that day and I have gone through the report and I will be part of that meeting.


Ms N V MENTE: Speaker, the first part you responded through


... of switching off the microphones, Rule 82, before proceeding, in terms of Rule 80(1), the Presiding Officer must inform the member, not members, of the House of the intention to do so. ... What you do, you take a blanket approach and switch everyone off, not one member when you are dealing with one member’s conduct, it is a member’s conduct, not EFF member, it is one member, that is number one. Number two, the report you say we had a privilege to see, I think indeed we had the privilege to see but we are going to have a problem if we are, as women, here in this House, when we are being harassed and violated by men called by you. You equally turn and go and open counter charges ... [Interjections.] ...


The SPEAKER: To be honest, hon Mente, you are out of order because this is not the item for the day. Hon ... [Interjections.] ...


Ms N V MENTE: ... against us. You even ... [Inaudible.] ... men. When did you see a woman touching a man here?


The SPEAKER: Hon Mente!


Ms N V MENTE: You even listed men that were violated by women of the EFF. That is not true.


The SPEAKER: Hon ... [Interjections.] ...


Ms N V MENTE: But that ... whatever day is whether Friday or Saturday ... [Inaudible.] ... [Interjections.] ...


The SPEAKER: Hon Mente ... [Interjections.] ...


Ms N V MENTE: ... We are going to reject that report.


The SPEAKER: ... this item will be on the agenda of the meeting and if you want a debate on that report when it has been processed ... [Interjections.] ...


Ms N V MENTE: It is not going to be debated.


The SPEAKER: Okay! Sit down then. The matter now is the President must answer questions. [Interjections.]


Ms N V MENTE: It is not going to be debated. You cannot go and tell men that they must go open counter charges against women as a woman Speaker. You cannot go and tell men to open counter charges against women. No! [Interjections.]


The SPEAKER: Hon Radebe! [Interjections.] Okay! Take a seat.


Mr B A RADEBE: Hon Speaker, on a point of order: I am rising on Rule 92 which is very clear that if a member is aggrieved in the House because of the ruling of a Presiding Officer must be able to proceed to the Rules Committee so that they can raise that particular point. But the ruling of the Presiding Officer is final in the House. I request that that Rule be observed, Speaker. Thank you.


The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Radebe. Hon Letsie from the virtual platform, and you will be the last one. Hon members, we now have to proceed with the business of the day and the business of the day is answers by the President to the questions which you have raised. Hon Letsie?


Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, you have recognised me before but it seems as if you have forgotten me. Can you recognise me?


The SPEAKER: Actually, hon Mkhaliphi, I never recognised you. I said ... I did ... [Interjections.] ...


Ms H O MKHALIPHI: ... you will come back to me. You did. You forgot. You did. Yes.




Kahle wena ... [Akuzwakali.] ...





The SPEAKER: Hon Letsie? [Interjections.] Sit down, hon Mkhaliphi. I will recognise you and you will be the last one. You will be the last. Letsie?






Mr W T LETSIE: Speaker, I hope I am audible, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: No! You are not going ... hon members, no. [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu! Hon Shivambu! No, stop it. For the sake of ... do not say what ... for the sake of the decorum of this House.



Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, please don’t point at me. You’ve got no right to point at me. Don’t use your finger to point at me.



The SPEAKER: Sit down!





Hlala phansi!





Mr V PAMBO: I didn’t come with your mother here. Don’t do that.





USOMLOMO: Lalela-ke ...






 ... sit down. You are right. You didn't come with your mother; my son is older than you.



AN HON MEMBER: But now you are ... [Inaudible.] ... [Interjections.] ...



Mr W T LETSIE: Speaker ... [Interjections.] ...



The SPEAKER: Hon Letsie, followed by hon Mkhaliphi.



Mr W T LETSIE: Yes, can I continue now? Yes, can I continue, Speaker?



The SPEAKER: Yes, sir.



Mr W T LETSIE: Thank you. Now I was saying, Speaker can your Table assistors there ... the sound that comes from the mics there in the House is extremely low and it’s going to deprive us of an opportunity to listen to some of those who would be asking follow-up questions in the House. So, can you please assist with the mics from the House? Thanks.




The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Letsie. I'm sure the people ... the IT system will sort this out. Hon Mkhaliphi? Hon ... ICT people, can you fix the ... [Inaudible.] ... system. Okay. Alright.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker ...



The SPEAKER: Yes, hon Mkhaliphi.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: ... I just want to say to you, Speaker, I’m rising on a point of order Rule 92, Speaker. Don't try to manage us ... [Interjections.] ... 92 and you are not the Speaker, because the issue of opening Parliament is an old issue. We have been writing to you. Now you are trying to manage us to tell us about the matter or the meeting that will take place on 7 September. So we are saying to you, now ... this today, we are supposed to have your President here. The President of the ANC is not here. Where is it? He is not here. So we are saying to you, please give us a response because when we are here, Speaker, we are not representing ourselves here. The people out there, want to know, when are we going to have all Members of Parliament as per the Constitution come and ensure that the executive is accountable to the members of




the public. The second point, Speaker, is the point that was raised by the national chair. Speaker, last time when you evicted the spokesperson of the EFF you also blocked all of us and you don't observe the Rules yourself. So today, ensure that people who are also ... yes ... you must admit and also apologise because we are also against the Rules speaker.



And today there are our members who are on the platform and ensure that you don't block them because they're also members. But lastly, is to say that the country has been opened, open Parliament. We have been saying that let us go even to Khayelitsha, we have to identify public spaces there.

Community halls are there. So we can go all of us to Khayelitsha in order for everyone to come and account.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Please respond because even the public is waiting for the response.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much.




Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Don’t tell us about the meeting on 7 September, it does not hold water. Thank you, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Mkhaliphi. Thank you very much. You have made your point. The main issue is the opening up of Parliament. And I'm saying you Chief Whips will be meeting on Friday. And one of the issues you are discussing and finalising to find a way forward is precisely that issue that’s before you, there is an order here and I'm just responding to that, number one.



Number two, on this matter, hon members, of blocking everybody. If I may respond to that, actually, it is not just members of the EFF who were cut off. It is all members who were on the virtual platform from all political parties. And it has everything ... Ah-ah! Wait, wait, and it has everything to do ... it had everything to do with maintaining the decorum of the House because people were screaming on the virtual platform. And I did explain that. I am now closing this matter, hon members, and I'm allowing Radebe ... [Interjections.]



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: On a point of order!






The SPEAKER: No! I've not given you the floor.



Mr N F SIVAMBU: On a point of order!



The SPEAKER: It is a point of order here.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But I have raised a point of order.



The SPEAKER: He had a point of order.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Please recognise me after him.



The SPEAKER: He had a point of order. [Interjections.] Sit down, man, don’t stand up. Don’t stand when raising a point of order for the sake of the decorum of the House.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But the Rules say we must stand up.



The SPEAKER: No! Don’t, just sit down and raise your hand and say, point of order.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But the Rules say we must stand up.








USOMLOMO: Cha, akukhona emwageni lana mani. [Ubuwelewele.] Radebe?





Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No, don’t talk to us like that ... [Interjections.] ...



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, but the Rules say you must stand up. Confirm the Rules.



The SPEAKER: But guys can you imagine if all of us stood up?



Mr J S MALEMA: You won’t run Parliament according to your feelings, follow the Rules. The Rules say we must stand up. Your feeling might be that we must sit down but the Rule says you must stand up.



Mr B A RADEBE: You are not the Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, Okay.




Mr B A RADEBE: Thank you, where is the president of the EFF


... [Inaudible.] ...



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Malema, for that lecture but, hon members, I want to make a plea to all of us.



Mr J S MALEMA: Why are you looking for me? I’m not your president. I’m not the President of the Republic. Look for your big-nosed President here. Why are you looking for me? Nxa!



The SPEAKER: I'm making a plea to all of you, which is that hon members, when you still have your hand up and you are asking to be recognised, please take your seat. You will be recognised. You know this is a small room. We can't all stand and say, point of order. That’s all I am saying. Hon Radebe?



Mr B A RADEBE: Hon Speaker, the first point of order I’m raising is on Rule 84, the hon Malema has just used unparliamentary language by calling you “wena” [you]. It cannot be right. You cannot be called “wena”. You are the head of this institution. Number two, hon Speaker, I'm still rising on Rule 92 (12) point of order subsection. That Rule is very




clear. The appointed Presiding Officer has made a determination, that determination cannot be challenged here on the floor. I request if the members are aggrieved, they must take it where it is supposed to go to.



The third order that I'm raising, Speaker, is on Rule 6, is very clear that if an unpredictable situation arises, just like the situation whereby the members are getting rowdy, they're making their House uncontrollable, you can use Rule 6 whereby you can make a determination yourself and then that Rule will be passed over ... that ruling will be passed over to the Rules Committee. But that ruling cannot be challenged. So we're not here to open up your rulings of the past sittings. If there are any people who are aggrieved, they know where they must go to. Thank you, hon Speaker.



The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Speaker, on a point of order: I rise in accordance with Rule 64 ...





... isicelo nje, Somlomo, ukuthi ...







 ... there is a time when a nation must decide and a House must decide that it shall be able to conduct itself in a manner in which the people of South Africa expect. So, according to that Rule which I have indicated, Speaker, ...





 ... isicelo nje ukuthi sifuna abantu ukubezwa kodwa uma bafuna ukuthi sibezwe kodwa singabalaleli ...





... it will not be helpful. I for one ... [Interjections.]





Mr J S MALEMA: That’s plagiary, intellectually that is plagiarism, quote the person ... [Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, please. Hon Zulu is on the floor, please.



The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: ... Speaker, I have said in this House, with due respect, that I'm the last person to request after having been part and parcel of people or members of this House who've consistently howled, consistently made




noise. We came to a point where I, for one said, can we at least lead our people in a way that they will continuously respect us?



And under that Rule that I indicated, Speaker there's a limit to which you yourself, as the Speaker, can keep on taking interruptions that are very deliberate and very well planned in order for us not to continue with the work of this House. And the hon ... who is saying, plagiarism or whatever he calls it?





IsiZulu lesi engisikhulumayo. IsiZulu sabo bonke abantu, hhayi isiZulu sakwaZulu kuphela, la abantu bekhona, yinto okufuneka siyikhulume leyo.





Let there be dignity in the House, once and for all.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Zulu. Hon members ... [Interjections.] ...




Mr J S MALEMA: You were quoting ... and you didn’t ... [Interjections.] ... that ... That was a quote.



The SPEAKER: No man, hon ... please.



Mr J S MALEMA: That was not Zulu. That was a quote.



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, please!



The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Malema, I quote and I unquote.



Mr J S MALEMA: Yes, please do that. [Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: I will not allow any points of order now; I want us to proceed.



AN HON MEMBER: Can you ... Julius also?



The SPEAKER: You are saying also; you mean he has not been stopped. What have I been doing? I said, hon Malema, stop it. Not once, not twice. What do you want me to do? Hon members, will you please ... all of you, I'm not going to allow you




now, hon Shivambu. We are now continuing with the business of


... [Interjections.] ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... [Inaudible.] ... Which Rules say you can’t allow me to ... [Inaudible.] ...



The SPEAKER: I'm not going because you are diverting us from what you're trying to do.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I am not asking you for permission. I am just indicating to you when I need to speak. I have the right to speak in this House.



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, if you don’t want ... [Interjections.] ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I have the right to speak in this House, you are just a facilitator there.



The SPEAKER: If you don’t... you don’t want me ... sit down, hon ...




Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Sit down for what because I want to raise a point of order.



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu!



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I am permitted by the Rules of this House to raise a point of order.



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, sit down. You don’t have the floor. [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu, number two ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I want to speak now.



The SPEAKER: You are not going to speak because I have ruled that we are now proceeding with the business of the day. [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu, this is the third time I am pleading with you. And now that ...



Mr S TAMBO: Point of order, Speaker! Point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Where is that hon ... hon Shivambu I've raised it thrice ... [Interjections.]




Mr S TAMBO: Point of order, Speaker1



The SPEAKER: Yes. Hon ... where are you?



Mr S TAMBO: Here, Speaker. Point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Hon Tambo.



Mr S TAMBO: Speaker, on a point of order: I rise on Rule 92, in terms of procedure. I am going to address two points in that regard. One, we have asked to have an open discussion in terms of the blocking of members here. You quoted Rule 8(2) here on removing members on the basis of disorderly conduct and you said members in the plural form.




The SPEAKER: We have passed that one now. We have passed that one.




Mr S TAMBO: Can I finish, Speaker? Can I be indulged?





The SPEAKER: No, you are delaying the process.







Mr S TAMBO: Speaker, maybe it does, but it is my point of order and you have given me the platform.




The SPEAKER: It is not a point of order.





Mr S TAMBO: Two, in terms of procedure, the president and party leader of the EFF here rose and said that we must discuss the report in terms of the investigation on gender- based violence ...




The SPEAKER: I have provided guidance that the report would be discussed by the Whippery.




Mr S TAMBO: Can I finish my point? Can I finish my point?





The SPEAKER: Sit down, hon member.




Mr S TAMBO: Can I be allowed to finish my point? Parliament released a statement ... [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Hon member, all the issues you are raising ... [Interjections.]




Mr S TAMBO: ... there was violence on both sides, but now they don’t want us to debate the same report to release the statement on.




The SPEAKER: Hon member, ...





Mr S TAMBO: Who released the statement on that report, ... [Interjections.] ... there was violence on both sides? The same report said that female members of the EFF were touched inappropriately, yet it states that .... Why can’t we discuss that report now?




The SPEAKER: Hon member, please. Hon Tambo, the issues that you are raising are the same issues that have been discussed




before. I am not going to allow for a discussion on this matter ... [Interjections.] Sit down!




Mr S TAMBO: ... on the virtual platform on a blanket basis.





The SPEAKER: Hon member, sit down. Take your seat.





Mr T B MUNYAI: Hon Speaker, I am rising on Rule 69 on using points of order to disrupt the sitting of Parliament. So, therefore, I appeal that we must allow the proceedings of Parliament to proceed.




The SPEAKER: Hon members, hon members, ... [Interjections.]





Mr S TAMBO: Hon Speaker, on a point order: ...





The SPEAKER: Sit down, hon Tambo. Hon Tambo, please take a seat. [Interjections.] Can you please switch off your mics?




Mr S TAMBO: Hon Speaker, it was like this the last time. You kicked me out, without knowing ... [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Hon members, we now proceed with the business of the day and as we proceed with the business of the day, ... [Interjections.] As we proceed ... [Interjections.] Hon Malema, no comments again. You are out of order.




Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, pardon me, it was not me. I know ... [Interjections.] ... to pronounce, but it was not me.




The SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you very much. We now proceed with the business of the day and allow me to recognise Mr President first, before we start with the questions.




The PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker, let me start off by apologising for not being ... [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: There is no point of order; I have recognised the President. [Interjections.] There is no point of order.







The PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker, let me start off by apologising for not being in the House. It was my wish and desire to be personally in the House.




Ms E N NTLANGWINI: Speaker, on a point of order: ... [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, don’t do that. [Interjections.] No, you can, but don’t. You may not do it. Yes, you can do it, but you may not do it. Stop screaming at us, No, stop it. It is not right, hon member. [Interjections.] It is not right, hon Shivambu. I know you are the Chief Whip of the party, but your conduct is not correct. [Interjections.]




The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY: Speaker, on a point of order: ...




The SPEAKER: Yes, hon member.




Mr K CEZA: Speaker, on a point of order: ... [Interjections.] The SPEAKER: Hon Dlakude, you may continue.



Mr K CEZA: Speaker, on a point of order: ... Speaker, on a point of order: ... [Interjections.] Point of order, point of order, point of order.




Mr T B MUNYAI: Speaker, ...





The SPEAKER: Hon members, I ... [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu, I am disappointed in you. You are the most disruptive member.




Mr K CEZA: We are disappointed in you.





The SPEAKER: You are so disruptive. Now, hon members, the point is, if you are going to stand and all are just screaming point of order, I will not recognise you.




Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, can you recognise me? I want to speak. Point of order, Speaker!




The SPEAKER: Hon members, I will not allow five or six of you to stand and say, point of order. And you believe that this is an august House.




AN HON MEMBER: But it is you, Speaker, who are causing problems in the House.




The SPEAKER: No, stop screaming, young lady. Stop screaming.





Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, on a point of order: ...





Mr K CEZA: On a point of order!





The SPEAKER: I will now recognise hon Mondli followed by hon Malema.




Mr K CEZA: Speaker, point of order! [Interjections.]





The SPEAKER: ... Malema and I will close this. Hon members, we


... [Interjections.]





Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker, what criteria do you use to recognise points of order?




The SPEAKER: I am taking a criterion that suggest that people have been raising hands and I have allowed many to ... [Interjections.] Of course, it is Parliament. It is not an ANC meeting. You are right. Now, will you please take your seat?

Hon Gungubele, followed by hon Malema and I will not take points of order again. [Interjections.] Hon Shivambu, will you please mute your mic. Thank you.




Mr M GUNGUBELE: Hon Speaker, I am rising in terms of Rule 69. Rule 69 is against the abuse of points of order to disrupt the proceedings. I am calling upon you to ... [Interjections.]




Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker!





The SPEAKER: Hon Mkhalipi, please allow hon Gungubele to make his point. Hon Mkhalipi, take your seat! Take your seat, hon Mkhalipi!




Mr M GUNGUBELE: I am saying that Rule 69 must be invoked because it has been breached several times here. They are using points of order to disrupt the proceedings. It borders on turning this Parliament into a street bash. So, I am requesting you, hon Speaker, to invoke Rule 69.




The SPEAKER: Actually, Rule 69 states that members may not engage in grossly, disorderly conduct in the House. Members may not deliberately, in a sense, create serious disorder and disruption. This is what the points of order are doing.

Secondly, repeatedly undermining the authority of the presiding officer or repeatedly refusing to obey Rulings of the presiding officer or repeatedly disrespecting or interrupting the presiding officer, whilst the latter is addressing the House. Lastly, persisting in making serious




allegations against a member without adequate substantiation or allowing the correct procedure. That is what Rule 69, as stated by hon Gungubele, says.




Hon members, I have allowed you to raise several points of order. I did not do so because I am crazy or mad; I did that because I believe in allowing people to express themselves, until it gets to the point where you cut the line and say it cannot be it, because the House is becoming disorderly. And that is where we are. We are at that point and I am making this point for the second time now. Hon members, I am still allowing Mr President to raise the matter that he was raising. Then we proceed with the questions for the day. Thank you.




Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, you said I was going to follow after hon Mondli.




The SPEAKER: You are right, I did say. I am sorry, Mr President, I did say.




Mr J S MALEMA: I hear the people who were speaking about turning Parliament into street bashes. So, we have not been to street bashes. So, regulars will know how street bashes run.

The point that I was making is that it is wrong for staff members to switch off the mics, without your instruction. Members of Parliament want to rise and raise issues and all the mics are off, including when hon Gungubele was trying to speak. The mics were showing a green light, which is a demonstration that some mere administrator, who thinks he has the power he does not have switched off the mics without your instruction. Please, control those administrators. They are nothing else but administrators. We are elected to be there and we can’t be muted by administrators who know nothing about being elected. Please.






Speaker, hon Malema is misleading the House that he has never been to a street bash. [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Ronald Lamola and hon members, will you please switch off your mics. Please, mute. Thank you very much. [Interjections.]







Mr J S MALEMA: I have never been to a street bash with Lamola. He was ... [Interjections.]






misleading the House that he has never been to a street bash.





Mr V PAMBO: On a point of order, Speaker: That Minister who have just appeared there is lying. He must say the ...




The SPEAKER: No, please, don’t do that. You know that language is not used. It is unparliamentary.




Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, please. He is casting aspersions on our president. Speaker, you just read the Rules now. You said that there is no member that must cast aspersions on any member here. That Minister must withdraw now.




The SPEAKER: You cannot say that a person is lying. Will you please withdraw that?







Mr V PAMBO: I will withdraw that. I withdraw, but please ...





The SPEAKER: Please, allow me to understand what the Minister was saying. What was he saying?




Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, the Minister said that the president of the EFF and the incoming president of South Africa has been to a street bash, which is a lie. [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Now, you see, I did not hear that. Hon Lamola, withdraw that. We want to proceed.




Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, I am still on the floor.





The SPEAKER: No, but you are done now.





Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, how do you know?




The SPEAKER: You told me the essence.





Mr V PAMBO: No, I did not say that.





The SPEAKER: The essence of what ...





Mr V PAMBO: My point of order can be in two parts. I have been asking to speak.




The SPEAKER: You know what, ...





Mr V PAMBO: Please, can he withdraw. That is number one. Number two, ...




The SPEAKER: Hon Pambo, please take your seat.





Mr V PAMBO: Speaker, I have another part to my point of order.




The SPEAKER: Take your seat. Take your seat!





Mr S TAMBO: On a point of order.





The SPEAKER: Take your seat. Will you please take your seat!





Mr S TAMBO: On a point of order, Speaker: ...





The SPEAKER: I am pleading with you to take your seat. I am equally saying that you are being aggressive that it is a point of order. You want speak and I am pleading with you to take your seat, because I have ruled that we have come to end of the points of order. Now we proceed. [Interjections.]




Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Lamola must withdraw. [Interjections.] ... call our president a liar.




Mr S TAMBO: Lamola must withdraw what he said about the president of the EFF. He must withdraw that. How can he accuse




a party leaders of attending street bashes? Lamola must withdraw now. [Interjections.]




The SPEAKER: Hon Lamola.







hon Speaker.





The SPEAKER: Hon Lamola, will you please withdraw your statement on the street bash.






in the interest of peace. I did not say he attended; I said he is misleading the House.




The SPEAKER: No, unconditionally, man. Just withdraw.







in the interest of peace, I withdraw, hon Speaker. [Interjections.]







The SPEAKER: Hon Lamola, I am not going to ... I don’t want that, in the interest of. I just want you to withdraw.






withdraw, hon Speaker. [Interjections.]





The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Hon Speaker, as I was saying, I wish to apologise for not being there in person and I would like to thank you for giving me the latitude to be able to answer these questions on the virtual platform. I have a family situation. My wife has had a procedure and I would like to be there to support her, as soon as I am finish answering these questions. So, I would like to thank you for allowing me to be in a position to answer the questions on the online platform. Thank you very much for that.




The SPEAKER: Hon members, we now proceed with the business of the day. The only item on today’s Order Paper is only questions addressed to the President. There are four parliamentary questions. On each question, ...







Mr M N PAULSEN: Hon Speaker, point of order!





The SPEAKER: I have said that I am not allowing any more points of order.




Mr M N PAULSEN: No, Speaker, I think it is very important. If the President has family issues, we can excuse him and he can go take care of that.




The SPEAKER: I don’t want to hear that. It is okay. I don’t want comments anymore. There are four parliamentary questions. Parties have given an indication on which questions their members wish to pose a supplementary question. Adequate notice was given to parties for this purpose. This was done to facilitate participation of members who are connecting to the siting through the virtual platform. The members who will pose supplementary questions will be recognised by the presiding officer. In allocating opportunities for supplementary questions, the principle of fairness, amongst others has been applied. If a member who is supposed to ask a supplementary




question through the virtual platform is unable to do so, due to technological difficulties, the party Whip on duty will be allowed to ask the question on behalf of the member. When all the parliamentary questions have been answered by the President, we will proceed to the next question on the Question Paper.



Question 7:


The PRESIDENT: Thank you, hon Speaker. Hon Speaker, the issue of migration is an important developmental issue within the African Union and the Southern African Development Community, SADC, and indeed across the world. As a consequence, it features quite often in bilateral engagements between South Africa and various African countries that we interact with on an ongoing basis.



A good example is that in November 2021, during the state visit of President Uhuru Kenyatta, Kenya and South Africa signed a migration agreement that includes the return of third-country immigrants that passed illegally through one of our countries en route to the other country. I also met President Muhammadu Buhari, the President of the Republic of Nigeria towards the end of 2021 in Nigeria.






Ms B MATHULELWA: On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: What is your point of order?



Ms B MATHULELWA: Hon Speaker ...





... eyona nto besiyilindile ke kuMongameli kukuba avele aye ngqo apho kufele khona ithole. Besijonge ukuba athethe nje ngePhala Phala la fama yakhe. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)



[... we were expecting the President to get straight to the point. We were expecting him to answer the question about his Phala Phala farm.]





The SPEAKER: Hon member, please, take your seatt. Please, take your seat.







Nks B MATHULELWA: Ndilinde ndigqibe, ndilinde ndigqibe kaloku.


(Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Ms B MATHULELWA: Let me finish my point. Please, let me finish my point.]





The SPEAKER: The first question is on migration. It has nothing to do with ...





Nks B MATHULELWA: UMongameli kufuneka athethe ngale nto abantu baseMzantsi Afrika bayilindeleyo, umcimbi wasePhala Phala nemali ephantsi komatrasi. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Ms B MATHULELWA: The President has to speak about the matter that is on every South African’s lips, the Phala Phala issue and the money that was stashed under a mattress.]





The SPEAKER: Hon Mathulelwa! Hon Mathulelwa! One!






Nks B MATHULELWA: Mamela Somlomo ndigqibe, ndivumele ndigqibe.


(Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)


[Ms B MATHULELWA: Let me finish my point, Speaker. Let me finish my point.]





The SPEAKER: Hon Mathulelwa, the first question on the Order Paper is a question on migration, and it has nothing to do with Phala Phala. You will raise the Phala Phala issue when the time comes. Please, take your seat. That was the first question, hon member. Switch off your mic. Thank you. Please continue.



Ms N N CHIRWA: On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: There is no point of order until the President has finished with question.



Ms N N CHIRWA: I am entitled to a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Until he has finished answering the question! Take your seat, hon member.






Ms N N CHIRWA: I get that, Speaker, but I am entitled to a point of order.



The SPEAKER: Hon Maotwe, sit down. Take your seat.



Ms N N CHIRWA: Rule 92 says I am entitled to a point of order.





USOMLOMO: Chirwa ohloniphekileyo, hlala phantsi.



Nks N N CHIRWA: Ndicela isiphakamiso sonqwanqwado kuba ...



(Translation of isiXhosa sentences follows)



[The SPEAKER: Sit down, hon Chirwa.



Ms N N CHIRWA: On a point of order ...]





...I am entitled to a point of order whether you like it or not.






USOMLOMO: Hlala phantsi, Chirwa ohloniphekileyo, (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[The SPEAKER: Sit down, hon Chirwa,]





Hon members, I have said that was the last I have accepted ...



Mr S TAMBO: On which Rule?



The SPEAKER: On the basis of that ...



Ms N N CHIRWA: Speaker, no, it is not up to you all the time. We are entitled to points of order.



Mr S TAMBO: Which Rule? Which Rule are you using?



Mr M R MASHEGO: Rule 69!



Mr S TAMBO: Which Rule are you using to supress the point of order? Which Rule are you using?




The SPEAKER: Hon members, you are not going to disrupt the House.



Mr S TAMBO: But, no, which Rule are you using to supress the point of order?



The SPEAKER: You will not disrupt the House.



Mr M R MASHEGO: Rule 69! Rule 69!



The SPEAKER: We will allow him to respond to the issues you have raised in the Question Paper. What I will not allow is at the point when the President or any member of the executive for that matter is responding to a question and then you raise a point of order even before you have heard the answer. I am not going to allow that.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: A point of order is allowed in any part of the sitting.



The SPEAKER: But in this instance, ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: You can raise a point of order any time.






The SPEAKER: Hon Radebe!



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We want an explanation of the money in the matrass and pillows of Cyril Ramaphosa, today.



The SPEAKER: Hon Radebe!



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We want the money which is in the pillows.



The SPEAKER: The money cannot be number one. Phala Phala is not number one on the list of questions on the Order Paper.



An HON MEMBER: Yes, but it is a priority ...



The SPEAKER: We are dealing with Question 1 on the Order Paper.



An HON MEMBER: ... number one in the country!



Mr B A RADEBE: Thank you, hon Speaker. I am rising on Rule 92 subsection 12. Hon Speaker, you have made a ruling around Rule

69. Rule 69 ...






Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Who said the German cut must speak?



Mr B A RADEBE: Rule 69 ...



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Why is the German cut on the floor? Did you recognise him?



Mr B A RADEBE: ... that the ...



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, why is the German cut speaking? Why is the German cut speaking? You didn’t recognise him.



Mr B A RADEBE: Will you please ensure that the people who are violating that Rules are evicted. Thank you.



An HON MEMBER: Speaker!



The SPEAKER: Hon members, there is no amount of confusion, there is no amount of screaming or disruption of the session which will prevent us from proceeding with the discussion today.




An HON MEMBER: Speaker!





USOMLOMO: Yima kaloku nawe. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)

[The SPEAKER: Please, wait.]





I don’t know who is calling Speaker, but I am on the floor now. I am now on the floor. Thank you. Hon members, Rule 70(1) states that if the presiding officer is of the opinion that a member is deliberately contravening a provision of the Rules, or that a member is disregarding the authority of the Chair, or that a member’s conduct is grossly disorderly, he or she may order the member to leave the Chamber immediately for the remainder of the day’s sitting. Hon members should take cognisance of that.



Ms N V MENTE: Haaaa! It is an intimidation. That’s an intimidation!



An HON MEMBER: It is a threat. You mean it as a threat.




Ms N V MENTE: That’s an intimidation.



The SPEAKER: It is not an intimidation.



Ms N V MENTE: It is an intimidation. Are you reminding us that you are going to evict us?



The SPEAKER: You are going to be evicted if you ...



An HON MEMBER: We even didn’t hear that.



Ms N V MENTE: But why? For raising a point of order?



An HON MEMBER: You can’t even listen to our points of order.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, I have closed all points of order





An HON MEMBER: On which Rule! On which Rule are you closing the points of order?



The SPEAKER: ... on the Rule that people are using points of order to disrupt the session.






An HON MEMBER: There is no Rule like that.



Ms N V MENTE: Hon members, then ...




... kusembarheni ke xa kunjalo. Sisebenzisa imithetho yasembarheni. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[...this is more like a disorderly shebeen if that is the case. We are therefore following shebeen rules.]





The SPEAKER: I have requested the hon ... the one who asked the first question.



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker!



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, I am not allowing any more points of order now and I think there is understanding.



Ms N V MENTE: There is no such a Rule.




Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, just a quick one. The Whip of the ANC, whom I don’t know his name but they call him the hon German cut, has spoken and you did not recognise him. The last one who spoke!



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, I have taken note of the point of order of hon Radebe. Are you talking about hon Radebe?

Mr J S MALEMA: I don’t know his name, but he has a German cut.



The SPEAKER: Hon Radebe had been recognised. I did recognise him.



Mr J S MALEMA: Okay!



The SPEAKER: Hon members, I said no more points of order. Hon members, we are going to continue with this session. I know that a statement had been made that perhaps the session should come to an end. This session will not come to an end. We will proceed with the business of the House together.



The hon Mr President, you were at the tail end of your response.




Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker, there is a question of the matrass and migration because people are migrating to Namibia and steal money from Namibia. People were using helicopters of the state in migrating. Can we be given an update by the President as to what happened with the migration which he himself violated in terms of what happened at Phala Phala.



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu! Hon Shivambu! I am calling you for the last time. And yes, he knows it is Rule 69. Hon Shivambu! You are about to leave the House. Yes, you are about to leave the House.



Mr S TAMBO: Hon Speaker!



The SPEAKER: Sit down. I said no more points of order.



Mr S TAMBO: No, it is a point of exigency.



The SPEAKER: Take your seat there is no exigency. Take your seat! Take your seat, Tambo. Take your seat!




Mr K CEZA: Speaker, Speaker, Speaker ...






The SPEAKER: I am not allowing point of orders ...



Mr K CEZA: Can I call a point of order on you, Speaker?



The SPEAKER: ... because you are using the point of orders to distract us from what we are trying to do. Even to me. You can write to me and point that ...



Mr K CEZA: Do not be agitated Speaker as the Presiding Officer.



The SPEAKER: I have no choice if your people are screaming.



Mr K CEZA: You cannot be agitated.



The SPEAKER: Now, hon member ...



Mr K CEZA: Speaker, the President must respond ...



The SPEAKER: He is responding.




Mr K CEZA: He must respond to the issues pertaining to the abuse and the abduction of women in Phalaphala farm. That is what is at the centre of what he should be responding to because in a country like this, we cannot when women are being killed ... [Inaudible.] and the President does that as the first citizen of the country and you are saying to us he must not be held to account.



The SPEAKER: Hon Ceza, who has recognised you? Hon Ceza, will you please leave the House? Hon Ceza will you please leave the House?



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, you did not warn him. You did not warn him like you did with Shivambu. Hon Speaker, please warn him the same way you warned Shivambu. Please warn him. You did not warn him, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Hon Ceza ...




 ... kha usincede torhwana ... (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[... please work with us ...]








... please leave the House.



Mr J S MALEMA: You did not warn him, Speaker like you did with Shivambu. You did not warn him, warn him first.



The SPEAKER: Hon Ceza, leave the House. Hon Ceza, I called you more than three times, please leave the House. Leave the House hon Ceza.



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, you warned Shivambu and said to him you will evict him if he does not listen to you. You have not done that to Ceza.



The SPEAKER: Call the Parliamentary Protection Service unit, PPS.



Mr J S MALEMA: At least warn him.





Uyaqalisa ngoku, ufuna ukusibulala. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)






[You are going back to your tendencies now, you want to kill us.]





You are calling those people.



Ms N V MENTE: Speaker, Speaker, Speaker no, you cannot do that. You have read the warning. This is exactly what we have warned you about. You cannot use a blanket approach. Nooo, you see the violence we were talking about?



The SPEAKER: Hon Paulsen, hon Paulsen, you may as well leave.



Ms N V MENTE: No, you cannot do that.





Heyi Somlomo, uyayenza ingxushungxushu kule Ndlu. Kutheni usenza ingxushungxushu ngolu hlobo? (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)



[Hon Speaker, you bring chaos into this House. Why do you bring this chaos?]








The SPEAKER: Hon Paulsen, out. Hon Paulsen was the first one to obstruct the PPS from removing your hon member. Can I say this? Hon Paulsen was the first one – hon Shivambu, take your seat. Hon Mthenjane, will you please leave the House?



Mr D F MTHENJANE: For what? For what?



The SPEAKER: For obstructing the PPS.





Phuma bhuti. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Leave the House, hon member.]








The SPEAKER: You know what you did.



Mr D F MTHENJANE: Why? What rules are you using now?




Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, let me help you run the House please.



The SPEAKER: You know what you did. You all know what you did.





Phuma. Phuma. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Leave the House.]





Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, can I help you? Can I help you?



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Hon Speaker, on a point of order:



The SPEAKER: Mute your masks, I beg your pardon, your microphones please to all of you. Hon Mthenjane, no member, may in any manner, whatsoever physically intervene in, prevent and obstruct, and that is what you did. Hon Mthenjane ...





 ... phuma bhuti, hamba. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)






[... leave the House, hon member.]





Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker,



The SPEAKER: Serjeant-at-arms please remove hon Mthenjane.



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, I am not entertaining any points of order now, because points of order have been used to disrupt us.



Mr J S MALEMA: I want to appeal to you to calm down, please.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Malema I am calming down. Hon Mthenjane, no I will not allow you. No, no.

Serjeant-at-arms you are taking long to report back.



Mr J S MALEMA: We are in an army base here.




The SPEAKER: The PPS must usher him out. Instruct PPS to remove hon Mthenjane. Hon Mthenjane, please leave bhuti because I saw what you did and I have not heard from other people. I saw you when you were shaping. Hon members, just as a reminder, none of you are allowed to disrupt the Speaker or any Presiding Officer when addressing the Members of Parliament. If it continues, yes, people will leave the House. If people obstruct the PPS from ushering a member out, yes the person responsible for that will have to accompany the PPS and leave the also. That is the issue and that is all hon members. Thank you, very much hon members. On what rule are you rising? You are not addressing me because I do not want to be addressed. You are using points orders and making statements to disrupt the House. That is what is happening.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: On which rule are you using? The rule says you must inform the member and you must allow him to withdraw.



The SPEAKER: I have read the rule.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Which rule is that?




The SPEAKER: I have read the rules out clearly as I was preparing those members to leave the House. I did. You were not listening. Rule 73 talks to that. Go to the Rules Book and Rule 73 will explain that to you. Thank you, hon members.



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, on a point of order:



The SPEAKER: No hon Malema ...





 ... kudala ndikuvumela ... (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[... I have been allowing you...]





 ... on the points of order. I have ruled on the points of order now because the points of order are being used to disrupt us. Can you please stop.



Mr J S MALEMA: I am not disrupting ...




... ndiyacela








ohloniphekileyo kodwa hayi, hayi.



Mnu J S MALEMA: Hayi Mbhexeshi oyiNtloko kha ume kancinci. Yima Mbhexeshi oyiNtloko yima. Somlomo, kancinci nje ... (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)



[... I am asking for your permission ...



The CHIEF OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Malema, do not do this.



Mr J S MALEMA: Hold on a bit, Chief Whip. Just a bit, Chief Whip. Speaker, may I...]





The SPEAKER: Noo maan, please hon member. Mr President, are you done with your first question because we were interrupted?



The PRESIDENT: No, I am not Madam Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, we will proceed then.




Mr J S MALEMA: No, he is done.



The SPEAKER: Please proceed to answer your questions.



The PRESIDENT: Now, dealing with the issue of migration, Madam Speaker, as I was saying, we interact on a continuous basis with various countries on our continent and amongst the agreements reached is to have a consular migration forum between ourselves and a number of countries, but specifically between Nigeria and South Africa where senior officials meet twice a year to look at visa issues, illegal migration and other issues concerning either of our countries.



Similarly, an immigration co-operation agreement formed part of my discussion with President Nana Akufo-Addo of Ghana in December last year. We had bilateral commissions at head of state with Mozambique in 2022 in March, as well as Botswana in April of 2022. In both cases, co-operations on deportments and agreements on migration co-operation were broadly concluded.

In the last few months there have been engagements in ministerial and official’s levels with our counterpart countries such as Lesotho, Botswana and Zimbabwe on migration issues.






In the last few months, there have been engagements at Ministerial and officials level with our counterpart countries namely Lesotho, Botswana and Zimbabwe on migration issues.

During our chairship of the Southern African Development Community, SADC, Organ on Politics, Defence and Security over the past year, we have prioritised the Draft Regional Migration Policy Framework and Action Plan 2022-30. The draft plan proposes principles and strategies on matters such as border governance, irregular migration, labour migration and others.



Like any sovereign nation, we have the right to implement policies and measures that guarantee the integrity of our borders, protect the rights of South Africans and provide that all who reside in our borders have a legal right to be here.

To this end, there are ongoing joint operations by SA Police Service, SA Defence Force, the Department of Employment and Labour and the Department of Transport to deal with illegal migration.



The first cohort of the Border Management Agency border officials has been deployed in areas where we know that there




is often illegal entry into the country. We are dealing with the challenge of illegal migration, and we must remember that we are a democracy founded on the rule of law. Acts of lawlessness, intimidation or humiliation directed at foreign nationals, whether they are documented or undocumented, should not be tolerated.



If migration is managed properly and occurs within the legal framework, those from other countries or foreign nationals can contribute positively to our society, as they could bring skills and resources to our economy and create jobs for South Africans. We have recently undertaken a comprehensive review of the policy framework for work visas to ensure that migration is managed in a way that benefits our country and supports our national interests. We need to work together to ensure that all the country’s laws are enforced by the relevant authorities firmly and consistently. I thank you, Madam Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you the hon the President. Before I allow you, hon Chabane to raise your first supplementary question, may I just remind all of us once more that Rule 92 provides, amongst others, that a member may raise a point of order at




any time during the proceedings of the House in terms of the procedure prescribed in Rule 66. Rule 66 provides amongst others, that no member may interrupt another member while speaking, except to call attention to a point of order or a question of privilege subject to Rule 92. And that is why I have decided that I am no more allowing for points of order because some of these points of order have been spurious points of order, and they are distracting us from the work which we are seeking to do today. Thank you very much. Hon Chabane?



Mr M S CHABANE: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you President. Mr President, thank you for your comprehensive response, particularly your articulation on the African Union, AU, Agenda 2063 progress thus far linked to migration. The positive side of migration is that we can contribute to economic growth of the country ... [Inaudible.] ... the sector to advance relations between member states. The desirable side of migration relates to its legality and possible link to criminality.



In the recent past we have witnessed a terrible incident in some of part Krugersdorp, where our undocumented foreign




nationals engaged in illegal mining terrorised our people. Mr President, how do we strike a balance between the need to protect our national sovereignty by tackling migration process on one hand and on the other hand, advancing AU Agenda 2063 which talks about the integration of the continent. Thank you, Madam Speaker.



The PRESIDENT: Thank you, hon Speaker. The integration of our continent at various levels includes the ability of all countries on our continent to be able to trade together, to be able to develop each other’s economies but also, it includes the movement of people between countries. This is an important developmental issue for our continent, but it has to be pursued in a way where the laws of all our countries on the continent are observed. This cannot be pursued at the expense of any country or in a manner that undermines the rule of law of any of the countries on our continent.



As I said, like any other country, South Africa has laws on migration that needs to be enforced and upheld. And when it comes to those who are here illegally, we have to ensure that there is a process that we follow. The process cannot be self- help for our people, it has to be properly processed through




the laws that we have in our country. In that way, we are able, together with our various sister countries on the continent, to act jointly as we develop each other’s economies.



The issue of migration is a global problem and a major challenge across the world, and obviously we have opted to deal with that within the confines of our laws and that in itself should give us a good strength and understanding that as we strengthen, for instance, our border management authority and as we prevent illegal entry into our country, we will be able to resolve the various problems that we are experiencing right now. Thank you, hon Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you the hon the President. The second supplementary question will be asked by the hon the Leader of the Opposition.



The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr President, the more government fails the people, the more it must find somebody else to blame for its failures. Your government is playing an incredibly dangerous game and stoking up xenophobic sentiments when the real problems that are




facing the country are as a result of your government failings. The inability to secure our borders R30 million washing line, a broken Home Affairs department, a foreign policy that turns a blind eye ... [Inaudible.] ... in Zimbabwe and Eswatini and you update the economic policy to push

12 million people into the employment queue. Still not fixing the problem, Mr President, your government distracts and points fingers ... [Inaudible.] ... your party spokesperson Pule Mabe has endorsed Operation Dudula.



Your Home Affairs Minister has called foreign nationals rascals, your Limpopo health MEC bullied an injured and vulnerable Zimbabwean patient. Is your silence on these matters, Mr President, implies that you are endorsing the scapegoating of foreigners? So, I will ask you today, Mr President, do you agree with your xenophobic colleagues and comrades, and if not, what action have you taken against them?



The PRESIDENT: We have always said that as South Africans, we are not xenophobic, we are a people who have always welcomed those from various countries from around the world, and also on our own continent. In many ways South Africa has been built with participation with the help of people from various




nations and they have helped to develop our country as well. So, by any stretch of anyone’s imagination, we are not a xenophobic nation, and even the leadership of the party that I lead are not xenophobic.



Yes, there are challenges as I said, that are global when it comes to issues of migration. And our people also respond to the various challenges that they also experience on a daily basis. For instance, when it comes to service delivery, our people feel strongly that the preference should be given to South Africans, and they are right many ways to feel like that. At the same time, we have got to ensure that whatever is done, is done within the confines of the law.



Our foreign policy is actually admired around the world because we have taken foreign policy decisions of a progressive type that are applauded in many other countries. Our participation on the African continent, through the AU is highly respected, and at SADC, South Africa is held in high regard being the type of country we are and the economy size that we have. And in many ways we contribute progressively to various policy positions that are taken by SADC and also our continent.






So, South Africa is not xenophobic; South Africa is quite welcoming and we are saying that the rule of law – legality, has to be observed as it is the case in any other country around the world but also specifically on our own continent. As we integrate our continent from a trade point of view and from an investment point of view, we also recognise that there will be movement of people. People from South Africa are moving to various countries on the continent and people from other countries are moving to South Africa, and we are saying that it’s all got to be done within a particular legal framework. That is where we stand and we believe that that is the correct stance that any country can take and that is where we are headed.



Our Home Affairs department is dealing with enormous challenges – challenges that emanate from the past as well. And I believe that they are doing a really good job, particularly now that they are setting up the border control authority and that in itself is going to help us to ensure that there is legality and the migration which we cannot avoid and run away from is done within the legal framework that we have. Thank you, Madam Speaker.






The SPEAKER: Thank you, the hon President. The third supplementary question will be asked by the hon N F Shivambu.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Thank you very much, Speaker. It is common cause now that the President of the ANC that there are millions of dollars that were not legally ... [Inaudible.] ... your farm and hidden under the mattress and when it was taken from your farm you sent your security guards to go and look after that money in Namibia. Did your head of security and your political adviser comply with immigration laws when they were chasing the money which was taken from your farm? That is question one. Two, do you agree with what was done by the MEC of health in Limpopo ill-treating a fellow African from Zimbabwe in terms of the conduct that happened in Bela-Bela last week? Those are the questions.



The PRESIDENT: On the first issue and question. That matter which relates to one of the questions that will come later, is a matter that is currently under investigation. The various investigating arms or agencies of our country are in the process of dealing with that matter. And I will say little bit more about that and later when the question properly arises.






On the second one obviously, the MEC of health in Limpopo has raised an important issue, how service provision is affected by migration. That is an important issue, that is top of mind in the minds of many South Africans. And indeed, it is part and parcel of having to deal with the whole issue of a framework around migration - not only on our continent but elsewhere as people move around the world one of the questions they are often asked is if they are able to make provision for any service that may have to be offered to them in any shape or form. So, that is part of that whole process of having to deal with migration. So, the MEC as I said has raised an important issue which is currently under debate. And of course, she raised it in the presence of a patient and I guess that it is such an important issue, it could have been raised in another way but neither has it been raised and it has evoked quite a debate not only in our country, but also in Zimbabwe and also in the rest of the continent. And it is a matter that is going to enjoy quite a lot of attendance even as we meet at head of state level to discuss precisely what the movement of people should really entail and what should accompany that in the form of services, in the form of health issues, in the form of wither criminality and rule of law.






So, all those matters are matters that are germane to the whole process of migration which we as a nation also have to deal with. Within the context of Pan-Africanism, within the context of being a part of this continent and within the context of our basic humanity and also in the end, it has to be done within the context of our own Constitution. We have a constitutional architecture that looks at the people who are present in South Africa and also how they should be tended for or how services should be provided to. So, those are issues that needs to be debated as we move forward. Thank you, hon Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, the hon Mr President.



Mr J S MALEMA: But Speaker the question was not answered.



The SPEAKER: The last supplementary question will be asked ...



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, the question was not answered.



The SPEAKER: Hon member, the question has been answered. You may be unhappy with the content, the substantive issue raised




by the president. You may differ but the question has been answered. Hon Herron? The last supplementary question will be asked by the hon ... [Interjections.] I am not in a position to prescribe how members of the executive, however, I am compelled to ensure that they respond to questions. The how part is a matter which you can raise in your portfolio committees. Hon Herron?



Mr B N HERRON: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr President, we understand that the issue of migrant labour in the southern African region is complex, and we know it has a long history and in some cases like Lesotho, the way remittances are a substantial part of that country’s economy is bilateral agreements that allow for migrant labour in many cases predate our democracy and were designed for the purposes of providing cheap labour. We also know that a lot has changed in South Africa since these agreements were signed we have a very high unemployment rate ourselves. And one of the big problems with these agreements is that they allow for self-management where labour brokers and employers are able to exploit migrant labour. So, Mr President, isn’t time that our migrant labour policies balance the need to protect South Africans from exclusion from the labour market, especially the seasonal




opportunities by securing the labour rights of migrants and local employees through more direct management of employment practices? Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Herron. The next Question No 8 has been ... I am sorry, hon Mr President. I am really sorry. The hon the President?



Mr J S MALEMA: Hence I ... [Inaudible.] You see now you are making even simple mistakes.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mr President.



The PRESIDENT: Thank you, hon Speaker. Yes, indeed, I should say that I agree with the hon Herron because in the end, we need to have a balance and the balance has to be that we cannot do many of these things at the expense of the interest of our own people. But at the same time, we have to recognise that those who also come to our country, who come legally – who come in compliance of our labour policies, migration policies also do have a right to come through here as they comply through our laws. Like South Africans who can also and do go to various other parts of our continent either following




the businesses that are owned by South Africans to go and work there or going to invest there or trade, the laws of those countries that they go to are laws that would permit them to be in those countries legally.



So, that balance has to be there and for us obviously, the first price is to look after our own people and to make sure that our own people’s rights are not trampled or ignored. But at the same time those who come to work here have the right also within our labour laws framework, to have their rights respected. I therefore would agree with Mr Herron that yes, as everything keeps evolving, including policies, we do need to look at whether the policies that we still have are still relevant for the modern times that we live in and also look at the various industries and sectors and the extent to which they are able to have workers from other countries come to work here on a legal basis. Thank you, hon Speaker.



Question 8:


The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: [Inaudible.] ... by men against women and children is a devastating social problem that can only be solved by every part of society working together.




A recent World Bank report characterises gender-based violence and violence against women and girls as a global pandemic that affects one in three women in their lifetime. The report goes on to give statistics that are really worrying. They are staggering! They show that 35% of women worldwide experience either physical or sexual intimate partner violence or nonpartner sexual violence.



While the latest crime statistics in our own country show a slight year-on-year decline in sexual offences, we have not yet made significant progress in reducing the appalling levels of gender-based violence. That is why government has been working closely with civil society, with a number of women-led organisations, with business, with labour and other formations in society-wide response that harnesses all the resources and energies at our disposal.



The National Strategic Plan, NSP, on Gender-based Violence and Femicide is a product of an inclusive social process. Its implementation is our collective responsibility. The NSP is a 10-year plan in its third year of implementation. We are committed to the full and urgent implementation of the NSP. We have started to make progress in putting the necessary social




infrastructure in place to respond more effectively to gender- based violence.



To this end, 23 rapid response teams have been established — in the Eastern Cape, in KwaZulu-Natal, in the Northern Cape, in Mpumalanga, and in Gauteng. These rapid response teams are multi-stakeholder structures at district and ward levels to co-ordinate responses to gender-based violence and femicide. The teams consist of senior frontline officials such as police station commanders, senior social workers, representatives from the Thuthuzela Care Centres, and Victim Empowerment Centre officials. They work with community organisations and individuals to report suspected cases, clean up unsafe spaces and act to reduce the potential for gender-based violence by, for example, that liquor outlets in certain areas do not stay open after operating hours. Much more work needs to be done around that, to keep focus on these liquor outlets. We still need to do much more.



We have strengthened the criminal justice system by enacting the Sexual Offences and Related Matters Amendment Act, and the Criminal and Related Matters Amendment Act. Among others, these Acts strengthen the protection of children and other




vulnerable persons and make vital changes to the parole system, giving complainants the right to make representations on certain parole issues.



The new provisions tighten conditions with respect to the granting of police bail. Courts will now impose tougher sentences in cases of murder, attempted murder of children, in femicide and in domestic homicide cases. Rape perpetrated in domestic relationships, rape of a child under 18 years of age, gang rape and serial rape will result in life imprisonment.



Through the Thuthuzela Care Centres we are working quickly to ensure that gender-based violence survivors can access efficient and sensitive criminal justice services in an accessible manner, and in a responsive and gender-inclusive manner.



Now, these centres are also proving effective in improving conviction rates. The current conviction rate for matters emanating from these centres is 76%, up from 60% in 2010. The Sexual Offences Community Affairs Unit in the NPA achieved a conviction rate of 94% in femicide prosecutions, and 74% in sexual offences cases in the last financial year.






It is not enough to arrest, prosecute and sentence perpetrators of gender-based violence. Our shared responsibility is to prevent such violence and build a society in which women and children can feel free and be safe in our country.



One of the initiatives in this respect is the national prevention GBVF programme called “What about the Boys?” which is a partnership between the Department of Basic Education, the chemical industry Seta, and the private sector. About

10 000 boys in grades 8 to 12 are now part of the programme.


They are encouraged to re-imagine traditional ideas of masculinity, learn how to manage their emotions, and create healthy minds and bodies.



We are also working with partners to promote the economic empowerment of women to thereby reduce their vulnerability to abuse. Our interventions include gender-responsive budgeting, on which I would like to see us focusing more attention, so that our budgets respond in a gender-sensitive manner.




We are also looking at preferential procurement for women- owned enterprises. We have already put a percentage that needs to be taken into account and observed. We are promoting the participation of women in business supply chains so as to ensure that women are well represented in the labour market.



We will be convening the second Presidential Summit of Gender- based Violence and Femicide later this year to reflect on what has worked and not worked, and what further actions need to be taken to accelerate real, meaningful change in the lives of all the women in our country.



We know that we will not win this battle overnight. There is much that needs to be done. Sometimes we make progress; sometimes we regress. But building a safe and violence-free country, particularly for women and children, means healing our nation. It means restoring healthy respect for our common humanity and respect for women, and rooting the values of our Constitutions in ourselves, in our homes and in our communities. This is something that we should all feel strongly and passionately about in our country. Thank you.




The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Mr President, a month ago your Police Minister, Bheki Cele, said in an interview that a 19- year-old rape victim was, quote, lucky to be raped only once. It’s clear from this comment that Minister Cele has himself given up and lost faith in his own ability to keep South Africans safe from rape, murder and other violent crimes.



It shows in the statistics to which you referred. On your Police Minister’s watch, 67 citizens are murdered every single day. One-hundred-and-fifty-three people are raped every single day. Three-hundred-and-sixty-four violent robberies occur every single day.



South Africans are under daily attack from violent criminals in their homes, in their work places, and on their streets. And your Police Minister, by his own admission, had given up trying to protect them.



Mr President, the question to you today is, if he has given up on his own ability and has no faith in it to keep our citizens safe, why do you have faith in him? Why have you not fired him yet?




The PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker, I would like, with great respect, to dispute and disagree with hon Steenhuisen that the Minister of Police has given up on the fight against crime, particularly on issues that have to do with gender-based violence. He is often at the forefront of ensuring that we do fight crime.



Hon Steenhuisen referred to the statement that Minister Cele made after the Kagiso incident. I would like to suggest that that meaning was clearly not his intention. It may have been lost in translation. But, as far as his commitment is concerned, he was there. He was there soon after that incident happened. And he was there among other leaders, not only to care for the victims, but also to ensure that there is an investigation. And that investigation has led to the ensuing arrests.



He has been working together with the National Commissioner of Police and various other police officials. Let me say that he is often there whenever these calamitous criminal activities occur. So I think we need to give him a little bit of latitude, and also recognition.




The issue of criminality in our country is recognised by everyone. It is a major problem. And we are addressing it. Just last week we held a meeting of the national security council and we urged all our law enforcement or security agencies to focus on criminality, with particular focus on various areas or nodes of great criminality like illegal mining and a whole range of other, particularly gender-based, violence.



I do think we are making progress. We will make even greater progress with the greater determination that the police are going to be demonstrating going forward, and the focus that the leadership of the police are also going to be demonstrating.

That we have a problem is what I recognise and all of us recognise. But that we will address this issue and deal with it is something that we are focussing on and will make sure that it happens. Because it is important that South Africans feel safe, and it is important that the police focus on ensuring that the levels of criminality on our country are brought down significantly, if not eliminated. Thank you.




Ms Z NKOMO: Mr President, gender-based violence and femicide takes place in families and communities. Those same families are shaped by cultural and religious orientations and their economic struggle to survive. Those factors have an impact on gender-based violence and femicide.



My question is, in strengthening our struggle against gender- based violence and femicide, how do we as communities strengthen the family unit in order to deal with the root problem in society, when within our families there reside men who embed patriarchal practices and toxic cultural practices?



The PRESIDENT: Speaker, indeed, this is a societal problem. It is for this reason that we say that all of us need to address this issue in a way that we are all implicated. We therefore need to embark on a number of interventions and actions that will lead to a solution. I am rather pleased that, through the interaction that we have with community-based organisations, it is beginning to get us to address the important issues. For instance, the issues of patriarchy, the issues of paying attention to the boys, as I said, and making sure that we inculcate a sense, a consciousness of respect for women and for the correct values in our society in young people as they




grow up. And also address the issue of this toxic masculinity that is there. But also focussing on the family as a unit needs to be nurtured, so that, at a societal level, we are able to do what we’ve always done over generations, which is that society, the community, takes an interest in what happens within its confines. Where there are abuses, the community should find ways of intervening. And it is through this, when we engender this spirit, that we will have preventative measures that are much more effective.



I am pleased that a number of educational institutions like universities and so on have also taken this up.



This being a broad societal issue, we need to work together. I found that when stakeholders work together to address common societal problems, we are able to make progress. This is even more so when we have to deal with the issue of gender-based violence. Addressing issues of patriarchy and toxic masculinity and now the focus on young boys which is a movement or a process that I would like to see spread more and more in our country ...




We are possibly still at the beginning stages, but if all of us can put our shoulders to the wheel, I’m sure that we will be able to make progress. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon President. The third supplementary question will be asked by the hon Z Majozi. Hon Z Majozi? Are you on the virtual platform?



Mr N SINGH: Hon Speaker, she’s meant to be on the virtual platform. Perhaps she’s having some connectivity problems. May I ask the question to the hon President on her behalf?






Mr N SINGH: Thank you. Hon President, for South Africa’s criminal justice system to be effective under pillar three of the National Strategic Plan on Gender-Based Violence and Femicide, the DNA backlog of 58 000 cases needs to be cleared. Such operational incapacity in dealing with cases of gender- based violence, GBV, is dangerous as victims are left exposed and accessible to the perpetrator. Mr President, how would your government capacitate the provincial criminal justice system to deal with DNA backlogs that will aid in mitigating




instances of perpetrators being in close proximity to their victims and how far along is the process of clearing the DNA backlog of 58 000 cases by September ... [Inaudible.]



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, hon Speaker. Just to be more specific with regard to this, the Minister of Police and I have discussed this issue of the DNA backlog and he has assured me that a number of steps are being taken. Initially it was a case of this whole procurement process that had gotten stuck, and I’d like to believe that now the whole matter is being addressed and the process should get underway.



It is concerning that we built up a backlog of 58 000 DNA samples that needs to be cleared and it is an area of focus that I’ve also communicated to the Minister which needs to be cleared up. Yes, it is at the provincial level where we need to capacitate our provinces to be able to deal with this type of matter.





Dr P J GROENEWALD: Agb Speaker ... [Hon Speaker ...]






... through you, hon President, it is correct when you say that there is improvement. For instance, I have just received a household report ...



The SPEAKER: Order!



Dr P J GROENEWALD: ... which says that there is an improvement, where women for instance feel that they are safer when they move around. However, the fact of the matter is that if we look at the murder rate of women and children for the first quarter of this financial year, then we see that there is an increase of 53% when it comes to women, in children ... [no audio] ... but when it comes to assault with gross bodily harm, then we see cases of women increasing by 55% and when we talk about children of 17 years and younger, we see there’s an increase of 58%.



Now, hon President, we had a meeting with political leaders and yourself in 2018, and I said to you then that the problem is the criminal justice system. I heard what you said on the question by the IFP, but my question is more specific. What steps have you as President taken to ensure that the criminal justice system is improved? And then I’m not only referring to




the police but to the judicial part and, for instance correctional services. I think that there are too many rapists that get parole and then they just continue with their criminality. I thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon member. You’ve exceeded your time. The hon President?



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker, on a point of order. I wanted to ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: I did not give you the floor.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But I’m on ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: I did not give you the floor.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: I did not give you the floor.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Give me the floor.




The SPEAKER: I am not giving you the flour until I recognise you.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Recognise me.



The SPEAKER: Hon member, what’s happening to you?



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Please recognise me! [Inaudible.]



The SPEAAKER: I am not going to recognise you because I have closed all points of order.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... [Inaudible.] ... must take a point of order.



The SPEAKER: The hon President, you may proceed.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: On a point of order. [Inaudible.] Speaker, on a point of order.



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, hon Speaker. I am glad that hon Groenewald has recognised that there has been an improvement but ...




Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker, on a point of order!



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: ... I agree with him that much more needs to be done and can be done, and the focus should be on key priority areas such as, for instance ...



The SPEAKER: What is the point of order, hon member? Mr President, there’s a point of order.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: So, the point of order ... [Inaudible.]



Mr J S MALEMA: President, there is a point of order. When there’s a point order you must keep quiet and allow other people ... Mr President. There’s a point of ... [Inaudible.]



Ms C M PHIRI: Julius, you are not the Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Hon member?



Mr E T MYENI: Malema!



Mr J S MALEMA: Unlike you, I’m ... [Inaudible.]




The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, please! Hon Shivambu?



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I want you to clarify if it is permissible for us to make follow up questions from the ... [Inaudible.]

... because we will gladly do so. So all the follow up questions that we want to make ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: No, hon ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... because ... [Inaudible.] It’s a point of order because we must be consistent with the Rules. If it is allowed we want to make follow up questions from there as well, so that ...



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, you ...



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... [Inaudible.] ... your President is hiding somewhere. We want to ask questions from there because he’s not here ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu? Hon Papo? Hon Shivambu, remember


... Order! Order! Order! Order! Hon Shivambu, remember that whenever we prepare for Questions, you have a right to submit




follow up questions ... an indication that you would want to make a follow up question. I do have a list of parties that made that request. [no sound] Hon members, honestly! Hon Shivambu, what is the problem here? I mean, you may speak from the podium and we did not ... [Inaudible.] ... hon Mkhaliphi! Order! Order! Hon member! Hon member ... Okay, I will intervene. Hon Mkhaliphi?



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, I’m being harassed here. I’m being harassed by your member here. He’s asking what my children say when I speak here. Where do my children fit in? In Women’s Month! I’m being harassed in Women’s Month!



The SPEAKER: Hon members!



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: In Women’s Month! Can you rule on that, Speaker? Speaker, rule on that! I’m harassed by this doctor here.



The SPEAKER: Who is that? [Inaudible.] Okay, take your seat.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Where do my kids fit in? Why do you bring my kids here? [Inaudible.]




The SPEAKER: Okay, hon Mkhaliphi. Hon Mkhaliphi, take your seat. Who raised that question? Who is that, hon members?





Aowa, aowa ... (Translation of Sesotho sentence follows.)



[No, no...]





... hon Dhlomo, really?



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: [Inaudible.] ... I’m not here ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Dhlomo, hayi maan! Okay. Hon Dhlomo?





Hayi maan kha ume Hope yhuuu. Hayi, hayi ... (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Just stop it, hon Hope. Stop it ...]






... you are not presiding now.



Mr M A TSEKI: But that question is very relevant, hon Speaker. That question is very relevant.



The SPEAKER: Hon Dhlomo ...





... kha uphakame bhuti ... (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[... please take the floor, hon member ...]





... take the floor. What did you say? What did you say, hon Dhlomo? Let me understand what you said.



Dr S M DHLOMO: Hon Speaker ...



The SPEAKER: Hon Modise and hon Mente! Hon Dhlomo, what did you say? Order! Order! Order! Hon Dhlomo, what did you say? Can you just clarify what you said for me?




Dr S M DHLOMO: You can check the Hansard. I didn’t say anything.




The SPEAKER: Okay, then I will come back. Hon member, I will come back with a ruling ... from Hansard. Hon Zulu?




The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Thank you again, hon Speaker. Again, on the same Rule that we raised earlier on. It is just a plea, hon Speaker, because members of this House on both sides do have to appreciate what we have been raising all the time. What is actually very disturbing right now is that members of the EFF in the front and members on this side are actually going to the point of almost talking ... physical threats against each other. [Interjections.] No, hon member, I’m really ...




The SPEAKER: Allow her. She is on the floor. She is on the floor and I granted her that opportunity. Yes.



The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Speaker, I am really pleading ...




An HON MEMBER: Point of order.



The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: It’s Women’s Month, so the last thing we need between us women in particular is making the kinds of threats that are being made in the House. I thought we’d long gone past that stage. As I indicated earlier on, the people of South Africa will learn from us, and when we learn we must learn and show that we have learnt. So, what has been going on here ... Hon Speaker, it’s a pity that you did not hear but members who are here heard the physical threats. It’s a plea that all members must withdraw from any form of physical threats. The last thing we need is that hon ... [Interjections.] Yes, I have changed and I will show you that I have changed. I struggle to make sure that we make the change. I’ve made the change ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: Ok, thank you very much hon Zulu. Hon members, order! Order hon members! Hon members, order please! There is a matter which has been raised here. Not only has it been just raised, I heard it all but there was somebody I recognised on the floor. I was asking hon member, Dr Dhlomo to clarify what he had said which had annoyed hon Mkhaliphi. Now, hon Dhlomo




has referred me to the Hansard. I will check the Hansard and come back and rule on the matter. However, hon ...





...yima ... (Translation of isiXhosa word follows.)



[... hold on ...]





... hold on. Please hold your horses. Now at that point, there was some exchange hon members between hon Modise and hon Mente. Hon members both of you, will you please stand. Hon Mente and hon Modise ...yes sisi, yes. Hon ... now ... no it was ... Hon members ...





...hayi ke ngoku! (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[...you cannot do this!]





Hon members, order! Order! Order hon members! Hon members, order! Hon Mente, hon Mente, hon members, you were right to




take the floor to stand because I did call out your name to stand. But, hon Mente is correcting that and is pointing to the right person. Will the person who was having an exchange with hon Mente take the floor hon members. Sit down hon Modise and thank you very much. Hon ... allow me... hon members, hon members, hon members ... Order! Order! Order! Order! Hon members, you are hon members and hon members are leaders of our society, the parliamentarians and have the responsibility to uphold the decorum of the House.



I think what hon Zulu said about the fact that, this happened at a time when it is women’s month says it all. I just think that hon members it was incorrect of you, hon Mente and hon Mgweba. We are supposed to be exemplary to our people who are watching us. We are supposed to be exemplary to our children, to our families, o our members who are watching us. I do want to ... no, no, no, I don’t need you to help to deal with this. Hon Mente, hon Mgweba, with all due respect, I am appealing to both of you to withdraw what you said to one another for the benefit of this House.



Ms T MGWEBA: Thank you very much hon Speaker, I withdraw.




The SPEAKER: Thank you very much. Hon Mente!



Ms N V MENTE: Thank you very much Speaker. I will not withdraw protecting my members, because she, after Dr Dhlomo




The SPEAKER: No hon Mente



Ms N V MENTE: No you want ...[Inaudible] ... there is context to everything.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mente! Hon Mente!



Ms N V MENTE: There is context to everything.





Asingawo amageza silapha nje, asikho mbarheni. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[We are not fools, and this is not a shebeen.]





You are not going to sit here and intimidate my members ...








... icinge ukuba ndiza kuhlala ndithule ... (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[... and think that I will keep quiet ...]





... it will never happen.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mente! Hon Mente! Hon Mente!





Nksz N V MENTE: Ndifuna ukukucacisela Somlomo. Ndicela ukukucacisela. (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



Mrs N V MENTE: I want you to be clear, Speaker. I want you to know.]



The SPEAKER: I am requesting you, it does not matter what happened now ...[Interjections.]



Ms N V MENTE: No it matters, it matters, it matters Speaker.






The SPEAKER: But, the exchange which you had ...no hon member





Nksz N V MENTE: Somlomo, ilungu lam ligrogriswa lelinye ilungu emva kokuba uGqr Dhlomo emgrogrisa ngabantwana balo.

Okokuqala, abantwana bakhe abangeni ndawo apha. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)



[Mrs N V MENTE: Hon Speaker, my member was threatened by another member after Dr Dhlomo also threatened his children. Firstly, his children have nothing to do with what is happening here.]



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much.



Ms N V MENTE: Secondly, she threatens my member and I must sit here and be quiet when my member ...[Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: No hon member. Hon member! Hon Mente!



Ms N V MENTE: It is not going to happen that my members are threatened whilst I am here. [Inaudible] ... were ejected out




of the House with violence. [Inaudible] Now the members are threatening with violence on my members? It will never happen. It will never happen.



The SPEAKER: Hon ... hon Mente, the matter ...[Interjections.]



Ms N V MENTE: You must protect us from being violated by your women. The worst part is, she is defending a man against a woman.



The SPEAKER: Okay, okay.



Ms N V MENTE: Then I must sit here and fold arms? I am not going to do that.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mente! Hon Mente!



Ms N V MENTE: I am not going to do it Speaker. [Inaudible] I am not going to withdraw protecting my members.



The SPEAKER: No, hon Mente, I have called your name thrice already. All I am requesting is, in spite of the context




within which this happened, the issue I am raising hon Mente and hon members is what transpired here in the Chamber.



Ms N V MENTE: Speaker, you did not hear us, you are being told by ...[Inaudibe.]



The SPEAKER: No, hon Mente please withdraw.



Ms N V MENTE: What? What must I withdraw? What must I withdraw?



The SPEAKER: Hon Mente, withdraw. Hon Mente withdraw. Then, hon Mente please leave the House.



Ms N V MENTE; What must I withdraw?



The SPEAKER: If you can’t take the order, leave the House. It is my ruling hon member; it is my ruling. Hon member, leave the House. No hon Shivambu.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: [Inaudible] ... give you a ...[Inaudible.]




The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu, the issue is not about the context, it is about what transpired here in the House. No hon Shivambu, I have made a ruling. I have said, these two members must withdraw.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: But she never threatened her with violence.



An HON MEMBER: No, these two members must leave the House, not that our member ...[Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: That is another matter which we will deal with once I have read the Hansard. I have ruled that hon Mente should leave the House. Hon Mente, leave the House.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The ...[Inaudible] ...was threatened by an ANC member. It was not done by the national chair.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mente please leave the House if you can’t withdraw. Hon Mente, will you please leave the House.

Serjeant-at-arms will you please usher hon Mente out. I have not called the bouncers; I have requested Serjeant-at-arms to

usher hon Mente out.




Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, on a point of order. Speaker! Speaker Nqakula! Speaker, are you calling a man against a woman again?



The SPEAKER: I have said, the Serjeant-at-arms should request


the women Parliamentary Protection Services, PPS members to usher hon Mente out. Thank you.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, can I speak?



The SPEAKER: We proceed hon members.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker, can I speak?



The SPEAKER: No, I am not allowing any point of order now.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: No but, Speaker, this thing started about me.



The SPEAKER: No, hon Mkhaliphi. Hon Mente please leave the House.







Ngubani? (Translation of isiXhosa sentence follows.)



[Who is he?]





Hon Shivambu, please give the way so that hon Mente can be ushered out. Please give the way. Thank you very much hon members.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker!


The SPEAKER: Hon members, order. Order! Order! Remember ... order hon members. Remember that, this happened in the context of an exchange between yourself, Dr Dhlomo and hon Mkhaliphi. For that I have ruled. I will go and consult with Hansard, come back and make a ruling.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: I want to get in there. I want to address exactly that point.



The SPEAKER: I am not going to allow you to speak now.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: No, but there is no Hansard, I want to address that point.






The SPEAKER: No, I am not going to allow ...[Interjections.]



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: There is no Hansard. He didn’t speak on Hansard. He spoke here.



The SPEAKER: There is Hansard ...[Inaudible] ...I will find it. I will find it.






The SPEAKER: I will find it hon Mkhaliphi.



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Speaker ...





... uchemile. (Translation of isiZulu sentence follow.)


[. . .you are biased.]





Speaker, you are worse than Baleka ...








... ngendlela ocheme ngayo. (Translation of isiZulu sentence follows.)

[...the manner in which you are so biased.]



The SPEAKER: Now hon members ...



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Hon members we now proceed. We were at the point where the President was to answer to the last supplementary question which was raised by hon P J Groenewald.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No Speaker, we were at the point where you were passing a ruling on the point of order of whether when we make follow-up questions we should take that podium, because we will gladly do so.



The SPEAKER: Hon Shivambu ...[Interjections.]



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: You have not given a ruling on that, you were busy doing that.




The SPEAKER: I actually did.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: What was the ruling?



The SPEAKER: I said, there is nothing wrong. However, we encourage people to answer or to pose questions from where they are. But, I was not going to interrupt at that point where he was at the podium. That is what I said.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: No problem.



The SPEAKER: But, you wouldn’t have heard it because there was this exchange that was going on in the Chamber hon member. Now for the record, that is what I said. Hon members, if I may read this Rule 78(2) which states that:



At a sitting in the Chamber of the National Assembly a member may —

(a) only speak from the podium during debate and whenever the presiding officer so directs, and at all other times address the Chair from a microphone on the floor of the Chamber; or




(b) deliver his or her address in such other manner as the member is physically able to do and agreed to by the presiding officer.



In this instance, I did not prevent the hon member from taking the podium. Therefore, hon member, I really request that we proceed. Hon members ... hon the President, will you please respond to the question raised by hon Groenewald.



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you hon Speaker. Hon Groenewald wanted to know what I have done in relation to all the issues that he raised, to improve the criminal justice system. Hon Speaker, a lot has been done in relation to just ensuring that, the prosecutorial process in our country is streamlined in relation to ensuring that they focus on crimes that has to do with gender-based violence and femicide.



I think we are seeing a lot of progress in that regard. There are more prosecutions, but not only that, there is greater success on convictions. When it come to the judiciary, we have set up special courts as well. Special courts where children and women feel much able, to be able to bear testimony to what would have happened to them. I visited one of those courts in




Gauteng and so how well structured it is and how the judiciary is also able to ensure that, those types of trials do take place in an environment that enhances the process of justice to go on, in a way where victims are able to testify and relate their experiences in a much more conducive environment.



When it comes to corrections, yes, there have been situations where parole has been given to people who have committed crimes of rape, and they go out and still go ahead and commit those, and I like to believe that the parole system is now being tightened. When you look at the work that the police are now doing, police stations have now become much more serious in as far as ensuring that, when they deal with issues that have to do with gender based violence, rape, and crimes against children, they have set up various structures either highly well specialised or trained officers. There are also social workers who deal with that.



Now, much more progress needs to be done still in the criminal justice system. But a combination of all these interventions that we have made, including at the legislative level, where even the National Assembly has passed laws, I think we can say that we are making progress. Clearly not enough progress in




the eyes of many people, also in the eyes of women of our country, much more needs to be done. But we have embarked on a journey that is enabling us to pay more attention to give more focus to crimes against women and children on a gender-based violence type of process. Thank you very much hon Speaker.





Question 9:




Speaker. The Report of the Expert Panel which I set up into the July 2021 civil unrest concluded among others things that the South African National Defence Force, SANDF, did not undertake any scenario planning or a possible sudden deployment nor put in place or put in measures necessary to deploy or should they be called upon to do so. That’s what the expert panel said.




We should therefore welcome the SANDF’s internal warning instruction of 06 August 2022 as an indication of the readiness of the security services to respond to potential unrest should it be necessary. In this instance, it was not necessary for the President to authorise the deployment of the




SANDF to support the South African Police Service, SAPS, in managing the security situation in the country.




The relevant security and law enforcement entities continue to improve their own ability to respond to criminality as well as instability under the overall direction of the National Security Council.




As indicated in the state of the nation address, government has allocated funding for the recruitment of 12 000 new police trainees and the first cohort is currently undergoing basic training. The SAPS Public Order Police unit will receive an additional 4000 members this financial year. The first tranche of the 2000 will complete their training next month. And the next tranche of 2000 will complete training in December.




Drawing on the lessons of last year’s July unrest, we are working to improve co-operation between law enforcement agencies and the private security industry in the fight against crime. An example is the collaboration between Transnet Freight Rail and the SAPS to combat infrastructure




theft and the sabotage of the railway line. This includes securing the Rail Corridor North between the Highveld Coalfields and Richards Bay, which has led to a significant reduction in crime and derailments.




Earlier this month Justice and Correctional Services Minister, Ronald Lamola gave approval for Transnet security officers to be granted peace officers status. This means that they will be allowed to make arrests and assist the National Prosecuting Authority with prosecutions. They will also have the authority to search premises, complete dockets to ensure suspects are charged correctly and assist the basic investigations.




Another example of co-operation is between mine security, private security and the SAPS to fight precious metal theft and illegal mining. As a result of these joint efforts, we are seeing progress in areas such as Mpumalanga, Limpopo and North West, that have been flash points of instability as stolen metals were moved to illicit markets abroad.




Government is taking the challenge of illegal mining extremely seriously. Last week, the National Security Council held a meeting to focus on the work being done to tackle illegal mining and related crimes. The SAPS has established Task Teams to tackle illegal mining alongside other Task Teams dealing construction sites extortion, copper and cable theft and theft and vandalisation of economic infrastructure.




The National Security Council agreed on further action to tackle illegal mining and that the SANDF could be called upon to support the SAPS should it be required. Together, all these efforts should steadily reduce the prevalence of criminality and combat attempts to undermine police order. However, it is important that all our security forces remain alert and ready to act if needed. But, we also urge our communities through the various community structures that are in place such as community policing forums to be able to assist the police in the work of dealing with criminality in our country. Thank you, madam Speaker.




Rev K R J MESHOE: Thank you, hon Speaker, and thank you, hon President. The ACDP is extremely concerned about the current




state of criminality in our country, violent service, delivery protests, incidents of vigilantism, abductions, kidnapping of women and children in particular are also increasing, hijacking of residential properties has become common place which is a great concern.




Mr President, when members of Operation Dudula set up roadblocks and checkpoints to stop people with darker skin who are suspected of foreign nationals preventing them from accessing hospitals and clinics while the police are watching in a posture of endorsement or when they search and demand official documents from business owners they suspect to be foreign nationals in the presence of the police that we believe sends a negative message to the international community, that South Africa is becoming a failed state where lawlessness is allowed to entrench itself. And members of the public are allowed to take matters in their own hands. So what I want to know, Mr President, while I appreciate what you said, and that there is collaboration and co-operation between different agencies of security, the issue of soldiers being involved, practically, to crush, to stop and to arrest drug lords. The fight against drugs seem to have been lost because




there is an increasing number of children that are addicted. So I want to know, Mr President what should happen to show government that the matter is serious and desperate. All the plans that the President is talking about consist of things that should have been done long ago. But it’s only now that government is talking about collaboration. I want know what has to happen to send the message of urgency or save our ship, SOS, to government and to the President that something needs to be done to finally stop violence in the country and make our streets safer particularly for women and children?






Speaker. I would like to say to Reverend Meshoe that indeed the alarm and the call has been raised quite prominently and many of the issues that hon Meshoe is alluding to, the issues of kidnapping, the issues of lawlessness are matters that have registered and action is being taken.




There has been failure, as has been admitted. And with the new invigoration that we have infused in the police, the National Commissioner of Police is highly alert on all these matters, together with the Minister. And there is now much more of an




action oriented approach, which is going to deal with these matters.




Hon Meshoe raises the issue of bringing in the soldiers to arrest and crush all these activities. I’d like to say that the army can only be called in to support and assist the police process of arrest dealing with criminality is a function of the SAPS. Where we, in certain circumstances, will bring in the army, at least when they have to come in to give support to give assistance to the police. And the police will be the ones who will lead that process. We need to remember that our soldiers are trained with a particular focus in mind. And as they come in, they have to be giving and lending support and assistance. And, yes, leadership and direction of the police.




The President in deploying the army also has to notify Parliament as we all know. So deploying the police, or rather the army is quite a serious matter. But the National Security Council in its recent meeting, realized that there will be situations where indeed, we might need to bring in the army. And when that happens, it is the President, but the President




can only finally do so informing Parliament and informing the National Assembly as well as the National Council of Provinces. I think we should look at that in that context.




But having said that, there is much more determination on the part of the police to deal with all these matters. I did say earlier that the police has set up a number of units, a number of units that will be focusing on all these areas. For instance, when it comes to illegal mining and numbers of the police who have to focus on this have been increased. And we are already beginning to see the positive effects of all this. So quite serious action is being taken in this regard. Thank you, hon Speaker.




Ms M MODISE: Hon President, the Experts Panel on the July 2021 unrest, amongst other things recommended that the capacity of the security services needs to be strengthened to respond effectively to all situations. Whilst appreciating that the defence force may be deployed to support the SAPS when the need arises, what measures will the President take to ensure that the capacitation of law enforcement agencies is




strengthened to deal with acts of criminality in our country, as observed by the experts panel?






Speaker. A number of actions obviously needs to be taken in this regard. The first one obviously is to get the police, and indeed, the security forces to focus more on the problem areas. And what is good is that the National Security Council meets quite regularly and focuses on areas of risk and areas of concern. And of course, the other one is to capacitate our security forces, from a capability point of view, as well as ensuring that we focus on the budgetary side of things. With the financial fiscal constraints that we have faced, we have seen yes, a cut back on budgets, particularly defence forces, as well as the police. And these are matters that are now being looked at. So that we strengthen the hand of the police and we also strengthen our defence force. And if we do all that, and appoint the right people, for the right positions, we do believe that we will be able to make progress. And this is a probe process that we have now embarked upon. The training element, the capacitation element is also another area that we looking at. And we are looking at all these




matters holistically to ensure that we address the various areas of weakness, all round particularly when it comes to our police. So progress is being made.




I’m rather pleased with the focus that the National Commissioner is having together with various other officers that he works with, on the issue of criminality. And, of course, we need to ensure that they continue getting the support of the people of our country because they can only really truly be successful if they are supported. And if, for instance, at community level through our community policing forums, we are able to lend them that support. Thank you, hon Speaker.




Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Thank you, hon Speaker. Mr President, it’s not the defence force or the SAPS that can do what we need in South Africa to create a better quality of life and protect our people. When a country is not able to provide food to its citizens, it’s in a state of collapse. If it cannot provide water for survival, it’s in a state of collapse. If it cannot provide homes, it’s in a state of collapse. Your predecessors President Mbeki says that we have no plan for the future. And




our former President Kgalema Mothlante says South Africa is in a crisis. Our state-owned entities have collapsed. Our infrastructure is collapsing the quality of education, where 60% drop off Tvet colleges 91,000 children gave birth to children last year, and we think it is okay.




Can you tell us? What plan do you have in terms of a holistic approach to solve the problems of this country? Very importantly, and I want to highlight Mr President 200,000 jobs are at risk at the moment in the confectionery industry, because of the policies we have, which calls for your urgent intervention to save these job, because of our policies. Could you please tell us whether you will be willing to consider that as well?






Speaker. We have a number of interventions that we are embarking on. As regards having a plan, we have a plan, we conceived a plan for recovery and reconstruction, which we put to various stakeholders, and it was adopted and embraced. And it is this that is guiding us at this point in time. And embedded in that plan is also the issue that hon Emam raises




the economy, and giving focus to our economic recovery, which, as he correctly says, has an impact on the issue of security, issue of criminality, because it is when people have food, when people have jobs and when people have water, but their livelihood improves. And our recovery plan is aimed at addressing that. We are making measured progress. We are not where we want to be.




The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in us losing 2 million jobs. And losing 2 million jobs in economy of our size, it’s quite a devastating act, where many people have lost their livelihoods and go to bed hungry. And it was for that reason that government had to intervene to introduce a relief measure for many of our people who were not able to cope with the ravages of COVID-19. So many initiatives are underway. And we are also interacting with various stakeholders, be it labour community and the business community. And what we had initially thought we would make progress on and forging a compact is taking time. But the discussions are ongoing. And we anticipate that as we continue addressing all these challenges, we are going to make progress. Yes, are we having a crisis situation? We are having huge challenges in our country. And they have been




given rise to what we know unemployment, inequality and poverty, which did not start yesterday, which has reset our country over a number of years and was exacerbated by the recent calamities that our country has just recently, just 18- months, - two-years ago gone through. And in the course of that government has taken any number of other actions or interventions.




Government at its own instance, and for the first time in the history of our country, was able to come up with an intervention that created 1 million job opportunities, especially for young people who are negatively affected by the incidence of unemployment. We’ve been able to also extend that to people who work in the rural areas, small medium farmers.

So a number of activities have been taken and where we have also assisted the early childhood development, say if you like practitioners, in quite a positive way, where young people have been cared for.




Are we concerned about the 91,000 young people who have given birth to kids? Yes, we are concerned. And COVID-19 also did not help us much in this regard as it has also happened to




other countries. So we are grappling with all these challenges and all these problems. Do we have interventions that are addressing all these challenges? Yes. do the interventions match up with the enormity of the challenges? At times may be not so much because of our fiscal challenges as well. But what I can assure hon Shaik-Emam is that government is not resting on its laurels. We are also continuing to deal with issues of corruption and a major pandemic if you like that our country has had to face during the course of this period. And we are beginning to see great progress that is ensuing in that regard.




So progress is being made but we need to make much more progress. But we are moving forward and at times we seem to be moving backwards but forward movement is what is our great focus. Thank you, hon Speaker.




Mr B H HOLOMISA: Hon President, firstly we wish ...







... umama wekhaya ...






... a speedy recovery.







Angazibhalela yena amayeza uye kumthengela ngokwakho, ungathumeli oonogada.






Mr President, would you consider establishing special disciplined units comprised of SANDF and SAPS, which are to be trained under one roof to implement what you are discussing at security council level, to make the budget available, to properly train and equip the said units and let them be on 24/7 standby in all nine provinces. That would improve the lack of state readiness we have witnessed on a number of occasions where you issue an instruction for instance to a defence force and it takes them time for them to deploy. But if they are trained and they have got equipment and those operation orders would be monitored at national level perhaps by security council or in a joint operation centre. That would also Mr President ... [Interjections.] ...




The SPEAKER: You have exceeded your time, hon Holomisa.







... sele ndigqibezela.







... to enhance their capacity. They should work with police


... [Inaudible.] ... and military intelligence unity [Time Expired.]






Niyaliqhawula eli lam ixesha ekubeni benibanika abanye abantu apha ixesha elininzi. Aninanyani kule nto yenu.






much, hon Speaker. Hon Holomisa,







... uthetha ngokukanjengele ngenene ...






And you are making a number of what I would call positive proposals on improving the state of readiness of our security forces or units and it’s something that we really need to think about.




What you should have noted which is what sparked hon Meshoe to raise the question is the notice that was issued by the defence force which was aimed at getting the army to be action ready if they are called upon to be ready. That I saw in very positive light because it basically meant that the Chief of the Defence Force and his various other officers are seeking to address the weakness that the Report of Expert Panel on July 2021 unrest had spoken about.




So there is a move to improve our state of readiness and similarly on the SAPS side there is that similar focus as well. So you are suggesting, hon Holomisa that we should have units, units that would be combined and look at what needs to be done to improve the state of readiness in all our provinces. It’s something that is currently underway in




different iterations, may be separately, but you are suggesting, do it as a combined force.




That is something that can be looked at although it will need to be looked at within the protocols of these various units, these various institutions, the defence force and the police. Because when they are called upon to help each other the intersect at a particular area of focus where the defence force is called upon to support and to assist the police. But I would like to thank you for the suggestions put forward.

Thank you, hon Speaker.






Question 10:


The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, hon Speaker, it will take an effort by all of us in the country to overcome the many social ills that confront our people. In recognising the critical role that civil society plays in tackling poverty, inequality and related social problems, I announced in the state of the nation address in February this year that a Social Sector Summit will be convened in 2022.




We recognised that government needs to create an enabling and a conducive environment for civil society organisations to be effective in undertaking their work.



The Presidential Social Sector Summit was held on 4th and 5th of August, this year, and it grappled with the challenge of poverty, unemployment and inequality, recognising that they lead to increased levels of desperation amongst our people, social problems, breakdown of families and violence in our communities.



To promote positive social values, we need to tackle poverty. The provision of the social wage is an effective intervention to support and protect households living below the poverty line.



As of November 2020, over 18,2 million citizens were accessing social grants in our country, with the child-specific grants reaching over 13,2 million children every month, representing over 72% of the total grants distributed.




The old age pension is an effective instrument to support elderly persons, together with other social services such as education, health and food distribution programmes.



For unemployed South Africans, the R350 Social Relief of Distress, SRD, grant has provided valuable support since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many people continue to criticise out intervention in this regard, but what I should say is that this R350, which is assisting almost 11 million people in our country is something that is seen in positive light by those people whose livelihoods were also negatively affected by COVID-19. In some social circles or civil society organisations, they say it has helped to reduce poverty which would have gone much higher had we not intervened. Poverty is at unacceptable levels. That amount, much as it is not as high as people would want it to be, has been a great boon to many of our people given our fiscal constraints and our ability to par or to assist our people.



The Expanded Public Works Programme, EPWP, is one of the government’s key programmes to provide temporary work for the people who are unemployed. The programme offers an essential avenue for income transfers to poor households in the short to




medium-term. In the last financial year – as I was saying earlier – over one million work opportunities were created.



The Presidential Employment Stimulus, seeking to mitigate the devastating economic challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, has provided work and livelihood opportunities for nearly a million people since it was started less than two years ago.



The Presidential Social Sector Summit produced a framework document highlighting two critical strategies to address social ills in South Africa: firstly, implementing development interventions with civil society; and lastly, strengthening civil society as a delivery agent for development interventions. The Social Sector Summit framework document is aligned with the vision of the National Development Plan, NDP, to eradicate extreme poverty in our country by 2030 and further reduce inequality and unemployment. This means that programmes to address poverty and inequality must be accelerated, recognising that the state and private sectors often rely on civil society organisations to deliver essential services to communities, especially those in hard-to-reach areas. We have seen how civil society organisations have




continued to play a critical role in a number of areas such as health and social welfare.



The Presidential Social Sector Summit laid the basis for more responsive and effective collaboration to deliver on the promise of a better life for all South Africans by ensuring that commitments are clear and that they strengthen existing initiatives to promote shared values within families and communities.



Civil society is a critical stakeholder in our country as we seek to deepen democracy and improve the quality of lives.

Civil society can help us address the social ills. The call for partnerships with the civil society sector is premised on the acknowledgement that government alone cannot address the developmental challenges that our country is facing.



Central to the partnership between government and civil society is the joint commitment to pursue matters of national interest such as fostering shared positive family values, promoting social cohesion within communities, nation-building and ensuring communities’ responsibility is there in protecting citizens.






We agree that our developmental interventions therefore must be structured in a way that promotes strong family values and strengthens diverse family units and households.



Some priority areas already exist and include social ills like gender-based violence and alcohol and drug abuse, but to name a few.



We signed a framework agreement and civil society committed to ensuring that society takes joint responsibility in dealing with communities’ pathologies by combating all forms of crimes, addressing social ills, providing youth and women empowerment initiatives, caring and supporting people with disabilities and older persons, and also addressing crime and corruption at ... [Inaudible.] ... level.



All these measures and interventions were embraced and are owned by civil society organisations to address our social ills. I felt very encouraged at the summit that we had that so many civil organisations that spanned the full spectrum of our lives as South Africans, from sport to religions, you name it,




and that we were all united as one team to work for a better South Africa. I thank you.



Ms N Q MVANA: Thank you, hon Speaker. Your Excellency, thank you for the elaborate response and we are confident that the Presidential Sector Summit resolutions will enhance interventions of government and strengthen support for civil society. As I was in attendance of the Presidential Sector Summit, I also think that I have confidence that the civil society will be able to know their responsibility with regard to assisting.



Mr President, women are major victims of high level social ills – as you have said especially on this women’s month. They experience trauma when their children are abused. The security of women and the girl child has reached alarming proportions as we know the tragic deaths that we have experience in Enyobeni, the one of eight women in Krugersdorp and the gang rape incident in Kagiso.



It is critical for the government to develop interventions that address trauma as result of these social ills that you are talking about, Mr President. The impact of these ills




require psychosocial support of citizens from social workers in particular.



Your Excellency, how will the government ensure that it enhances the provision of psychosocial support for victims? Thank you, Speaker.



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, hon Speaker, the issue of psychosocial support and assistance to our people who are facing enormous challenges in a number of areas of their lives is a very important process that we need to ensure that it is given attention. Obviously, through the various officials that we have in government, those that are within government structures like social workers and those that still needs to be brought in, are the ones who would play a key role. However, civil society organisations are the ones who are at the forefront of all these because they are much closer to the challenges that our people face and the needs that our people face. As I said earlier, government cannot do this alone, it requires the support and the assistance of civil society. Civil society has a number of people with great talents, insights, experience, as well as expertise to address




the needs that our people have; be they of health nature, psychosocial nature or any other nature.



I was particularly pleased at the Presidential Social Sector Summit when we were all ad idem of one mind between civil society and government. Let me also add that there were a number of business people. I called upon business to also ensure that it participates quiet strongly in the next summit that we are going to have, next year.



If we all work together, with business bringing its strength and muscle through the various programmes that they embark upon and their financial might, with government being the overarching entity in our country which is omnipresent and civil society organisations that are spread right across our country, we will be able to make great progress as we address the challenges and the problems that our people face.



I have great confidence in the co-operation and the working together between civil society, government, as well as business. What we sow together – as the hon member says – at that summit, was something that as South Africans we can be proud of. We dealt with problems honestly, openly and




directly. We were able to find each other and it ended up in the framework document that we signed. What remains now is the implementation. The implementation is obviously going to address the issues of psychosocial support that our people need and must be given as we move on. Thank you, hon Speaker.



The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Thank you, Mr President, I hate to be the one to break it to you that you should be judging your Police Minister on preventing crime rather than how many crime scenes he pitches up to with a TV camera. I have some good news, Mr President, crime statistics came out two weeks ago, and show that murder crimes are down by 43% in Mitchells Plain ... [Inaudible] ... Kraaifontein, and down 14% in Khayelitsha and Harare. Even if it has gone up all around the country, it has come down on an average of 8,2% in areas where the DA government reinforce policing sector at their own cost to the Law Enforcement Advancement Plan, LEAP, programme.



This government has now demonstrated that local policing works better. When it is done at local level, there is better knowledge about the ground issues and there is the ability to work closer with civil society.




Mr President, the City of Cape Town has now formally applied for greater policing powers to build on this success. Given the clear evidence ... [Time expired.]



The SPEAKER: Hon member, your time is up before you could ask your question, unfortunately. Thank you. [Interjections.]

... I have noted that. The point is that you have exceeded your time.



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, Madam Speaker, I note with pleasure and also very impressed with the record that hon Steenhuisen is setting out. It is something that is evolving in those areas in Cape Town that he has mentioned. That should be applauded. Any decline in criminality is something that we should all applaud. We all want to see what is behind it and how it is unfolding. Hon Steenhuisen said that they have been doing this at their own cost. We need to look at that in a very positive way so that all of us can learn out of it and see the extent to which it is positive. It should be an experience which should be shared all around so that even our local government entities have greater focus on dealing with criminality.




More importantly, what I find more impressive, he mentions that they have been working together with civil society. We welcome that. That’s precisely what we want to see because it strengthens our argument for community policing forums where members of the community get involved, working side by side with the police in dealing with crime. As I often say, it is members of the community who know who the thieves are, who know who the rapists are and who know where those people who are either peddling drugs are peddling them from. It is when we all work together with a level of confidence and trust that we will be able to deal with crime. Thank you, hon Speaker.



Ms N R MASHABELA: Thanks, Speaker, the outgoing President of the ANC, the recently released crime statistics show that the SA Police Service are unable to protect citizens from the high levels of crime. For the past two years, each and every quarter, there are over 10 000 reported cases of rape in this country while there are over 6 000 cases of murder. Do you still have confidence in the ability of Minister Bheki Cele to lead the country’s crime fighting plans? If so, what specific

... [Inaudible.] ... [Time expired.] ... to show that he is able to lead the country’s fight against crime?




The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Yes, I do have confidence in the Minister of Police and his ability to continue to lead our fight against crime in the country. Thank you, hon Speaker.



Ms S A BUTHELEZI: Thank you, hon Speaker, government’s role in combating gender-based violence and social ills has been wholly lacking and underwhelming as promises to ensure one social worker per ward and a women’s desk at municipal level has not materialised to the extent needed, for example. I would therefore like to know whether The Presidency or government has a plan to capacitate municipalities in conjunction with civil society to deliver on the above- mentioned needs of combating social ills? If so, please provide a detailed response on how government could facilitate and assist municipalities and civil society with such a collaboration. Thank you, Speaker.



The PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC: Thank you, hon Speaker, yes, our intention is to ensure that we collaborate with civil society and we ensure that there is deep co-operation at all levels, national, provincial as well as at local government level.




The hon member is raising a very important issue about the municipality level because that’s where our people live and that’s where everything takes place and to the extent that we may not have paid close attention. This is an opportunity that we all have to ensure that at municipal level we are able to broaden and deepen the collaboration between civil society and government agencies.



Hon member refers to one ward, one social worker. We are not there yet because of budgetary constraints. That is the ideal situation. I see that more often as I go around the country, meeting our people at the local government level, and hearing their problems and challenges that they have. Knowing very well that if we had moved into having a social worker per ward, we would be able to do a lot better.



Some municipalities are doing quite a lot in that regard. They do have social workers that attend to the challenges and the problems that our people have at that local level. In a way, that should be the norm particularly being the type of society that we are that has come out of a very fractured past. The past that was so difficult for many of our people because of what apartheid did to the majority of our people at various




levels. We then need that societal involvement and societal support. It is an ideal that one would like to see being achieved. Budgetary constraints make it difficult. One often needs people who are qualified in social work who do not have employment, who have not been able to be drawn into government employment because of the budgetary constraints.



This is a matter that we are giving attention because through that, we will be able to enhance social cohesion and be able to address the challenges that our people have. Thank you, hon Speaker.



Mr B A RADEBE: On a point of order.



The SPEAKER: I am sorry, there is point of order.



Mr B A RADEBE: Yes Speaker, you have omitted the IFP. The last one to ask the supplementary question.



The SPEAKER: I am sorry, hon Radebe. The IFP did ask a question. Okay, I understand.






Question 11:


The PRESIDENT: Thank you, hon Speaker. I know that there’s a great deal of interests and my answer to this question.

Therefore, I would like to say that without appearing like I do not want to answer questions, that I do not want to be accountable, I should say that as I have indicated before, indicated it even in written replies to members of this House, and also indicated it in the debate on the Presidency Budget Vote as well as in statements on various public platforms. I stand ready to co-operate and also to give an explanation and to co-operate with any investigations on this matter. Now, investigations are ongoing by a variety of agencies and I must say that the focus that the various agencies are putting on this matter demonstrates the importance of this matter and the way they are dealing with it.



I have responded to the various questions that have been raised and will continue to respond to all questions that have been put to me by the relevant authorities. In the cause of what they are working on, the authorities have said that it’s best if they deal with all these attendant matters to this theft that occurred at the farm and be able to address every




issue. Therefore, I’ve been counselled and advised that it is best to address this matter when those processes have been done. I’d like to say that I stand ready, hon Speaker, as people have said, to take the nation into its confidence and stand ready to do so to give an explanation. However, for me it has been important that this matter having occurred that I should give space, stand back and allow various agencies to deal with this matter as thoroughly as I believe they are doing.



Now, there are clearly individuals and organisations that seek some mileage out of this issue and the most appropriate response from my side is for the law to take its own course.

It is for me important that due process is followed, including the process that will unfold in Parliament and I’d like to say that I stand ready to co-operate with that process as well, and will be ready to be fully accountable. Therefore, I stand here as Cyril Ramaphosa not being unwilling to be accountable, I want to be fully accountable. I’m saying once again that I’d like and it’s important and even those who are dealing with these matters have said it is important that we give them space and time to deal with all the aspects of this matter.

And it is upon that process reaching whatever point of either




conclusion that I will be able to speak out on this matter. Therefore, that is my submission and I say this with the humility that I can place before this House. Thank you, hon Speaker.



Mr V ZUNGULA: Speaker, the President has not answered. We can’t accept his explanation about law enforcement agencies and everything that he’s stated. The purpose of asking questions and we in Parliament follow a process whereby the National Assembly Table approves those questions, it is because we want answers. Now, if the President does not want to answer, you must rule on that, Speaker. Therefore, I can’t move on, Speaker, to asking a follow-up question without the answer being given ... [Interjections.] ... I’m not done, Speaker, I’m not done. My question has got two parts if you were to listen to the so-called answer of the Present, he has not covered anything that I’ve said. Therefore, Speaker, I want to state to you ask ...





... lo mhlekazi ukuba aphinde aphendule ...







... then I’ll ask the follow-up question.



Mr J S MALEMA: Follow-up, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon member Zungula. If I may just before you speak, hon Kwankwa, I see you have your hands, hon ... [Interjections.] ... and me, hon Malema. Hon members, order! Will you please ... may I have your attention. I just want to read a part on the nature of replies to questions.

Members of the executive should use the opportunity provided by question time to provide the House with as much information as possible to assist members in exercising their oversight.

However, hon members, it is not possible for the Chair to prescribe to the executive on how they should respond to questions from members. If a member is dissatisfied with a reply, there are processes available for them to obtain further information in line with their oversight responsibility. I hope that I have responded. I can only steer, but I cannot prescribe how questions should be responded to, hon Zungula.



Mr V ZUNGULA: Thank you, Speaker. The question is clear, the first part of the question is asking if the President is




willing to engage the elected representatives of South Africa on this particular issue.



The SPEAKER: Okay...





... hayi khanime kaloku.





Order! Order!





Mnu V ZUNGULA: Khawubaxelele Somlomo, bangabatshazeli.









The SPEAKER: Honestly, don’t get excitable, order, just wait. Order! Hon Zungula ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: I’m concluding, Speaker.




The SPEAKER: You stopped and I thought you ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: The President ... [Interjections.] ... No, no, I did not stop I was waiting for them to keep quiet. He did not answer that, Speaker. The second part of the question was who did have handle the situation any different. He did not speak about that. He spoke about the law enforcement agencies, the very same law enforcement agencies he did not believe on because if he believed in the same law enforcement agencies he would have reported the matter to the police in 2020, but he did not do that. Therefore, what I’m saying, Speaker ... [Interjections.] ... Speaker, I’m concluding by saying that if a question is not answered you can’t say that you are prescribing. We can’t come here and ask a question which is very, very serious on the conduct of the President and he waffles in terms of attempting to answer, and you are saying that you are not going to prescribe. The bottom line is that the question is not answered.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, if I may have your attention ... [Interjections.]




Mr J S MALEMA: And not only that, Speaker, you have spoken, we want to speak as well on this matter. We are not at the festival ... [Inaudible.]



The SPEAKER: Yes, you’ll be probably be better in ... [Inaudible.] ... before you speak.



Mr J S MALEMA: But you spoke.



The SPEAKER: No, hon Malema, you don’t know what I’m going to say. Hon members, you’ll recall that there was a motion which was submitted by the ATM. Initially, when that motion was submitted just before we left Parliament in June, that motion was not in a proper format for it to be called a substantive motion, right. Then subsequently to that after writing back to hon Zungula, hon Zungula has since written back to submit the same motion, but in a format which clearly meets the criteria of a substantive motion ... [Inaudible.] ... number two.



Now, having done that the rules which you passed here in 2018, hon members, right, if I may say this indicate that once that has happened, you then put together a panel of three eminent people preferable legal ... [Inaudible.] ... Now, the Speaker




here has since responded to hon Zungula and has also invited political parties to submit names of those eminent people. I am expecting that tomorrow. The office of Mr Xaso, Thursday 2 September, will submit a list of 15 to the hon Speaker so that then the hon Speaker can click three names from those names which three names then will be charged with the responsibility that is if people agree because they are yet to be approached. Then the three people will then go through the issues and will be given 30 days and they will make a determination and submit a report suggesting whether, in fact, there is a case for the President to answer or not. I am ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: No, I’m just saying this ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: No, no, I’m just saying, I’m not ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: I’m raising a point of order, Speaker.




Ms J S MALEMA: ... [Inaudible.] ... you are extremely out of order. I mean we are becoming impatient with you ... [Interjections.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: You are addressing the section 89 process ... [Interjections.] ... we are not in the section 89 process ... [Interjections.]



Mr J S MALEMA: You are not just answering, you are answering for the President.



Mr V ZUNGULA: ... what we are asking for is that the President respects this House by answering questions.



Mr J S MALEMA: But you are answering for the ... [Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Zungula, if I have offended you, my apologies. However, all I was responding to is that part which says when he said he’s ready to co-operate with Parliament that, of course, now that there is going to be this panel of three the President has no choice but to co-operate with that




panel which you proposed and responds to questions ... [Interjections.]



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, you are out of order. On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Okay, Speaker is out of order. I will now allow for hon Skwatsha. Hon Skwatsha can you stand up ... [Interjections.] ... I’m sorry, Mcebisi, it was Kwankwa first, then yourself and then Munyai.





Mna J S MALEMA: Aowa, le nna.



The SPEAKER: I’m sorry, and hon Malema.







Mnu N L S KWANKWA: Mama ...





... let me correct you now and ...






... nguKwankwa hayi uKwankwa, nguKwankwa.



USOMLOMO: Uxolo lungu elihloniphekileyo uKwankwa.





Mr N L S KWANKWA Speaker, you see the problem here, the problem that we are facing is ...





... hayi thulani, musani ukungxola bethuna ...





 ... is that if we are going to have a situation where we have questions on the Order Paper, we go through the entire exercise of submitting our questions on time, the President and the executive authorities be able to see these questions and then when we come here a President can get away without answering the question. It renders the entire exercise futile.





Loo nto ke ithi sichitha ixesha lethu kuba kaloku ithetha ukuba lo mbuzo mawungabbikho phaya. Ndifuna ukuyibeka ngesintu




le nto, abantu baza kuza apha bafike basithele ngesebe lenkawu besithi baphendule imibuzo bengayiphendulanga. Ayikwazi ukwenzeka loo nto.





Hon Zungula is, indeed, right in saying that the question has not been answered, there has not been an attempt on the part of the President to respond to the question, or to attempt even giving an answer. To say that the law must take its course and what not, does not address ...





... le nto siyibuza apha sifuna ayiphendule ngoku.





Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Kwankwa. Hon members, hon Zungula is unhappy with the manner in which the question has been answered, and following that there are a few hands. Hon Kwankwa has made his points. Hon Skwatsha, I am now giving you the floor, followed by hon Malema and the last speaker on the matter will be hon Munyai. Therefore, I am deliberately




doing this because I do not want an impression created that we do not want this issue to be responded to. Hon Mcebisi!





DEVELOPMENT (Mr M Skwatsha): Thank you very much, hon Speaker, I’m hon Skwatsha not hon Mcebisi. Thank you very much. I really want to say, hon Speaker, that after you had just read I thought that would have a chance to proceed because the difficulty listening to the response by the President and looking at the question sitting here, the President has adequately answered the question. And, yes, even referred to him being accountable, and so this is why you are saying you will not be able to prescribe. However, I really think that the President has adequately answered the question. Thank you.



Mr J S MALEMA: Thank you very much, Speaker. Firstly, I must really ask you to withdraw and apologise what you’ve done because you are never asked to come and explain the other processes which you on behalf of the President just engaged in some long explanation that was unwarranted which is a clear indication that from where you left, you left with an intention to come and defend the President through the processes of section 89. The President himself said “I can’t




answer this question, I’ve been advised not to answer because there are other processes that are unfolding.” He can answer in all other processes except Parliament where he must really account to.



He says that so many questions came to me and I’ve answered those questions, but I’m not going to answer to you. He says that he can answer everybody else but Parliament. Therefore, then someone stands up here, like they did during Zuma’s era, he has answered sufficiently singing for supper is not correct. The EFF versus Speaker of Parliament on the Zuma matter were highly criticised for not holding the President accountable and not playing our role. The President comes here when we try to play our role the Speaker is defending the President.



The SPEAKER: Order, hon member!



Mr J S MALEMA: Are you talking about something else? Therefore, the President must answer the question today. He went to kidnap people, he engaged in money laundering, he intimidated women and kidnapped women in his farm and we are




told he must not answer. Please, the President must answer the question.



Mr T B MUNYAI: Thank you very much, hon Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Before I allow you, hon Munyai, hon Radebe raised his hand on a point of order.



Mr B A RADEBE: Thank you, hon Speaker. I’m rising on Rule 85. Hon Malema has just ... [Interjections.]



Mr M M DLAMINI: Speaker, didn’t you say that you are not taking point of orders. What are you doing with this ... [Interjections.]



Mr B A RADEBE: ... something which must come through a substantive motion.



Mr M M DLAMINI: ... point of orders here, Speaker, that must be clear.



Mr H A SHEMBENI: Point of orders have been closed.




Mr T B MUNYAI: Hon Speaker, I would appreciate the Speaker to invoke Rule 92 and also Rule 142 such that if the member is aggrieved they know what to do so that the matter can go to its committees.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Hon Speaker, the Rules of the National Assembly obliges the members of the executive to respond to the questions. No President is saying that he can’t respond to questions because ... [Inaudible.] ... the only time he cannot respond to questions is when the issue in terms of Rule 89 is still awaiting the judicial decision in a court of law. This issue is not sub judicare. It is not before a court of law. We do not know whether there’s investigations or not, but there’s no permissibility or non-whatsoever for Mr Ramaphosa not to respond to this question because the Constitution obliges him to respond to each and every details that we have asked. There is no law that permits him to avoid this question. Therefore, he must respond to the question about what happened in Phala Phala Farm.



The SA Reserve Bank has just responded today to say that they’ve asked him questions as to what is the origins of the dollars in Phala Phala Farm, and he has still not yet




responded to that as well. Why can’t he be held accountable? Which law is he using to refuse accountability to this House? Who is he accountable to, if he can’t be accountable in this House because it is an obligation, it’s not an issue of choice

... [Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: Order, hon members, order!



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... even if there is a case number or an investigation, it does not give him the right not to respond to questions today. Therefore, he must respond to the question that are asked. Now, the main question and all the follow-up questions that are going to pertain to Phala Phala there’s no permissibility in terms of the law for Mr Ramaphosa not to account of the millions of dollars that are stored in his mattresses, sofas and pillows and everywhere. So, he must be able to respond here today because that is his obligation.

That is what he sought to when he said that he wants to be President of this country. We want answers today, and it must happen today, now here.




The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Shivambu. Hon members, I think it is important for me to just clarify why I raised the issue. I wasn’t saying the President should not respond to the issue. But I have taken note of what he said and that is: He is ready to cooperate even with the process in Parliament. Now, my assumption then was that when that panel takes off, he will be able to answer the questions then. Of course, you are unhappy about that, so I am now allowing hon Gwarube to raise the hand.



Mr V ZUNGULA: Speaker, my hand was up before hon Gwarube.





USOMLOMO: Kaloku, ndikubonile tata.





Hon Zungula, I noted you.



Mr V ZUNGULA: Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Remember, you are the one who raised this issue. So then, there was an issue here from the members and I will




allow you definitely to be the last one on the matter. Is that agreed? Thank you.





am rising on Rule 140, which is Questions to the President. It is quite important Speaker to note that some Sub section 2 says the Questions must be submitted to the Speaker at least

16 days before that question day - which means that the President and your Office had these questions for two weeks before this matter was brought to the House. It’s simply not good enough then, Speaker, for now the questions not be answered. If it was ill suited the question should have been withdrawn from the Question Paper. Now we are sitting here. We are arguing back and forth about a matter that was now allowed to be on the Question Paper. The question must then thus be answered. Thank you. [Applause.]



The SPEAKER: I note your comments, hon Gwarube and I now give the floor to hon Ntlangwini, but she is not here. They said hon Mkhalipi.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Okay, no problem.






Vele nginguNtlangwini ...





... because she belongs to the EFF. Speaker, you must not do what your predecessor has done before. We have been fighting with her by protecting the former President. You are doing exactly that. We are saying to you, allow the President to take the nation into confidence on what happened to Phala- Phala. It is not a choice, the President has an obligation to take us into confidence, the nation and the poor people who are swimming in poverty while he’s sleeping on top of millions. So, the President must answer now, today and ...





... wena Somlomo suka endleleni. Suka endleleni ...





... allow the President to answer. He is the President of this country. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Hon Mkhalipi ...






... kodwa ke xa usithi suka endleleni ... ungekathi ndizakususa endleleni.





Thank you very much, hon Mkhalipi.



The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY: Thank you, hon Speaker, I think, there’s a risk of setting new convention. My understanding is that when questions are raised to the Executive what you are minimally entitled to is the response. Secondly, we don’t have a memorandum here like at school where, when we ask you a question and there’s a prescribed way how to answer. Thirdly, we’ve always said if a question is of a particular nature where it deals with a member in a particular way, a substantive motion has to come to a Table.

This kind of the question falls into a general set of questions. It has been responded to. The response is a minimum word. You spoke and you got spoken back to. So, that’s how the President has responded. You got the response.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Can you call order to this rubbish that has just been said here. Can you call this rubbish to order,




please! The rubbish that has been said can you please call it to order.





USOMLOMO: Hayi kaloku ngubani i-rubbish.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The word rubbish is allowed in Parliament, by the way.



The SPEAKER: The word rubbish is it allowed in Parliament?



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The word rubbish can be used. Yes.



Ms M R SEMENYA: “Wena”, you are speaking rubbish.



The SPEAKER: In what context is it allowed?



Mr J MALEMA: Rosina take your ... [Inaudible.]



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker.



The SPEAKER: I am just asking, in what context? Yes.




Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker, you can have this ...



The SPEAKER: Hon Gungubele.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: This person, Member of Parliament.



The SPEAKER: Hon Gungubele.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Mr Gungubele, what he basically says. He says that even if you just open your mouth and say “hi back or yes

- you have responded. That is not a response in terms of the obligations of the Constitution and the Rules of the National Assembly. That is just taking us for granted. If we allowed this to pass, it means all the time we ask questions, we are going to have these members of executive saying that “I am still thinking about it. I’m still going to apply my mind to it. I’m going to respond to other authorities other than Parliament.” When the obligation is very clear that this institution must receive honest and frank responses from members of the executive. That is what Mr Ramaphosa must do. He had his question for more than 16 days. He knew that this question is going to be asked today. We want honest responses as to just what happened in Phala-Phala. What is the source of




the money? What happened? Why was the SAPS involved in enforcement of law in a case that was never opened in any police station? Those responses must be given today here and you can’t say it is not our responsibility as Members of Parliament to demand such a response. It is our obligation. We have to hold the executive accountable. The Constitution of this country was drafted with that in mind that those who are responsible for resource allocation at the executive level, must not do things as and when they wish without accounting anywhere. If you allow Mr Ramaphosa to get away with this and not account to Parliament, you must know that you are destroying the foundation of constitutional democracy. You are destroying the rule of law in South Africa and that must not be permitted. We will not allow a destruction of the rule of law because it is going to lead us to very dangerous territories. We cannot permit that to happen. Mr Ramaphosa must respond to questions today. We must ignore the rubbish which was said by Mr Gungubele today.



The SPEAKER: You have made your point. Okay. Hon members.



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, on a point of order.




The SPEAKER: Hon members, I want to request that you don’t make long speeches.



Mr J S MALEMA: Yes, please. I want to ...





USOMLOMO: Yima kaloku, lungu elihloniphekileyo uMalema. Yima, ndiyakucela.





At the end of this, I am trying to find a solution because my impression was that ... wait sisi, you are going to get your turn. I said wait. Don’t put me under pressure. No, please.

Now, you can take the floor. You know what, can I say something to all of you. When you are chairing, presiding and trying to navigate Parliament and wanting people to find one another, no matter how much we differ for the benefit of South Africans, once you put me under this kind of pressure - it’s bad for all of us. You do not want me to make wrong rulings on the basis of pressure, which is being put on me. I will give you an opportunity to speak in a same way that I have given the others an opportunity to speak. But I should not be




harassed into allowing people to speak. Thank you very much. Hon Kubayi, you have the floor now.



The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Firstly, let me start with the issue that we agree with hon members that members of the executive starting from the President must remain accountable to Parliament and I think from Cabinet, we continue to do that. As a member of the ANC, that’s what we stand for and what we have agreed to supporting the foundation of this Constitution. We agreed with that, hon Speaker, as a principle.



The second issue that we must address, is the issue of the motion that you have mentioned. Precedents dictate that once a substantive motion is put against a member on a matter. Allow me to finish ... [Interjections.}




The SPEAKER: Hon members, order! Allow her to speak.



The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Once a substantive motion is put against a member on a matter, that member has to be allowed that space to respond to the substantive motion. I




think, the issue here, which we are grappling with all of us, is that we’ve got a question before us and though others would say why did the question come if it was not going to be answered and there’s a substantive motion. It could have been an oversight across, including the parties themselves and ours. [Interjections.] No, no, no it could have been because




The SPEAKER: Order, hon members!



The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: No, no, no, once you have that then you allow for a substantive motion to be processed, to be allowed, to be dealt with. Now, Madam Speaker, the President says, “I am prepared to account.” He has not said that “I don’t want to account.” “I am prepared to account” and what he is stating here is that “I’ve got difficulties that are here that you’ve asked me. I am going to appear before your committee as Parliament. I am going to appear before others. In the process of me answering today, I might have difficulties of not exploding.” We shouldn’t treat matters

... this has also potential of because if it involves law enforcement it’s criminal.




Ms E N NTLANGWINI: On a point of order, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! So that people can hear you.



The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Madam Speaker, I think all we need to do, all of us, perhaps one proposal is that political party Chief Whips as well, together with yourself relook at this matter so as to allow you to say that within the rules, the precedence, what could be done in order to manage this thing. I do think, it does put a condition for all of us while allowing for accountability.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much. Now hon members, you’ve had your say.



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker.



The SPEAKER: Yes, hon Malema. Did you have your hand up by the way?



Mr J S MALEMA: Yes, you said so.



The SPEAKER: Okay. Yes, but you spoke. You spoke, hon Malema.






Mr J S MALEMA: No, no. You have recognised me. Leave those ones who are making noise.



The SPEAKER: Okay.



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, once the new Chief Whip of the DA stood up and spoke, that’s where the matter should have ended because a matter was submitted to the questions Table. A matter was scrutinised and the matter was approved. If you were to ask hon Zungula, for sure the matter is not even the way he drafted it initially. They said remove this, let’s put it this way. It has satisfied the procedures and the requirements of Parliament - it’s enough.



So this one who was heading the ad hoc committee to Nkandla can’t come here and want to tell us about some non-existing explanation. She has misled us before, this one, and said there was a fire pool in Nkandla. When there was no fire pool in Nkandla. So, the Constitution says only when matters are sub judice we cannot answer to them. They have met the requirement. If the President had a problem, he would have written to you and say the question you are asking me has got




a problem legally 1, 2,3,4. Hon Zungula, ATM, has met the requirement, and therefore, there is no need for any Whip who should go outside with you to do anything.



The President must answer the question. Legally, constitutionally, there’s nothing stopping him. That is why this Minister of fire pool did not quote any law that stops the President from answering the question, because she knows that apart from singing for supper, there’s nothing that stops the President from answering these questions. That’s a desperation of wanting to be a Deputy President. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Malema.







Mr N SINGH: Thank you very much, hon Speaker. Hon Speaker, when the President started his response he said a great deal of interest in this matter. And I think a number of interventions that we have is proof enough that, yes, there is a great deal of interest in the matter. He also said that he is ready to cooperate with any agency on this matter. We are the people of Parliament, not just any agency. I believe that




the impression that the hon President has created - that he will not answer the question - must be withdrawn by him because in whatever way he provides an answer, we as Parliament of the people, will require an answer from the hon President, to the question that has been put. I think it is not for us to dictate to him what form the answer should take but we need an answer, and not an impression that I am not going to answer to you because I am going to answer to somebody else in the future. So we humbly request the hon President and you, hon Speaker, to give the President an opportunity to provide the answers to the nation to the extent that he can today. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, hon Singh. Hon Kwankwa ...





... ndikunikile ixesha, musa ukundidlakathelisa ...





 ... don’t harass me into allowing you to speak. I have just raised the issue now. Now hon members, I have taken notes. Hon Swarts!




Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, the challenge ...



The SPEAKER: Sorry hon Swarts, let me allow hon Papo. Sorry, I did recognise him earlier on. Hon Papo, you have the floor.



Mr A H M PAPO: I think that you actually outlined the process. The question, if it was unfortunately selected, and the President says that he will be answering to the panel which is going to be appointed by the very National Assembly, ... I think it is an answer. I don’t understand if people are saying

... [Interjections.]



The SPEAKER: Ah! Ah! Order! Hon members!



Mr A H M PAPO: Don’t worry about them. I think that ... no! I am speaking.



The SPEAKER: No, I am saying wait. Order! Order, hon members. I have given you opportunity to speak and be listened to.

Allow ... [Interjections.]





Nk M M KHAWULA: Uyaphapha lo.






The SPEAKER: Allow hon Papo to express his views in the same way that you have expressed your views.



Mr A H M PAPO: I don’t agree with what they have said but I didn’t say that they are wrong, because that’s their views. I think at some point you need to make a ruling. There was a response given. That respond said, in Parliament I will respond to questions to the panel we are going to form. If members do not like the response, there are procedures if you don’t like the response from a question. [Interjections.]

... that says you then force somebody to answer a question in the plenary. If you do that it will be against the very Rules which you are actually talking ... There is no member who can be forced to answer a question the way other members want.



The President said the law enforcement agencies, there is a panel which member Zungula has himself has requested through a substantive motion. We are faced with substantive motion in the House. That substantive motion is going to be responded to by you this week setting up an independent panel. The President will be ... and that panel will be a panel of the National Assembly. It’s not a panel of another body. An




attempt to try and embarrass the President will not work. You are not forced by the Rules to force the President or a Minister to answer a question the way some members want it to be answered. I don’t know how you are going to do it because we had instances in the House where a Minister will answer a question the way they understand the question.



So, to whatever story member Malema, taking pot shots at our members and so on, will not actually help because you are not going to force the President to answer a question in a manner that they want it to be answered. We are then subjected to threats by member Shivambu. That is why I have asked him that if it does not happen, so what?



Mr J S MALEMA: That’s why you were not elected in Gauteng.



Mr A H M PAPO: ... [Inaudible.] ... Well, I am not going to be intimidated by you Malema, you know.



The SPEAKER: Order!



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Hope is a hopeless character maan.




The SPEAKER: Order, hon members!



Mr J S MALEMA: Eh Hope, don’t just call my name wena hopelessness.



Ms M M KHAWULA: Go to hell.



Mr J S MALEMA: That hope must not call my name the way he likes.



Mr A H M PAPO: Speaker, the question has been answered. If they don’t like the answer, tough luck!



Mr J S MALEMA: That’s why you were not elected in Gauteng. It’s because of this dom koppish.



Mr A H M PAPO: And you see Speaker, Malema is making personal attacks on us. Malema is making personal attacks on us on the platform.



Ms M M KHAWULA: Sit down!



AN HON MEMBER: On a point of order. Honourable for you.






Mr J S MALEMA: There is no personal attack. You were not elected because you are a fool. That is why you were not elected. You are a stupid.



Ms N P MAHLO: Malema don’t insult others. Don’t do that.



Mr A H M PAPO: No! But Malema is insulting us on the platform.



Mr J S MALEMA: No, you were not elected. That is a fact. I am not insulting you. You were not elected.



Ms N P MAHLO: Malema you are out of order.



Ms M S KHAWULA: And you too. You are out of order.



The SPEAKER: Hon members! Hon members, ...



Mr A H M PAPO: Speaker, I am raising an issue that member Malema is attacking us on the platform.



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Hope, you are hopeless. You are a hopeless idiot.






Mr A H M PAPO: But Malema is attacking us personally on the platform.



The SPEAKER: I have heard you. Thank you.



Mr J S MALEMA: What did Malema say in attacking hopeless? What is an insult like that against ... [Inaudible.] ...



The SPEAKER: Hon members! Hon members, ...





 ... yimani kaloku, malungu a hloniphekile, hayi yima kaloku, yima. ...





Wait! Hon member I don’t expect that from you. Please! I don’t want you to do that when I am talking to you. I am addressing you. Hon members!





 ... andisayi kuvumela Kwankwa njengokuba undiphazamisa ngesi sandal.








Mr M M DLAMINI: But Speaker, Hope is also a coward. He won’t do anything. He is a useless coward.



The SPEAKER: Hon members! [Interjections.]



Mr M M DLAMINI: [Inaudible.] ...here in Parliament and outside Parliament. You won’t do anything.



Mr J S MALEMA: You must know that we are not scared of you Hope. We are not scared of you. You won’t do anything wena.



The SPEAKER: The SPEAKER: [Inaudible.] [Interjections.] ... hostile, antagonistic and exciting engagement is not going to help us solve the problem. The issue I have raised here ...

Hon members, order! Order! Tshabalala! Hon members, order!





Hon Kwankwa, ehlisa sandla



The SPEAKER: You see, the problem is that now we are behaving like young people, as in children. [Laughter.] No! No! No!













I said you have the last word. Hon members, I allowed people to raise this matter ... I can change its okay. You will take over. You win the election first. The point I was raising ... now, I allowed a discussion to go on and on, right? And you may ask yourselves, because of the manner in which Mr Zungula raised the matter, and I allowed it. I allowed you to speak. Now, I did not allow you to speak because I have no appreciation of the Rules or I am crazy. I allowed people to speak so that even as I am sitting here, I read to you for instance, one of the Rules which is that sitting here as the presiding officer, you cannot – right - force a member of the executive to respond to your question in a manner in which you want or you expect. However, you can only sit here and steer the ship so that we get to a point where there is convergence of views. Now hon members, I am sure the President is listening. He is listening. Well, he is on the system. Hon Swarts, I did acknowledge you. Thank you.




Mr S N SWART: Speaker, what you have indicated is the correct approach, but you have a question on the Order Paper that has been correctly put on the Order Paper that has not been answered. That is the cracks of the issue. The President on legal advice has said, I stand ready to answer your question, but he has not answered the question. He has given a response but he has not. So Speaker, the correct ruling will be to rule, President answer the question. Not to give a response to say I can’t answer the question because I have legal advice to do so. If the President says that he will account to investigative authority rather than Parliament, that is very dismal state of affairs. So I would employ the President, he said I stand ready to answer all the questions that is now, that he will use his discretion and answer to Parliament right now. Thank you, Speaker. Hon Radebe!



The SPEAKER: I am really sorry. General, you had raised your hand and I had recognised you. I am sorry about that.



Gen H B HOLOMISA: Don’t worry.



The SPEAKER: Order, hon members. Allow the speaker to speak.




Gen H B HOLOMISA: Hon Speaker, mine will be very brief, but its directed to the President. My President, I thought that you would at least say, notwithstanding the current investigation on Phala Phala, I, Matamela Ramaphosa, can assure this country and this Parliament that I have not broken any law. I close my case. That’s what we expect from you, at least for now.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, General. Hon Radebe!



Mr B A RADEBE: Thank you, hon Speaker. I am still rising on Rule 92.12. You made a ruling initially here that you cannot prescribe how a member of the executive will answer a question. Number two is that again, we cannot come again and change the Rules here in the House. They know very well - members of the opposition - that if they are aggrieved, there are certain processes which must be followed. You have made a ruling and I think you must stick to that ruling. Thank you, Speaker.








Mnu N L S KWANKWA: Mama, umhlekazi kudala ethetha, singathethi thina. Ndithethe kanye mna oko iqalile le Palamente ...





... and that is a problem. And, mama I provided a solution to this problem ...[Interjections.]



USOMLOMO: Bendikekakuniki ithuba lokuthetha ke kodwa.



Mnu N L S KWANKWA: Yhoo! Uxolo.



The SPEAKER: Yes, now you may proceed.





Mr N L S KWANKWA No, we mustn’t conflate two unrelated issues, all the mechanisms that we are using here, are mechanisms that this Parliament has designed in order to put the executive to account. The Section 89 process must go its own route and will deal with the President, when he comes before that process, but this is a question and answer session to which we also hold the executive to account.




And, the President is here to answer questions and the question is here on the order paper. I did say, right at the beginning that it has been put properly and it must be responded to. And all that needs to happen now Speaker, instead of us allowing running commentary on this issue put the question to the President and say you said you are not willing to answer or not going to answer, you have to provide a response. Saying I am not going to answer is not an answer. I mean it’s ludicrous to accept that is an explanation.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much hon Kwankwa. Now hon ... okay I’ve got a list here now. I know I have noted that, you are not an officer here. Okay, now hon Xasa, followed by hon Shivambu and hon Munyai and hon Shaik Emam, sorry I didn’t see your hand, I’m sorry. Hon Tshabalala and that would be the last speaker and I rule on the matter ... [Interjection.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: Speaker [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Ewe man [Yes man] you are the last one to speak, this is your issue, we are dealing with.




Mr F D XASA: Thanks hon Speaker, I suspect that when we say the President or whoever who is a member of executive must account, we might not have a similar understanding of what it means when we say an executive must account. I think that’s the biggest problem. Number two, I am sure you are correct or other members are correct when they say the President is listening as we speak. Continuing to allow all of us here to speak, I don’t think it helps anybody. We should actually allow the President, to respond, we should allow the President to respond. I’m sure he was listening carefully as members were speaking and I don’t think we must try to say: “this what you must say, this what you must not say”. I think let’s allow the President to respond. Thanks.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much hon Xasa, now here is my list, hon Shivambu, hon Munyai, hon Shaik Emam, and hon Zungula, and the matter is closed, hon Tshabalala, askies, askies.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Now Speaker, Speaker...[Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: I did not see Ndlozi’s hand, no one even drew my attention to his name on the screen, yes continue.






Mr N F SHIVAMBU: Speaker... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: There is no hand of hon Ndlozi on the screen, continue.



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... Speaker, there’s nowhere in the rules of the National Assembly, where it says that because you are going to appear in a different platform, you cannot answer in this platform that you are in now. As a matter of fact, as a Minister or member of the executive, you can be asked the question in committee you respond, you go to a mini plenary you must respond again, you go to the main plenary you must respond again, you are called to a Section 89 Committee you respond again. And if you are not a crook the responses will always been consistent.



If you ask me what is the colour of this jacket I am wearing its red today, I cannot say I going to answer you next Tuesday. Unless if I am crook, then I’m still trying to figure out what am I going to put up together and create the story.




If the President ... these are factual issues that are being asked here. If he has got factual grounding on what exactly transpired, why can’t he give the answer now, here. He has responded he has not answered; he has responded but he has not given the answers as to just what happened. If he is a person of principle who upholds the Constitution of this country and is a truthful person. He can respond today and even in Section 89; he can respond the same response. There’s nothing which is going to implicate him here.



Is not even ... [Inaudible.] ... a judicial decision here. He is not yet arrested; he is going to get there very soon. He is not yet arrested. He has not yet been charged. And there’s an obligation, it’s not a choice, it’s not a choice. It’s not according to his will whether he wants to respond today or tomorrow. It is an obligation that he must answer today, the question which was properly tabled here for this question session. He has been aware that he is coming to respond to this question today and give proper adequate answers.



He has been avoiding all these institutions. He delayed the Public Protector, he is delaying with the SA Reserve Bank, but here we can’t allow that as Parliament, that he must run away




without giving us the appropriate answers, as is ... there’s no law that says because you are going to appear in the next platform, you can’t respond or give an answer in this particular platform. He is obliged to give an answer... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon ... [Interjection.]



Mr N F SHIVAMBU: ... today, let him do so today! We want the answer today!



The SPEAKER: Okay, thank you very, hon members. Thank you. Hon Munyai.



Mr T B MUNYAI: Thank you very much, the hon Speaker, one: I rose before, earlier and appeal that the Speaker must invoke Rule 92(12a) which indicates that when you have made a ruling like the Speaker did and clarified before this House. I believe that the Speaker should stick to the ruling she had made, as per Rule 92(12).



And, also Rule 142, if a member is not satisfied with the person, they know how they need to make follow through on that




matter. So, therefore the hon the Speaker, I appeal again, for the second time that at least Rule 92(12a) need to be invoked so that we should stick to your ruling, hon the Speaker. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much, thank you, hon Munyai, thank you. Hon Matumba, I will not allow you to speak because I have already given an opportunity to the Chief Whip.







The SPEAKER: ... I have said after Munyai ... ntate [sir] Shaik Emam.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Sorry, hon Speaker, Shaik Emam, I thought I was next.



The SPEAKER: No, no I was still addressing a matter, there’s a name which has just come now, which is that... hon Matumba. I was just saying I won’t give an opportunity because your Chief Whip has just spoken, on the matter now. I am trying to shorten this process. Hon Shaik Emam, followed by hon Zungula,




then Tshabalala, Tshabalala you will be the last one on this matter. Thank you.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Hon Speaker, I think there are two issues here, the first issue is, the question is on the order paper. And the purpose of putting a question and approving a question to be on the order paper is to solicit a response from the President. So, I think we should take that out of the way, the President has to respond because there is a question on the order paper. Now, your office had actually approved this question, so that’s the first thing.



The second issue, hon Speaker is this, that whether we would be satisfied with the response of the President or not, now that’s another issue altogether. So, I think the President should respond, he must respond, he doesn’t have an option because the question is on the order paper. Everybody is equal in terms of the law.



The second thing is this, if the response that the President gives, is not good enough, in terms of what we are asking him, based on the fact that he believes it might interfere with the actual investigation that is going, then that’s the matter we




could deal with at another stage. But, I think for purposes of going forward, President must respond as adequately as possible without putting himself in a difficult position so that we could forward with this matter. Thank hon Speaker.



Mr V ZUNGULA: Speaker, I think let me start by saying you are not fair. You are not objective and if there’s any breakdown in the decorum of the House, that is the reflection of you being a Speaker. You stated when hon Shivambu was speaking that he must not make a speech, few minutes later, hon Papo speaks and he makes a speech for more than 20 minutes, you allow him to speak. Hon Radebe spoke and after he spoke you allowed hon Munyai to speak after him. Then hon Matumba just rose ... [Interjection.] ... Speaker...



The SPEAKER: Hon Zungula, please make your point ... [Inaudible.] ... passing.



Mr V ZUNGULA: ... that is the point I am making, that you are not fair ... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Okay.




Mr V ZUNGULA: ...because, you allowed the hon members from the ANC to speak one after the other. When hon Matumba is rising on a point of order, you did not want him to speak. So, that is what I’m raising that you are not fair and the reason why there’s always a breakdown in the decorum of the House, it because you are failing to apply your duties objectively and fairly. If you were exercising your role as a Speaker fairly, the President would have been forced to answer because in his own statement he did not answer. It is not us that are saying he did not answer; it is his own words that he is saying he will not answer.



So, what I am raising to you Speaker, is that number one, in his own words, the President said, he will not answer. Number two, do not conflate the issues of Section 89 process with this process. These are two separate processes. Number three, Rule 89 does not block the President from answering. He has not given any valid, legal or constitutional reason for him not to account to Parliament.



And, the other issue is that Rule 140 of Parliament was followed to the tee. So, what we are appealing to you Speaker, please be fair and please use your responsibility as Speaker




not because you are loyal to your party. You must not be loyal to your party here, you are elected as a Speaker of Parliament and we demand that the President answers. Thank you.



The SPEAKER: Thank you very much hon Zungula, hon ... I’ve heard you, you’ve made your point, but actually if you’ve noted, as I was allowing people to speak, it is true that there will be times when would say, but you’ve been speaking for a long time. I’ve actually not timed people here. During this particular discussion I have not timed people because at the point when I want to make a ruling, I want people to be satisfied that they had an opportunity to express themselves.



It’s not just the ANC people, I have also allowed people from either side, to speak so that they make their point. So that when I rule, I‘m informed by your wise counsel here. So, it’s a pity that it goes to that extend. If you question my integrity because of that, then that’s another matter ... [Interjection.]



Mr V ZUNGULA: Speaker, I need to correct something, I am not questioning your integrity.




The SPEAKER: Okay.



Mr V ZUNGULA: The only thing I am saying is that apply the same rules for everyone. If you are going to stop hon Shivambu, saying he must not make a speech, the same thing must happen to hon Papo. Do not make one rules for the opposition and other rules for the majority party.



The SPEAKER: Okay.



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, I am seeking your protection here.



The SPEAKER: Hon member, no ...





... yima ndilinde, ndilinde bawo



Mr J S MALEMA: No, I am seeking your protection here, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: From?



Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Hope, who got 24 votes at the conference of the ANC in Gauteng, said I insulted them. I don’t know ... he




is casting aspersion on me, that I am insulting them and I am saying things that are unparliamentarily, which have never said, so you [Interjection.] ought to call him into order ... [Interjection.] ... insult ...[Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Malema can we [Interjection.] deal with one matter at the time, please. Can we deal with one matter at the time?



Mr J S MALEMA: Yah, but protect me from that charlatan.



Mr X N MSIMANGO: Mara shut up.



Mr A H M PAPO: Now, you see ...[Inaudible.] [Interjection.]



Mr J S MALEMA: ... Speaker, he has not been noted, Speaker, why is he standing?



Mr A H M PAPO: ... hon Malema just called me charlatan.



An HON MEMBER: Who gave you the right to speak? You see, he is abusing us ... [Interjection.]




Mr A H M PAPO: ... hon Malema has just called me a charlatan... [Interjection.]



An HON MEMBER: ... take him out, take him out. Can you take 24 out now... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: What?



Mr A H M PAPO: ... hon Malema called me a charlatan.



The SPEAKER: Okay, sit down, he will withdraw sit down.



Mr A H M PAPO: And he must know, I don’t fear the EFF, [Interjection.] I don’t fear the EFF.



Mr M M DLAMINI: You lying you are scared.



Mr J S MALEMA: That’s why you got 24 votes, dom kop. You got


24 votes, it’s this attitude.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, I have said ... [Interjection.]




An HON MEMBER: Hai mara hon Malema you are out of order, there’s no dom kop here.



Mr X N MSIMANGO: Hon Malema, you dom kop... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Hon Hope, hon Papo please, no don’t do that. Hon





Dr M Q NDLOZI: [Laughter.]





USOMLOMO: ... kudala ke wena ungxola kuloo kona ...





... talking about consistency, but you haven’t even said a word.



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Speaker, there’s a matter of 24 votes, a factual matter of 24 votes.



The SPEAKER: ... hon Tshabalala, followed by hon Jacobs, because I had left his name out.




An HON MEMBER: What about Matumba?



The SPEAKER: He had his name, he had his name ... [Interjection.]



An HON MEMBER: But on a point of order Speaker:



The SPEAKER: ... he had his name I left it out. I am really sorry; I need to explain this. I see that people are very unhappy, Johnson, hon member had his name ages ago and I left it out, I am sorry. Hon Tshabalala.



Mr M M DLAMINI: But, Speaker Hope must know he is a coward, he is scared of us. That one he must know, whenever he is sitting even at his house.



The SPEAKER: I will rule on the matter.



Mr B A RADEBE: On a point of order Speaker:



The SPEAKER: Hon members, order, hon members, hon member!



Mr A H M PAPO: Member Malema also lied about our conference.






The SPEAKER: Sit down man, sit down man. Hon Papo take your seatt! Hon Papo, I said I will rule on this matter, hon Papo

... [Interjection.]



An HON MEMBER: Order Speaker.



The SPEAKER: ... I said I will rule on this matter, hon Papo!



An HON MEMBER: 24, 25.



Mr M M DLAMINI: He is drunk, Papo must leave alcohol. He’s drunk, that’s his problem.



Mr J S MALEMA: On a point of order Speaker:



The SPEAKER: Yes, hon Tshabalala.



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Hopeless idiot.



Ms J TSHABALALA: Thank you so much, thank you so much hon Speaker... [Interjection.]




AN HON MEMBER: Objection Speaker.



The SPEAKER: What is ... [Inaudible.] ... [Interjection.]



Mr A H M PAPO: Member Ndlozi just called me an idiot.





USOMLOMO: Yima mani, hlala phantsi.



Mr A H M PAPO: Member Malema called me a charlatan. I am not going to ... [Inaudible.] [Interjection.]



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Is your name Hopeless? Is your name Hopeless? [Interjection.]



Mr A H M PAPO: ... the outcome of our own conference ... [Inaudible.] [Interjection.] ...it’s not true... [Interjection.]



An HON MEMBER: Futsek wena!



Dr M Q NDLOZI: ... are you not proving the very fact of hopeless idiot, are you Hopeless wena?






Mr A H M PAPO: ... I don’t the EFF, I don’t fear all of them


... [Interjection.]



An HON MEMBER: What was the number dialling, if it was not 24? Give us the correct number.



Mr J S MALEMA: You’ve got 24... [Interjection.]



The SPEAKER: Point of order hon members:



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Give us the correct number.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, hon members ...[Interjection.]



Mr J S MALEMA: Speaker, when Hope speaks ...[Interjection.]


...Hope doesn’t speak through you and you don’t stop Hope.



An HON MEMBER: Why Hope is being kicked out?



Mr X N MSIMANGO: Hon Malema is not speaking through the Speaker.




Ms V MALINGA: Heyi you Ndlozi thula [keep quiet] ice boy, nyawu, nyawu, nyawu!



Mr J S MALEMA: Hey, wena [you] Hope, 24 votes.



The SPEAKER: Hon members, I am dealing with the matter because in the first instance... no hon members, no, no, no ... [Interjection.]



Dr M Q NDLOZI: Please deal with the matter of hopeless idiot, Speaker.



The SPEAKER: ... for instance, there’s an issue which he has raised and he’s been pushing that I should raise it and I said he should wait until we finish this matter and then I handle the issue. Tshabalala, followed by ...



Ms J TSHABALALA: Thank you so much, hon Speaker. Madam Speaker, I want to say to you that, I think you are doing very well. I really think that you are doing very well, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise on Rule 140 on section 4. It reads as follows: The total time allocated to reply to questions and associated supplementary questions under this




rule, is limited to a maximum of three hours, that’s number one. Secondly, section 5, where the party sequence when the questions are put to the President, according to Rule 137(9) is interrupted at the end of the question session, the next question session to the President starts when the question session was interrupted.



Now, the reason I’m rising around that one, Speaker, is to draw your attention around that, so that, when you look at the proceedings, you are able to allow the President to the latter, and you are able to also apply your mind to section 4 on the number and the time allocated to questions for the President to reply accordingly. From where we are seated, the President replied to the question. What was needed was to add her supplementary questions. When members or the member who asked the question doesn’t want to pose a supplementary question, Speaker, I really draw your attention to Rule 4 and

5 of 140 to be invoked, Speaker. Thank you so much.



The SPEAKER: Thank you, hon Tshabalala. I have noted what you are saying. However, this discussion started at a time when, in fact, we even had one last question. The President started




answering questions about three hours ago at 14h00, and we are now...





USOMLOMO: Yintoni ngoku, nawe Nkokeli yeQela eliPhikisayo awukwazi ukuphumela?





Yes, Lindi, I have noted you.



The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION PARTY: Madam Speaker, you attempted to allow the President to make a statement to the House at 14h00pm. The questions to the President started 55 minutes after that.



The SPEAKER: Okay, hon Steenhuisen. Hon Zulu, you are now the very last speaker on this matter.



Mr A H M PAPO: But Speaker...



The SPEAKER: I have given you the floor.





The SPEAKER: Hon Zulu, you have the floor. Hon members, would you please listen to her.









The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: I rise again yet with a request that, can we please find in each other. If there is a feeling that the President did not answer...



The SPEAKER: Please allow hon Zulu to speak. Yes, continue, we are listening.








... ngicela ukuthi abantu bangangikhulumeli ngoba ngiziphakamisele isandla, ngizithobile, ngihleli la. Ngicela abantu bangangikhulumeli ngoba ngiyakwazi ukuzikhulumela.



First and foremost, Speaker, I rise again on the same view of the decorum of the House, and also to indicate yet again, hon Speaker that, maybe when you are there you cannot hear what is being said between the members here. Some of the statements that are being made, hon Speaker, are very painful to take to a point that hon Papo began to respond in the manner in which he did. Unfortunately, you are there and cannot hear some of the things that are coming across. [Interjections.] No, no...

The SPEAKER: Order, hon members, order.

The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: The fact of the matter, Speaker, is that...

The SPEAKER: Hon members, Minister Zulu was sitting there listening when you were speaking, all of you. Now, I don’t understand why you are preventing her from speaking. Can you please allow the matter of hon Papo to be attended to later, we will deal with it as a last matter, please? Continue.

Dr M Q NDLOZI: To be held at ransom by 24 votes is not fair.

The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, please don’t do that. Continue, hon Zulu.

The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Speaker, it is a request...

Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, heckling is allowed in Parliament?

The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: Hon Speaker, I am sincerely raising this issue again on the basis that, and when I say that I am a living example, I really speak from the bottom of my heart. It really cannot continue in the manner in which we are behaving and doing things in the House. But also, hon Speaker, we are the ones that adopted the Rules that we are now referring to in the House.

Hon Tshabalala went back to Rule 142, and it is also not acceptable that, when the time for questions begins and the President is supposed to respond, or any other member of the Executive, the time that is allocated must be the time that is allocated. So, when it so happens that in between, there are disruptions. I just think that it is utterly and completely unfair for all of us to sit through a process that should have ended a long time ago. Respectfully, the Rules are indicated and we all accepted the Rules.

Hon Speaker, it is a request because, the more we sit in the House, and the more we get agitated, the more we are just a reflection of people who actually are not here to represent the people who have brought us here. So, let us not abuse the fact that we are hon members in the House ...

Mr M M DLAMINI: But Speaker, who is Lindiwe talking about now?

The SPEAKER: No, hon Dlamini.

Mr M M DLAMINI: Speaker, this of being blackmailed about bottom of the heart must come to an end. What is she talking about?

The SPEAKER: Hon Dlamini, ...

Ms N P MAHLO: Who is Lindiwe?

The SPEAKER: Hon Zulu, continue.

The MINISTER OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT: The fact of the matter, hon Speaker is that, we can be called all kinds of names, and we will take all the punches. But the bottom line is that, it’s a request, can we at least have order in the House so that we can finish the work that we came here for, that’s the request I’m making.

The SPEAKER: Hon Zulu, actually, I would have thought that, one of the things is that, right at the beginning, the President did indicate that he has an emergency. So, at some point, when he ... it’s his wife that is undergoing a procedure. But I have allowed, nonetheless, for people to speak.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: I have proposal, Speaker.

The SPEAKER: It’s a proposal now, neh?

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: It’s a proposal.

The SPEAKER: So, you will go straight to a proposal.

Mr N F SHIVAMBU: The proposal is that, we have already exceeded the three hours. So, both section 140 and ... [Interjections.] ... we have gone beyond that, in terms of the Rules. I would propose that, that meeting which you were supposed to have with Whips ... [Inaudible.]... It constitute Parliament that all members are available and standing, and we bring that meeting with programme and the second session of the President his next schedule be on 29 September.


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We can bring it closer because this one was interrupted now because of political constraints. We need to deal with issue because it cannot be postponed. We cannot wait for 29 September. So, let us deal with those issues of the proper Parliament Constitution, then we call him next week so that he will be able to respond, particularly, to the question that he has been refusing to respond to, now. That is the proposal.

The SPEAKER: Okay, thank you very much. I will now give hon Dlakude. Unfortunately, these are Chief Whips that are speaking now. I see that you also have your hand up, and we will still have a meeting which we’ve agreed that we will have, isn’t it? So, it will be Dlakude, followed by hon Gwarube and hon Singh. These are the Chief Whips that would have sat in that meeting. Over to you, hon Dudu Dlakude.

The DEPUTY CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Thank you very much hon Speaker and thank you for the opportunity to speak in this House.

The SPEAKER: Take one minute each.


I want to bring all of us to the rules of the House because we cannot change that. These are rules that were adopted.

I want to concur with hon Judith Tshabalala when she said she quoted rule 142. I am going to rule 143 which says:

“Unanswered questions for oral replies. Replies to questions on oral replies which have not been reached by the end of the allocated time on a question day must be submitted in writing to the Speaker on the same day for appropriate distribution and inclusion in the official reports of debates of the National Assembly.”

So, hon Speaker, I want us to go this rule. The real reason we adopted the rules was to guide the proceedings of the House.

So we cannot move away from these rules. So, I submit hon Speaker. Thank you.

The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Thank you very much Speaker. I would implore you Speaker for the progression of this session that you please make a ruling on this matter for this progression of the session.

The reality is that the question has been put now to the President and he has not responded but the question has been put to him. We cannot adjourn a question and answer session in the middle of a question.

So, my plea with you, can you please make a ruling so that the President can continue answering this question and then at which point we can adjourn.

Mr N SIGNH: Thank you Hon Speaker. Hon Speaker, I am not going to refer to any rule but I just want to say good sense must prevail at this moment. We are sitting here for over four and a half hours and we can be here until midnight.

I think the reasonable proposal by the EFF Chief Whip requires support. The President said that these are matters that are

... [Inaudible.] ... with a great deal of interest and we have not concluded on the matter.

Let us meet as Chief Whips and talk about it sensibly so that we can have these two questions answered whenever we set it down to be answered. I think that would be more appropriate. Otherwise whatever you do hon Speaker, this House is going to be in a state of chaos until we get some kind of answer from the hon President. I think the nation deserves the answer as well. Thank you.

Mr S N SWART: Speaker, I am very mindful of the President indicating that his wife is having a procedure and we also need to accommodate him in that regard and for that reason, I would like to support the hon Shivambu’s suggestion that the question is held over to a session where he might get better legal advice to answer the question. So I would support the hon Shivambu’s suggestion. Thank you.


Mnu N L S KWANKWA: Ndicinga ukuba ilungu elihloniphekileyo uShivambu liyichanile, makaphinde abuye uMongameli ukuze size kuthetha naye kule veki izayo. Siyigqibile.


He has to account ... [Inaudible.] Thank you.

Mr V ZUNGULA: Thank you Speaker. In support of hon Shivanbu, I also want to add that he must come in person and not virtually. Thank you.

The SPEAKER: Hon members, I suggest that we have now reached the end on this matter. There are proposals made by parties. One of the proposals made is that there is a need for us to have another question session rather than the question session which is coming in September, I think towards the end of September, and that we rather move it to an earlier date. I don’t know about 24 hours; I did not hear that. What I do know is that there is a proposal that we bring these questions earlier and in addition, hon Swart says, it will also provide for the President to have even more time to prepare and seek what it is that he will present to that session.

Lastly hon members, on the same matter is that meanwhile, and I do want to keep on reminding you about this. Hon Zungula, without mixing things, I want you to keep it at the back of your mind that the motion that we are about to embark on now, starting from Thursday and Friday, through that panel is the motion that has been moved by yourself. I am not suggesting in any way that because of that, because you made it clear from the beginning that the fact that there is a panel should not replace the questions raised with the President. I have understood that.

Now, the issue is the Chief Whips who were supposed to meet and I would still encourage that they meet and finalise the matter. There is also something called the Programming Whip, who is part of that panel, and the Programming Whip, I hope she is here, will then bring the proposal date for that interaction to the programming committee. In my view, I think I have captured what you have raised.

The LEADER OF THE OF THE OPPOSITION PARTY: Madam Speaker, I would like to know in terms of what rule you will be making this decision. Because Rule 143(1), sets out a very specific procedure that must be followed if the questions are to proceed and that is that it gets submitted for written reply.

Be very careful about what you are going to do because we are going to let the President out of the trap today and it will end up with a written question that he could very well not answer. I can tell you now that the next time that this question is submitted to the Order Paper; they are not going to let it ... [Inaudible.] ... so be careful what you wish for.

There is no provision for 143(1). The question was put to the President, the President responded, and, I view that in inverted commas, we therefore started moving into the supplementary questions, so you cannot stop a question midstream.

Now, I am happy to concede that the last question on the Order Paper falls away, but you don’t have a provision in 143(1) or any of the rules to be able to do ... And, if you are going on about time, we started an hour late before the President started. And be careful about a precedent here because what you could provide is for a President to filibuster his responses and just kick for time and end up getting through one or two questions.

So I think if we are going to do ... we must treat it fairly and it terms of the Rules. Rule 143(1) does not give provision for us to stop the question session and move on. You can not go to the next question, that is no problem, but this question is live and those of us who have prepared follow up questions, myself included, must have our rights protected by the Speaker as well as the ....

The SPEAKER: Hon members will you please lower your hands. May I please propose a suspension so that I can consult with the team here. Thank you hon members.

Business suspended 18:49.

Business resumed at 19:27






The SPEAKER: In the first instance, I wish to state that everything I have done here has been in terms of the Rules and practices of the House, and I think it is something I need to emphasise. I have deliberately allowed all parties that wish to speak to do so, and I do not regret this.

I have now considered all the issues raised and made the following determination: in terms of the Rules of programming business, it is a function of the Programming Committee. The manner in which the outstanding questions are dealt with will be for the Programming Committee to decide after consultation in the Chief Whips’ Forum. I am aware that the Chief Whips’ Forum is meeting tomorrow and would hope that the Chief Whips will take matters raised here seriously and deal with them irrespective of whether they agree or disagree. They must discuss these issues. I do not have the powers to make a determination on the programming of Parliament. It is only the Chief Whips that can agree on that and then make a decision with the Programming Committee.






Hayi, hayi niqala kanje nibe nindigrogrisa. Hayi, andiyifuni ke tana nyani. Andiyifuni nyani loo nto leyo.




Your Whips will meet tomorrow, discuss and engage with the Programming Committee and the Programming Whip, hon Lesoma, will then bring that matter and report to us about the date we shall have agreed upon in the Programming Committee.

Hon members, as it has happened in this House before that a question is sometimes not completed due to expiry of time – I want to emphasise ‘expiry of time’. In this regard, I wish to state that question time started at 14:51, and therefore according to Rule 144, it would have expired at 17:51.

Therefore, the time allocated for questions has, in fact, expired. Rule 143(1), as it affects the last question, will also be deliberated upon by the Programming Committee and the Rules Committee if necessary. I am equally aware that the Rules Committee is meeting on Friday.

Therefore, allow me to adjourn until the processes that I have outlined above, which are meant to give a way forward on the questions you have raised here have taken place.


House adjourned at 19:32.



No related