


FOURTH SESSION /


FIFTH, SIXTH AND
SEVENTH SITTINGS		:	NORMAL	:	17 SEPTEMBER, 18, 26 AND 27 NOVEMBER 1997
								






								

	VOLUME 7 / 
	1997







SPINE:	VOLUME 7 1997
















HANS\COV797

	DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FOURTH SESSION
	FIFTH SITTING - FIRST SITTING DAY
	WEDNESDAY, 17 SEPTEMBER 1997

THE HOUSE MET AT 14:03 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, PIETERMARITZBURG.  THE ACTING SPEAKER TOOK THE CHAIR AND READ THE PRAYER.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Yes, Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I want to raise, at this stage, two matters of concern.  One is that the benches have been rearranged.  [LAUGHTER]  Minor party Whips represented on the Whips Committee know nothing about it, and I think it is an insult to the major parties that we have become front benchers.  I hope that whoever decides to rearrange the seating, does so with the consent and authority of the relevant structures of this Legislature and also of the Speaker.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, is the order of the Order Paper.  This is a Legislature and our main function is to deal with legislation, but what we have done with the Order Paper, is relegated the legislation to No 8 while briefing on library, issues like that, takes precedence.  I suggest that we put this right, because the main topic on the Order Paper is a draft legislation.  It is a Bill.  We are not a football club or a social club.  Whoever has done this or drawn this should bear that in mind.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Your concerns have been noted, Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  The Order Paper is not for noting.  We must deal with the legislation first.  I make that plea.  Let us put that right.  I propose it.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Can I refer the hon member's request to the Whips.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, this Order Paper, as it stands, is a matter that was dealt with by the Parliamentary Board.  People have travelled from far, especially Foreign Affairs, to give the briefing.  This has been a request that has been outstanding for some time.  They are here.  They need to travel again this evening.  That briefing is in the order of about 20 minutes.  Then the other two briefings are less than 15 minutes.  In fact I think the one falls away.  It was a request that we should fit them in so they could then get back.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Chief Whip.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, shall I say that the briefing of the library will come after 8.1.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I accept what the hon Chief Whip says.  I am a member of the Parliamentary Board, but this order was never determined by the Parliamentary Board.  It was determined by somebody in a private caucus room.

MR R E REDINGER: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, I take umbrage to that.  This Order Paper was set up by all the Whips representing this House, and if that member finds himself in too small a party not to be represented then he had better put that matter right.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, on a point of correction.  The Chief Whip of the majority party says this was determined by the Board, and this hon member jumps up like a jack-in-the-box knowing well that my party is the emerging third largest party in this Province.  [LAUGHTER]

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Mr Chief Whip.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I have no wish to misinform this House.  It was actually a Management Committee of the Board that determined this.  Mr Speaker, I really request we get on with the business of the day.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Chief Whip.  We will proceed with the Order Paper as it is.

2.	OBITUARIES AND OTHER CEREMONIAL MATTERS

3.	ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS OR AFFIRMATION

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Chief Whip.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, it is simply to inform members that the IFP's new member, Mr M R Mzobe, has already been sworn in by the Speaker in his offices in ~Ulundi~.  Perhaps Mr Mzobe would like to stand up so everybody can know who he is, and what he looks like.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!  (APPLAUSE)

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon members.  I did not give you permission to clap hands.  That should be noted.

4.	ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER

I have no announcements to make at this point.

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

Hon the Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  We have once more come together as the Province's Parliament.  We have lots of business that is incomplete, and many projects to attend to.  I am glad that we are today going to deal with the Road Traffic Bill, because it is urgent and necessary.

It is saddening to note that violence is again raising its ugly head in our Province.  We regret the deaths in Umlazi, in Richmond and other places.  The police and Security Services can achieve only that much, the rest is up to us as political leaders.  We must pull our weight, we must do everything together to put down violence.

There has been too much suffering in this Province.  Too many simple people engaged in their ordinary daily lives are harassed, threatened and made to live in fear.  This has got to stop, and we as political parties have a duty to do so.

We reported today to the Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs about my recent trips to Europe, and the Minister of Economic Affairs reported about his recent trips to Latin America.

Our trips have been very successful.  Very important linkages are being established and there will be more to report in October.  This is just a matter of reporting that we had successful trips.  Contrary to what many may think, they were very much to the advantage of the Province.

I welcome Mr Mzobe as a new member of this House.  This House, in these last sittings of which I have been part, has distinguished itself with the seriousness with which it approaches its business.  I think we are doing a good job.  There is a lot of respect for KwaZulu-Natal and its institutions in Europe.  Let us hold this well earned, and well deserved respect by continuing to do better, by bench-marking ourselves against the best in the world.  I thank you, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon Premier.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

The hon Dr Mkhize.

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  May I, on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism, table the KFC Annual Report for 1997.  The report is tabled.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon member Mr Peter Miller.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Mr Speaker, may I table the Annual Report of the Water Services Advisory Board.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The hon member, Chairman of the Transport Committee.

MR M S C M MOTALA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I table the report on the Natal Provincial Traffic Bill for 1997.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  First Mr Burrows please.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day, I will move as follows:

	THAT THIS HOUSE:

	1.	noting the comprehensive analysis of the resource needs of the disadvantaged schools in our province; and

	2.	noting further that there are absolutely no funds available within the budget of the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education and Culture to meet any other than current costs.

	THEREFORE:

	3.	calls on the Ministry and the Department of Education and Culture to formulate a systematic, costed and effective plan and procedure to obtain funds, nationally and internationally to meet the KwaZulu-Natal backlogs in:
		-	classroom and school construction;
		-	electricity and telephone connection;
		-	library and laboratory facilities.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day of this hon House as follows:

	THAT THIS HOUSE calls upon the hon Premier, and the Cabinet to determine a policy in respect of the employment of disabled persons in all departments of the Provincial Administration.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  The hon member, Mr Bartlett.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Speaker, when the House met last on 20 May, I had a dispute with the hon the Premier which became rather heated at times.  As a result of this, an ad hoc Committee has sat, and they examined the tape and they found, sir, that I did not heed your calls to order.

I acknowledge that this is unacceptable behaviour, and therefore I wish to apologise to you, sir, Mr Speaker.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Bartlett.  That brings us to the end of our first session.  At this point I wish to adjourn the House and allow our visitors from the Department of Foreign Affairs to come and make their presentation to us.  I will wish that the hon Chief Whip brings them in just after our adjournment, and then they will give us their presentation.  Thereafter the House will resume, after the second presentation by the library staff.  At this point the House adjourns.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE SUSPENDED AT 14:14

PRESENTATIONS BY OFFICIALS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND THE PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY STAFF.

	HOUSE RESUMES AT 14:58

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY 

I wish to call upon the hon Minister of Transport to introduce the Bill on the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Road Traffic Bill.  The hon Minister.

KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL ROAD TRAFFIC BILL, 1997.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Thank you, Mr Speaker, hon members, members of the media, ladies and gentlemen, it gives me pleasure to table the KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Bill, 1997 before this hon House.

Today marks an historic occasion as KwaZulu-Natal is the first province to table its Provincial Road Traffic Bill.  The KwaZulu-Natal Department of Transport is proud to lead the transport sector and this Province into a new era of co-ordinated and harmonised traffic control.

While we pilot the rest of the country in this process, the legislation we are passing today will only be promulgated once the other eight provinces table and pass their Bills, which we expect in the next eight weeks.

In terms of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, the provinces have legislative and executive powers with regard to traffic regulation.  Within this context, the Committee of all Ministers of Transport, Mincom, decided at a meeting on 28 November 1995 that there should be one National Road Traffic Act dealing with matters requiring countrywide uniformity, and provincial Acts for the remaining matters.

The National Department of Transport, in consultation with the nine provinces has, after careful scrutiny and deliberation, extracted the appropriate sections of the Road Traffic Act, 1989 requiring national uniformity for submission to the National Assembly.  The National Road Traffic Act, 1996 (Act No 93 of 1996) has subsequently been passed with the date of commencement, which must coincide with the introduction of the nine Provincial Acts, scheduled shortly after the last province has passed its Bill by the end of this year.

The remaining provisions of the Road Traffic Act, 1989 were then consolidated and where necessary, amended to provide for legislation concerning Provincial road traffic matters.  In effect, the existing Road Traffic Act has been split into National and Provincial competencies in terms of the Constitutional Transformation Process.

THE NATIONAL ACT

The simultaneous proclamation of the National and Provincial Acts will, for the first time since 1988, bring about comparative harmony in all the provinces with regard to Road Traffic Legislation, contributing substantially to uniformity and standardisation.

Issues requiring national consistency and concordance with the SADC, now that South Africa is a significant player in this forum, are covered in the national legislation.

To enhance South Africa's prominent political and trade role in SADC, traffic legislation will now be standard with other countries in the region to allow people and vehicles to move freely across the borders.  Among the things which will now be standard across the region are codes for driver's licences and overloading restrictions for land freight vehicles.  So when we say we have got code 8 from Zimbabwe it will mean the same thing, whether it is Lesotho, Swaziland or South Africa.

Existing legislation which allowed separate traffic acts to operate in the former homelands and self-governing territories will be repealed.  The Acts which functioned in the Ciskei, Transkei, KwaNdebele and Kangwane were platforms for gross irregularities, but the closure of these loopholes will now lead to seamless legislation countrywide.

Another provision contained in the National Act which allows for countrywide uniformity is the standardised K53 test method for drivers and learners licences.  The act also allows for the introduction of a nonsubjective, multilingual audio-visual learners licence examination.  KwaZulu-Natal has been investigating its use for some time, and we expect to launch this pilot project at our Road Traffic Inspectorate, Rossburgh early in 1998.

In 1998, a credit card type licence with a fraud proof format will be introduced.  The credit card licence will be an important tool to supplement law enforcement as it will involve a point demerit system where drivers will be penalised each time they are caught committing a traffic offence.  The licence will be automatically suspended once the driver exceeds a certain number of points.

The new legislation also makes it imperative that drivers carry their licences at all times.  From now on, traffic officers will conduct random and regular checks for drivers licences and people found driving without licences will be prosecuted immediately after we leave here.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  I think the point is important.  There are many people with fraudulent licences, and there has been legislation now for two years which requires anybody behind the wheel, as long as they are outside their yard, to carry a licence.  If you do not carry a licence you become a bush for everybody who does not have a licence to hide behind.  Therefore serious enforcement that everybody who is behind the steering wheel must carry a licence at all times, except if you are within your yard at home.

The Road Traffic Act prescribes new conditions for the application and processing of Professional Driving Permits.  It is anticipated that these provisions will contribute to improved safety in public, passenger and freight transport.

The Road Traffic Act also contains new and innovative legislation which replaces the largely unenforced Hazardous Substance Act.  The legislation is supported by various South African Bureau of Standards' codes of practice which govern the transportation of dangerous goods.  RTI and local authority officers will now be empowered to enforce these regulations and the penalty provisions of the South African Bureau of Standards.

The Act provides for the use of the tested method of "presumption", and the provisions contained in this section of the Bill are very necessary to facilitate administrative prosecutions and adjudication in the decriminalisation process.  In order to execute prosecutions for offences, it must be "presumed" that the driver of the vehicle is the owner of the vehicle and of course he can then prove that he was not the driver that day, somebody else was driving his or her car.  In case of corporate business, we will assume that the executive director was driving and he can then prove that it was not him, it was his chauffeur or whoever.

AN HON MEMBER:  Can we presume the Speaker was driving?  [LAUGHTER]

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Thereafter, the onus is on the owner to prove that he or she did not drive the vehicle when the offence was committed.

THE PROVINCIAL ACT

The traffic control function is now a provincial competency and the KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Act gives the Province powers to co-ordinate traffic control through structures such as PROVCOM and the KwaZulu-Natal Co-Ordinated Traffic Committee.

Although the KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Bill will give the Province greater autonomy to determine its own road laws, it also provides for uniformity and standardisation within the Province.  Clause 26 of the Bill requires the local authorities to obtain the approval of the Provincial Minister of Transport in order to pass new or amend existing by-laws governing traffic related matters.

This Clause gives the Province powers to ensure that local authorities do not enact by-laws contrary to national and provincial legislation, and to safeguard that local councils abide by the Province's road safety standards.  The Clause allows the Province to guard against local councils passing discriminatory laws or ordinances which compromise the safety of road users.

We are also able to guarantee that consistency is maintained throughout the Province and gives us recourse should any local authority attempt to pass regulations contrary or inconsistent with the Road Traffic Act.

One of the most significant sections of the KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Bill is Clause 42 which deals with the apportionment of fines.  The proposed amendment means that the authority who initiates a prosecution shall now receive all the fines, bails and admissions of guilt resulting from that prosecution.

This is a radical departure from the existing position where all fines initiated by the KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Inspectorate are paid over to local authorities.  The current legislation prescribes that fines stemming from prosecutions within the jurisdiction of a local authority should be paid to that authority.  Since every square metre of KwaZulu-Natal now falls within the jurisdiction of a local authority, the Province cannot claim any income deriving from traffic prosecutions.

The Province of KwaZulu-Natal stands to lose R11 million per annum as long as the current legislation stands.  However, the new Bill prescribes that the Province receives all income procured from prosecution conducted by officers of the RTI.  It is important to emphasise that this money goes straight into the provincial coffers, and not to the Department of Transport or the Road Traffic Inspectorate's reserves.

The KwaZulu-Natal Department of Transport is relentless in its mission to stamp out all forms of fraud and corruption which results in abuse of State assets and funds, or the violations of regulations.  The KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Bill now gives us the authority to appoint special inspectorates, to oversee or investigate the standards and functioning of testing stations and licence test centres.

Until now, this competency rested in the National Road Traffic Act, and enforcement and inspection were the responsibility of the South African Bureau of Standards and the Directorate Traffic Safety in the National Department of Transport.  The devolution of these functions to the Province is welcomed by my Department and staff for the two inspectorates have already undergone intensive training in investigative techniques and inspections.

The inspectorates will act autonomously and will police provincial, local authority and private test stations in an ongoing partnership with the South African Police Services Fraud Unit.  The inspectorates will contribute to good governance and will help to combat fraud and corruption at test stations.  Officials found to be perpetrating fraud will face vigorous criminal prosecution.  They will also encounter administrative sanctions in the form of deregistration either of the individual or the entire test centre if the station management is compromised.

ROAD SAFETY  :  SHORT TERM IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Mr Speaker, South Africa has emerged from an era of international pariah status which it earned for many reasons.  The injustices and discriminatory laws of the ~Apartheid~ State against black people awakened an international consciousness and unearthed global condemnation.  South Africa's semblance as a social outcast worsened during the height of the violence and prior to April 1994, we were a renegade in the eyes of the international community.

But the dawn of democracy has seen the people of this country unite on many platforms for different causes, for example, the end of racial discrimination, Aids, women's rights, and the peace process.  In KwaZulu-Natal, we have now initiated a new mass movement for road safety.

Through the ~Siyabakhumbula~ campaign during the month of August we mobilised bereaved people, victims of road crashes and conscientious, civic-minded people to unite in a positive drive for road safety.  ~Siyabakhumbula~ amplified awareness of the mass slaughter on our roads and outrage against road carnage, surfaced from all sectors of society in all parts of this Province.

The campaign culminated in a mass service on 30 August at Kings Park Soccer Stadium, and for the first time ever, people from all walks of life, religions and social strata, filled a 35 000 seater stadium to capacity for a road safety campaign.  The message was clear - ~Siyabakhumbula~ was more than a symbolic gesture to remember the victims of road crashes.  It was a crusade which gave us a strong mandate from the people of KwaZulu-Natal to take whatever actions necessary to challenge the collision and fatality rate.

Merely eight hours after we closed the campaign, Princess Diana was killed in a horror crash in Paris.  The crash was in fact a tragic irony because it captured all the elements the Department of Transport highlighted during the ~Siyabakhumbula~ campaign - speed, drunken driving, the wearing of seat belts, and the fact that a vehicle, in spite of all its state of the art features, is only as safe as its driver.

It is unfortunate that an international icon such as Princess Diana had to become another victim of a road crash to highlight internationally the devastation of collisions.  The lesson to be learnt from ~Siyabakhumbula~ and Princess Diana's death is that road crashes do not distinguish between the rich and poor, or between the famous and ordinary people.  In your package you will of course find the message by Her Majesty the Queen Mother of the Kingdom of Lesotho, and a message of His Majesty our King.  It also marks a turning point.  It is now time for action.

The National and Provincial Departments of Transport have designed a programme to mobilise all available road traffic management resources in a unified endeavour to restore traffic quality and safety on our roads.  Though we cannot guarantee that there will be a reduction in the collision rate, we will make it as difficult as possible for drivers to have the opportunity to cause crashes.

Road crashes are a national disaster and the fact that 10 500 people are killed, and 50 000 others seriously injured calls for urgent action.  The cost to the economy during 1996 was in the order of R11,9 billion.

The National Department of Transport has thus made available an amount of R53 million to drive a four-month intense law enforcement and communication campaign targeting critical traffic offences.  Because 76% of the country's road crashes occur in Gauteng, Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal, these three provinces will be driving the campaign from 1 October 1997 to 31 January 1998.  Each province will receive a budget of R10 million to run the programme.

At the end of this month, my counterparts in Gauteng and the Western Cape and I will, in the spirit of co-operative governance, sign an agreement with the National Minister of Transport, Mr Mac Maharaj, to execute this plan and to ensure that all the necessary planned actions are conducted.

The agreement stipulates that among its responsibilities to execute the plan, the National Department will:

(a)	Amend national legislation where it is necessary;
(b)	Purchase certain items of law enforcement equipment on behalf of the Provincial and local authorities;
(c)	Promote the provision of traffic courts and the standardisation of traffic fines by the Department of Justice, as well as the acceptance of results of law enforcement equipment as evidence in courts.

Just to illustrate the question of standardisation of traffic fines, we now have got very good co-operation from the Justice Department which we negotiated through the Magistrate's Commission.  You will have read, for instance, that in Ladysmith there is a very conscientious Magistrate.  She is a lady and that is why she is so conscientious.  She really does not take any nonsense on the roads, and it is very helpful because we are able to phone her for a traffic offence at 11 o'clock at night, she will come there and impose the necessary fine.  Two days ago, she imposed some R5 000,00 on a BMW driver who thought that this was Kyalami.  Also in Verulam we are now having very, very good co-operation.  For instance, I think two days ago there was a person, what I mean by the standardisation of fines for instance, someone was driving at 186 kilometres an hour.

Mr Speaker and hon House, even with the present legislation, if you are driving at a speed of 180 kph the Road Traffic Inspectorate cannot give you a ticket.  They are forced by law to lock you up and you can only, like you saw for instance in the case of Ladysmith, it was the Magistrate who imposed the fine, it cannot be us because at 180 kph you are just a murderer on the loose.

But, in Verulam, for instance, a fine of R4 000,00 was imposed here on the N2 outside Umhlanga Rocks.  This guy was driving at 186 kilometres an hour.  He got a fine of R4 000,00, and the same Court imposed a fine of R2 000,00 on somebody who was driving at 177, and there is very little difference between the kilometres.  So the standardisation depends on which Magistrate you appear before, but we are going to be standardising that.

The responsibilities of the provincial departments include:

(a)	Arranging participation by local authorities in the project;
(b)	Preparing schedules for law enforcement by provincial and local authorities;
(c)	Running awareness and communication drives on the project.

I, in turn, will sign an agreement with the Mayors of KwaZulu-Natal to consummate the plan in KwaZulu-Natal.

In addition, the nine Provincial Ministers of Transport and the National Minister signed a memorandum of understanding, very close to a record of understanding, earlier this year giving traffic officers corresponding powers in other provinces so that if, for instance, somebody breaks the law in KwaZulu-Natal and then drives into the Free State, the Road Traffic Inspectorate of KwaZulu-Natal will chase him even up to Harrismith or wherever and arrest him there.

AN HON MEMBER:  That is in hot pursuit.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Hot pursuit, yes.  This agreement now allows us to conduct cross-border operations and hot pursuit of traffic offenders into other provinces.

The KwaZulu-Natal Department of Transport views the four-month onslaught as a delivery on the promises we made during the ~Siyabakhumbula~ campaign.  This short term campaign will also be a bridge into Project Victoria, the Department's Road Traffic Safety strategy adopted from the State of Victoria in Australia, which begins in earnest in February 1998.

For this reason, we have already invested R12 million to beef up our equipment reserves and acquire new technology, all of which will be used for enforcement during the short-term programme and Project Victoria.

We are mobilising 3 000 officers, comprising the Road Traffic Inspectorate, local authorities, Durban Metro Police, South African Police Services and protection services, who will conduct roadblocks incessantly all over KwaZulu-Natal from 1 October.

During the month of October, the emphasis will be on drunken driving and we plan to conduct approximately 80 roadblocks, each with an average duration of 14 hours.  KwaZulu-Natal will be leading the other provinces in this drive as we have already purchased highly technologically advanced equipment plus 10 Booze Buses.  We have also ordered 35 Drager Alco machines, at a total cost of R2 million, which gives a printout of a detailed analysis of a driver's blood alcohol content.

The Department of Transport has succeeded in negotiating with the Department of Justice for the admission of the breathalyser analysis as evidence in court from 1 October 1997.  In 13 days, the new blood alcohol level of 0,05 gram will also come into effect, that is just two cans of beer, 340ml depending on your weight though.  From October 1, those who dare get behind a steering wheel after consuming alcohol exceeding this limit are in for a rude awakening.  Anyone planning to drive should not drink more than the equivalent of two glasses of wine, two beers, or in the case of spirits, no more than two singles.  It operates also in the factories.  If you are a worker in a textile factory, for instance, you will not be allowed to operate a sewing machine if you have drunk during lunch.  It is a simple as that, and there you will not kill anybody, but here we are talking about somebody who is going to kill somebody.

But the most significant breakthrough for the short term implementation plan is the introduction of on-the-road Traffic Courts from 1 October 1997.  Following a series of negotiations with the Department of Justice, Minister Dullah Omar, has agreed that his Department provide these traffic courts to operate during the four month period during which the short term implementation plan will be conducted.

This in effect means that magistrates, prosecutors and court orderlies will now be on permanent standby to be called to the scene of the roadblocks and when traffic offenders are apprehended, their cases will be tried immediately on the roadside.

There will be no waiting period or remand delays, and prosecutions will be expeditious and proficient.  This is a first for South Africa and there has never been a more poignant example of swift justice.  Mr Speaker, this endeavour by the Department of Transport illustrates our dedication to road safety and our determination to deal effectively and candidly with the traffic offenders.

During November, we plan to hold approximately 50 roadblocks, the emphasis for this month being on speed.  We have spent about R4 million on laser and speed enforcement equipment, which include new camera technology, radar-guns, prolasers and sub-surface loops - undetectable speed traps which will be installed permanently in the road surface at strategic sites.

In December and January, there will be a crackdown on seatbelts, speed and drunken driving, with about 50 roadblocks planned for each month.  Though the wearing of rear seatbelts has been compulsory for some time, compliance by the public is about 10% and enforcement has not been stringent.  However, from now on, officers will conduct regular and random checks for the wearing of both front and rear seatbelts and failure to comply will result in prosecutions, no longer mere warnings.  I want to specifically ask my colleagues in the Cabinet to set an example by wearing seatbelts at the rear because it will be very, very embarrassing to be asking a Minister to step aside, and again with Princess Diana, the only survivor was the bodyguard who was wearing a seatbelt.


During these months where there is special emphasis on certain offences, it does not mean that other offences will be ignored.  It does not mean that if we say drunken driving, it means you can speed.  Enforcement will be thorough and sustained as we have adopted a zero-tolerance approach to all offences.  We have identified high frequency collision locations, and on these stretches of road, there will be a joint patrol and roadblock exercise on a 24 hour basis.  This means that at these sites, motorists will either encounter a patrol car or a roadblock at any given time.

Mr Speaker, we in the Department of Transport are passionate about road safety and we are determined to induce a significant reduction in the collision and fatality rate.  If the drivers of this Province refuse to take road safety to heart and continue to behave like desperadoes on the roads, the sanctions of our campaign will force them to think twice.

We are propagating a new culture of social respect for the law and for human life and while our measures are drastic, they are very necessary to traffic quality and safety on our roads.

The KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Act in its present form will help to complete the picture of a co-ordinated and synthesised traffic environment in this Province.  I look forward to the support of this hon House to create the milieu by supporting this Bill.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Motala to address the House for 10 minutes.

MR M S C M MOTALA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, the report on the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Road Traffic Bill, 1997.  The purpose of the Bill was to consolidate and amend the provisions relating to road traffic which should apply in KwaZulu-Natal, and to provide for matters connected therewith.

In order for the National Road Traffic Act, (Act No 93 of 1996) to be effected in nine Provincial Road Traffic Bills would have to be implemented.

Certain necessary amendments have been effected to the Bill by the Department of Transport which will enable the Province to effectively and efficiently execute these functions pertinent to registration and licensing of motor vehicles and road traffic matters.

The KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Traffic Bill, 1997 was submitted to the Transport Portfolio Committee for consideration on 1 August 1997, by the Speaker of the KwaZulu-Natal Legislature.

The Committee tabled the Bill at a meeting on 11 August 1997.  At the same meeting the Committee was briefed by the Department of Transport on the Bill.  The Committee resolved that no public hearings would be held as the Department of Transport had conducted the public hearings and there was little change from the former National Road Traffic Act, (Act No 93 of 1996).

The Bill was gazetted in the Provincial Gazette No 5221 on 14 August 1997.  The public and interested groups were invited to make representation on the Bill.  Invitation to the public to make representation were advertised in the Natal Witness, Daily News and Natal Mercury.

Three submissions were received.  Submissions received were from KwaZulu-Natal Local Government Association, that is KWANALOGA, The City of Durban, Legal Services Department and a member of the public.  Copies of the submissions are available on file.

The Transport Portfolio Committee met with the Minister of Transport, officials from the Department of Transport and the Chief Legal Advisor, Advocate M B Ndokweni on 8 September 1997 in ~Ulundi~ to discuss the Bill, along with the submissions received.

The Committee adopted the Bill with a few amendments.  The Bill was sent back to the Department of Transport and the Legal Advisor to be amended.  The amendments are as follows:

(a)	In the definition of the Bill, "MEC" has been deleted and substituted by "Minister" with a full definition of Minister.  All reference to "MEC" has been substituted by "Minister" throughout the Bill.

(b)	Clause 10(h) has been amended to include the words "physical and postal" in the first line.


(c)	Clause 19(5)(a) has been expanded to include the words "or categories of vehicles" after the word "vehicle" in the second line of the clause.

(d)	Clause 33(1) has been amended to read "The Minister" as opposed to "A Minister".

(e)	Clause 42(1) the words "into Provincial Revenue Fund" is substituted with the words "to the Authority who initiated the prosecution".

(f)	Clause 43(1) has been amended to read "The Minister" as opposed to "A Minister".

(g)	Clause 45 has been deleted in its entirety and Clause 46 now reads as Clause 45.

With that, Mr Speaker, I propose that the House supports the Minister and that we accept this Bill as presented.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Motala.  Next to speak is the hon member Mr Edwards who will address the House for 10 minutes.

MR B V EDWARDS:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I congratulate the hon Minister on his very constructive and on a very instructive introductory speech.  Obviously the Minister is very serious about road traffic law enforcement.  So there is obviously no truth in the rumour that the 10 Booze Buses are going to be provided to take the drunken drivers home.  [LAUGHTER]

Mr Speaker, the Bill before us today is not, it seems, a contentious measure, but designed to consolidate and amend the provisions relating to road traffic in terms of a national initiative to regularise road traffic matters throughout the provinces.

I will not be taking the full 10 minutes allocated to me, as I speak at short notice in place of Mr Tino Volker, who regrettably is today at the funeral of his nephew who was tragically murdered on Tuesday during a vehicle hijack attempt.

While not part of this legislation, it is high time serious consideration was given to the reintroduction of the death penalty to discourage the many acts of senseless killings so prevalent today, and probably worse than before 1994.

Mr Speaker, returning to the Bill, a number of points need to be mentioned.  The standardisation of this road traffic legislation for all provinces may be approached with suspicion by some.  I trust the Minister can assure us that the provisions remain in this Bill to ensure that the Provinces' power of individuality to amend legislation where necessary to satisfy local initiatives, and we have some special local initiatives that we have talked about, and the Minister has talked about, and we are not bound in a centralised straightjacket and have to work through MINMEC and all the provinces to achieve changes.

I refer to the brochure tabled today to remember those affected by the road carnage in our Province and in our country, which sadly is some nine to ten times more than in most developed countries.

While a KwaZulu-Natal Department of Transport initiative, the hon the Premier's message has been placed as an insert or as an afterthought it seems, whereas the National Minister Maharaj was given priority.  I just wonder where this legislation is coming from - it should be provincially driven.

Section 42 of the Bill, which relates to the apportionment of fines it seems, may cause some mutterings from local authorities.  In the past road traffic fines imposed by the Provincial Road Traffic Inspectorate for offences on provincial roads within local authority areas, such revenue was paid to the local authority concerned.

One can argue that such revenue should be for the account of the Province as provincial staff and equipment was used.  Generally I support that view, and the provisions of section 42 now provides that such monies should be paid to the authority who initiated the prosecution.

It is not quite clear, however, as to the law enforcement or policing jurisdiction on these particular provincial or national roads, and possible conflict with local authority by-laws.

Local authorities, through KWANALOGA, did make a submission on the matter, but it seems were possibly not given an opportunity of putting their case fully to settle this problem area.


Perhaps local authorities do feel aggrieved at having this year lost the R20 million subsidy previously granted, which was utilised by local authorities for the maintenance of provincial roads within local authority areas, and now have to bear the costs fully themselves.

I believe further consultation is necessary to ensure that the grey areas are clarified.  For instance, where local authority and provincial inspectorates work in co-operation, which should be the case, how do they share the revenues?  I think we need to clarify that, and no pun intended. 

I think congratulations are due to Jenny Gray on her appointment as Head of Transport in KwaZulu-Natal.  I do not see her here today.  Oh, she is there.  Congratulations, and I believe under Jenny Gray's guidance and her very efficient Minister, this Province's Department can go from strength to strength.

With those few words, Mr Speaker, the National Party supports the legislation before us.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Edwards.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Nel to address the House for five minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, we too will support this legislation which, as the previous speaker said, is not contentions.  We too would like to congratulate our new secretary and wish her well in a job that has many challenges.

Sir, I will not take a lot of time, but I would like to say a few things.  One, is that we welcome the advent of card licences, smart cards, where hopefully we will be able to eliminate all the canned licences that have infiltrated our system over many years, and those are the real licensed killers, if one could so label it.  We hope that very soon that will be a thing of the past.

I also would like to congratulate the hon Minister on his ~Siyabakhumbula~ campaign which I think is an innovative way of actually drawing the public's attention to a very tragic thing that lives in our midst.  Many of us, including myself, have suffered bereavement through traffic accidents.

The Minister did refer to the standardisation of fines.  Whilst certainly one does not want to have a haphazard system, I would caution that one not try and over-regulate the system because most certainly Presiding Officer's should have the discretion to decide that an unroadworthy vehicle travelling at 150 kilometres an hour is a greater danger than a properly maintained modern vehicle at the same speed.  So some discretion is required.  We must not fall into the trap of simply identifying speed as the easy cash cow and then trying to label it unfairly as the main contributor to the carnage on our roads, which I would say is certainly perhaps more the fault of incompetent, uncourteous, irresponsible drivers and perhaps alcohol, than necessarily only speed.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR W U NEL:  Sir, I do not object to law enforcement in all its facets, but let us maintain a balance.  We would support the Minister and the secretary in all efforts to reduce the carnage on our roads.  With those words, I support the Bill.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Nel.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Ainslie to address the House for six minutes.

MR A R AINSLIE:  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.  I was also happy with the speech of the Minister, especially his style of delivery.  I have been with the Minister now on at least two occasions where a large part of his speech has been delivered in song.  I was very relieved that the Minister did not sing here today when he delivered his speech.  [LAUGHTER]  I was nervous that we may have had to follow, those of us on the speaker's list.  Possibly when the Minister replies he will have an opportunity to perhaps give us a bit of a surprise.

As we have heard, this Bill is a result of the splitting of the Road Traffic Act with those sections relating to the National standards being part of the National Bill and the National Act, and those matters relating to provincial matters being part of the Provincial Bill which is before us here today.  This Provincial Bill covers nine chapters, and deals with a number of very important issues to the Province.  These include appointment of officers, the registration of instructors, matters relating to testing stations and the inspectorate at those stations, and driving licences testing centres.

This is a very important Bill because the National Act has already been passed.  That was passed in 1996, but as we have heard from previous speakers, that cannot come into operation until this Province and the other eight provinces pass their appropriate legislation.  I am very pleased to listen to the Minister and hear that in fact we lead that process.  That we are in fact number one of the nine provinces promulgating this legislation today.

Mr Speaker, in numerous debates in this House, speakers have raised the problems regarding overloaded heavy vehicles.  Members will be pleased to know there is a very important section, I think it is section 10 in the Bill before us today which deals with that very issue of the overloading of heavy vehicles.  It is actually 10(e) which empowers traffic officers to ascertain the load of any vehicle and to prevent the operation of such vehicles until the loads have been reduced.

The CSIR recently published a report dealing with the issue of overloaded vehicles.  I must say at this point, and again congratulate the Department, that of the 58 904 vehicles weighed nationally in 1996, 50 969 of those vehicles were weighed in this Province.  But, if one looks at this CSIR report, it is quite clear that the sanctions applied when heavy vehicles are overloaded are simply being ignored.  The CSIR report has a list of top offenders when it comes to overloading of heavy vehicles.  If you look at these figures it is quite alarming.  For example, there is a company called Bennicom.  They had 62 of their vehicles weighed in 1996 and all 62 of those vehicles were found to be overloaded.  Coal Trays, which does lots of business in our Province, had 142 of their vehicles weighed, 141 of those 142 vehicles were found to be overloaded, and so it goes on and on.  It would appear that in some cases it is actually company policy to deliberately overload to maximise profits even if fines have to be paid.

MR A RAJBANSI:  On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Can we hear the point of order from the member.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Is the hon member casting an aspersion on the hon member Mr Romalall?

MR A R AINSLIE:  Mr Speaker, I can read the rest of the list for you.  There are a few surprises in the list, but I thought I would not embarrass members here today.  I have actually only read the top two or three.  I think we ought to make a copy of this report available in the library.  There are quite a few surprises in the list.

The point of what I am trying to say, Mr Speaker, is that the section that I have referred to, section 10, needs to be enforced.  Also I believe the Portfolio Committee under the guidance of the Minister must re-look the sanctions we impose when people are caught overloading vehicles.  The sanctions are simply not working.  The result is damage to our roads.  The result is road fatalities.  The Minister has referred at length to the problems of road safety in the Province.

Mr Speaker, the Bill as a whole is not controversial and we on this side of the House have great pleasure in supporting it.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Ainslie.  Next on the list is the hon member Mr Rajbansi who will speak for two minutes.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, this Province can be proud for many reasons.  One, is that we are relegated below the first three of high crime rate provinces in the country.  We are proud of the fact that we have an excellent road infrastructure in our Province and our country.  We are proud of the fact that we have a high quality law enforcement infrastructure, law enforcement personnel, and we are more proud of the fact that we have an excellent Minister who sets a very good, and a high standard in his Portfolio, and also in his working relationship with the Portfolio Committee under the able leadership of the hon Mr Motala.  We now have a very, very youthful person, who is full of youthful exuberance in the name of Jenny Gray who heads the Transport Department.

This Bill, Mr Speaker, as the hon members indicated, is to ensure that we have uniform regulations in the country, uniform methods of implementation of our regulations, and to see that there is standardisation.  This is excellent for our Province, excellent for our country.

I want to give the hon Minister one message about a road.  Always remember that on a road you have two ways.  Communications or whether you travel it is two-way traffic.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  One more minute.

MR A RAJBANSI:  All I can say, Mr Speaker, this Bill has some problems, especially with relation to Clause 42.  We say pass this Bill, make history, lead the country in passing the first Road Traffic Bill.  We can look at the discrepancies and deficiencies in possible amendments at a later date.  We support this Bill with all the might at our disposal.  Thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  Next to speak is the hon member Mr M A Cele who will address the House for five minutes.

MR M A CELE:  Mr Speaker and hon members.  The hon Minister should be congratulated for this Bill, and great applause should be give by this House.

This is a very important Bill.  The Road Traffic Act has been split.  Those sections dealing with national standards stay with the National Act.  Those sections which deal with provincial matters will become part of the Provincial Act.

Again, this Bill is important because a National Act can only come into operation once all nine provinces have passed their Acts.  This process that we in KwaZulu-Natal are following is also being done in the other eight provinces.  Only when all nine provinces have passed their Acts will the National Act be effective.  This Bill will also bring equality when applying for licences.  Also to regard women as equal and qualified without any sort of bribery.

This Bill comes at a time when the law enforcement, particularly now in our townships, suburbs and rural areas many accidents occur.  Our people can now rest assured that they are going to be safe.  We therefore support this Bill, and the House as well.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Cele.  Next to speak is the hon member Mr Mkhwanazi who will address the House for two minutes.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, we must congratulate the Minister and be thankful to the Portfolio Committee on Transport for having worked through this Bill.

This Bill is long overdue.  I am very unhappy that we will still have to wait for the other eight provinces to have their own Bills so that this can come into effect.  I do not know whether I heard the Minister correctly, but what we would like to say is that we would like to support this Bill.  It is long overdue knowing that there are three main causes of death or loss of life in our Province, and in our country.  It is the carnage on the roads, it is through crime and it is through Aids.  Perhaps we have no control over Aids and others, but on the question of road carnage we have.

Mr Speaker, I would like to encourage the Minister to stick to his words when he says that we will apply these laws with all the brutality which they deserve, because if we do not do that this law will be nothing but a piece of paper.

Finally, I want to congratulate the Minister, and we must congratulate ourselves, that in the past the so-called Transvaal was stricter than what used to be called Natal.  These days you travel through from the border of KwaZulu-Natal to Johannesburg there is not one traffic cop on the road.  Yet on our roads every 50 kilometres you will see a traffic vehicle, even without arresting you it causes you to feel that there is somebody watching.  I thank you.

AN HON MEMBER:  Intimidation.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Mkhwanazi.  Our next speaker will be the hon member Mr Gwala who will address the House for five minutes.

MR M B GWALA:  Mr Speaker and the hon House.  If you want to give hope to the people of Africa, since some African states just north of us are horribly inadequate in terms of a proper legislation, then we need to overhaul all legislation to suit the present day needs and environment.

South Africa is a third world country where social infrastructure and development in various aspects is a prerequisite.

The ~Siyabakhumbula~ Project initiated by the Minister of Transport, Mr Ndebele, has taught us that it is important that the Government of the day, and its people must begin to be proactive in dealing with serious matters that affect our communities either directly or indirectly, such as road carnage, car hijacking, bank robberies etcetera.

We are very pleased to hear that different legislation and separate Traffic Acts which are in existence are to be repealed to allow a kind of uniformity countrywide.

The fatality rate that occurs on our roads is out of proportion, according to what we always see and witness, and to the statistics given every day by the Minister when he talks about road accidents.

I agree with the Minister of Transport that crashes do not distinguish between the rich and poor or between famous and ordinary people.  If it is so, the world would not have lost such a famous person like the Princess of Wales.

This is in fact a lesson to all of us to be careful with the warnings made by the Department of Transport through the ~Siyabakhumbula~ Project.  Nothing under the sun can be effectively done without sound legislation that is relevant to a particular environment and its inhabitants.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, the Bill tabled before us this afternoon is very important.  The amendments will not assist the Province of KwaZulu-Natal only, but the entire country and will of course enable every road user throughout South Africa to be familiar with the uniformity of traffic legislation, particularly the Road Traffic Bill, 1997 we are dealing with now.

I am proud, Mr Speaker, to stand up and blow the same trumpet as the others did before me as they supported the Bill.  I do support the Bill.  Thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon member.  I now wish to call upon the hon Minister of Transport to respond to the members' debate.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker and the speakers that have gone before, the hon House.  Thank you very much for the support for this piece of legislation, which puts us on a footing where we cannot just be spectators, but we can actually do something about stopping the carnage.

The steps that we are taking actually brings us to normality.  What we are talking about here, these good roads, the powerful cars that the hon Mr Nel spoke about, you will find those good cars in the United States of America, you will find them in France, you will find them in the UK, you will find them in Australia, much more powerful than ours, but they drive at 110 kilometres an hour.  What we are trying to do is to bring ourselves to be a normal civilised state who respect each other's individual rights.

One was quite ashamed during ~Siyabakhumbula~, when we hosted the Australian delegation here, led by the Minister of Emergency Services and Police, when we were talking during Easter that over 300 people were killed on the roads.  In Australia they had no deaths whatsoever.  Not one single death during the period of Easter.  That is the level that we are talking about in reducing the carnage.

I want to assure the hon members here that we will be our own masters.  We are not going to be dancing to anybody's tune.  When we need to amend whatever clause in this Act or any other Act, we will do so to suit our Province.  It will not be decided at MINMEC or at National, it will be decided by ourselves in terms of what we need here.  So members can be assured of that.

The continued enforcement on heavy vehicles will continue, not only in terms of safety, but in terms of the damage that they inflict on our roads.

The discussions will continue with the local authorities through PROFCOM where both TLCs and Regional Councils are represented.  We will not be able to impinge on each other's dignity.  We will be able to move forward with them through consultations.

Finally, we have many medical doctors in this House.  It has been brought to my notice that it is not only alcohol that impairs concentration, but also ordinary medication like cough mixtures and so forth that can in fact impair your concentration.  That should be taken into account as well.

Mr Speaker, I want to thank you very much, and thank the hon members for the support that they have given to this Bill.  I wish to thank the Department that has been working tirelessly to have this produced under the leadership of the secretary Ms Jenny Gray.  Thank you very much.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Hon members, having concluded the debate on this ...

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Mr Speaker, sorry, can I also invite members to a cocktail party after this.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Of course those who will be driving will not be drinking.  [LAUGHTER]

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  We thank you, Minister, for the invitation.  Having concluded the debate on this Bill, I wish to put the Bill before the House.

KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL ROAD TRAFFIC BILL 1997 - PASSED

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I wish to now call upon the clerk to read the short title of the Bill.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION AND LAUGHTER

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Road Traffic Act, 1997.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.

8.2	DEBATE ON A MATTER OF URGENT PUBLIC IMPORTANCE - SECURITY SITUATION, RICHMOND.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I wish to call upon the hon member Mr Konigkramer to open the debate by addressing the House for 19 minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Unfortunately I do not think this debate is going to be convivial, because I believe we are dealing here with matters of grave importance, that have cost the lives of large numbers of people, and I believe it behoves us to actually get to the truth.

Mr Speaker, the murder and mayhem that has been allowed to persist at Richmond is a disgrace to this Province, and to South Africa.  I believe that we in this House deserve blame for allowing dastardly deeds of thuggery and murder to go unpunished for so long.  The stain on our name will not go away.

But, the most blameworthy for what the people of Richmond have had to suffer are the most senior leaders of the Central Government and of the ruling African National Congress.  They have been aware of ANC hit squad activity for years, and they did nothing about it.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, also aware of what was going on at Richmond was the ITU under the leadership of Howard Varney and Frank Dutton.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Aware of the murder and mayhem was also the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.  It is almost trite to point out that there has been no TRC hearings into Richmond.  Trite, because it would take a foolish man indeed to expect otherwise, given the partiality demonstrated by the TRC to date.

Mr Speaker, I note that my colleague, Mr Dumisani Makhaye, has congratulated, and even saluted Bushy Engelbrecht's Task Team for having arrested a former member of this House, Mr Sifiso Nkabinde.

AN HON MEMBER:  The ANC Gestapo.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Apart from the fact that it appears strange to me for an official party spokesman to congratulate the police for arresting somebody for murder before that person has been formally charged, let alone tried.  One wonders why his colleagues sitting opposite, in particular Mr John Jeffery, who regrettably is not here, did everything in their power for more than a year, to prevent an investigation into Mr Nkabinde's activities.  Congratulations, it would seem, are only in order when the politics is right.

Finally, Mr Speaker, history will show that there is very little evidence in the hands of Bushy Engelbrecht now, that was not known to the police, the Central Government and the ITU for at least two years.

The now famous Group Nine report which the Central Government has sought to hush up, gives the hit squad activities in Richmond in great detail.

Why then was there no action?  The stench of death that hangs over Richmond is matched only by the stench of the official cover-up.  I believe it cannot be gainsaid that had not a few of us in this House doggedly persisted with our investigations into Richmond, many of the dastardly deeds that have caused so much suffering would have been swept under the carpet.

It is unfortunate that so important a debate as today's has been restricted by time, but since this is so, I am forced to confine myself to just a few issues.

The first relates to cover-up with all the hype about the so-called third force.  I have said before that not one shred of evidence has been produced to substantiate this claim.  But, there is overwhelming evidence to prove that - regardless of whether individual police officers have been partisan or even guilty of complicity in assaults on the freedom of the people of Richmond, the ANC was not only involved in the denial of freedom, but it was directly responsible for it.

Allow me to detail some of the facts.  Firstly, the ANC, consciously, as a matter of policy, created the so-called self-defence units in Richmond.  These units systematically drove out all political opponents.  They systematically murdered supporters of the late ~Inkosi~ Mzwandile Majozi, they drove them out of Ndaleni, out of KwaMagoda, out of Simozomeni, and they looted and plundered people's homes.  They actually physically demolished the ~Inkosi~'s house so that there was nothing left of it.  They also drove out supporters of the Pan African Congress.  It is documented in many police files.

Are not the vast majority of those arrested for murder in Richmond high profile members of the ANC and the SDUs?  Just study the police records, Mr Speaker, and the SANDF's Group Nine intelligence report to find the proof of what I am saying.

Secondly, it is a fact that the ANC arranged for one Captain Shoba, formerly of the Transkei Defence Force, Special Forces and Parachute Battalion, and now a member of the SANDF to provide military training for ANC members in the KwaZulu-Natal Midlands.

AN HON MEMBER:  Scandalous.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  And I will come back to this.  Mr Speaker, and I measure my words, I believe this gentleman, apart from clearly having been engaged in illegal activities during the ~Apartheid~ era, could assist the police with investigations into the serial killings of several IFP leaders in the Midlands.  Parenthetically, I would draw this House's attention to a statement issued to The Natal Mercury in March this year by Mr A S Ntinga, an ANC leader, who revealed that he was aware of hit squad activities at Richmond and that he had, and these are his exact words in a written statement, "first hand information" about the smuggling of arms from Transkei.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, this incidentally, and this is a serious matter, was known by the Goldstone Commission, it was known by the ITU, and naturally it was known by the ANC itself.  Why have there been no charges?  This is one of the greatest cover-ups that has taken place in this Province.  This is where the seeds of violence were sown in this Province.

Now, Mr Speaker, as I said, I wish to raise another matter with regard to this officer.  Those of my colleagues who were present at a meeting of the Safety and Security Committee on August 13, will recall that I asked the SANDF's Colonel Schreuder, whether Captain Shoba had met with the now famous Mr Bob Ndlovu, whom the police want for a series of murders, and for whom they have offered a reward of R200 000,00.  Mr Speaker, my colleagues will remember that I got a very indignant response, and this officer challenged me and he said I should name the date and the time at which this meeting took place.

I then took it up with his commanding officer, Major General le Roux, and he reacted quite differently.  His first response was that an answer to my letter would be forwarded to the Premier.  I do not know why it goes to the Premier.  In addition, he said it was "his opinion" or the opinion of his command that it was appropriate to inform the Premier of such requests, who in turn would inform me about the answer.  Now I just have to say parenthetically that there has been no answer.

Mr Speaker, there is a Constitution by which we live in this Province, in terms of which those officials are obliged to answer questions.  When I challenged him on this procedure, Major General le Roux pathetically tried to hide behind the fig leaf of state security.  He informed me that, by refusing to answer my question, he was acting on the instructions of the Standing Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence.  Now, Mr Speaker, with the best intentions in the world, I fail to see how straightforward questions relating to crime have anything to do with intelligence, unless of course, like under ~Apartheid~, it is the function of intelligence to conceal politically incorrect crime.

The Regional Commissioner has been more frank in his response to my enquiries about Captain Shoba's meetings with the man we are told the SAPS so desperately wants to arrest.  He has told me that although he could find no trace of senior officers in the SAPS who were personally aware of the meeting between Captain Shoba and Bob Ndlovu, he had two written statements from non-commissioned officers who allege that they were informed by Captain Shoba that he had had a meeting with the said Bob Ndlovu.

My question is a simple one.  Why is Captain Shoba not arresting this man?  Is it perhaps to conceal the truth about who is responsible for the violence at Richmond?

I now wish to deal with another incident involving the famous Bob Ndlovu.  Those familiar with the Richmond "no-go area" inquiry, will know that I first raised this question of an incident in which a senior policeman was sitting in the lounge of Mr Sifiso Nkabinde, together with Mr Bob Ndlovu, at a Safety and Security Committee meeting on March 13, 1996 in the presence of the National Police Commissioner George Fivaz.  Nothing came about this, and certainly nobody came to ask anything about it, although that is a really grave matter.  I raised it again in front of the National Minister of Safety and Security, Minister Mufamadi, in Richmond on July 24 this year.  Again the police denied knowledge of this incident.

I have since raised the matter with the Regional Commissioner who, after receiving a report from the Area Commissioner, Midlands, that a senior officer, whom he has identified as the Station Commander of Richmond, Inspector Mangalal, had indeed been seated in the lounge of Mr Nkabinde together with Mr Bob Ndlovu.

Although he has called for a disciplinary inquiry, he would not accept a charge of defeating the ends of justice from me, saying that I would have to provide an affidavit which would, in his words, "contain sufficient evidence to found a charge of defeating the ends of justice" or, at the very least, again using his words, "to justify a criminal investigation".

I would have thought that in his own letter in which he admitted that this incident had taken place after he had received a report, that there was enough evidence to found a criminal charge.  But be that as it may, Mr Speaker, I have since asked the Attorney-General to order an investigation into this affair.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I wish now to make a few observations about what I consider to be very unfortunate political intervention in police matters at Richmond.  Firstly, I find it strange indeed to hear Mr Bushy Engelbrecht publicly announce that he reports only to the State President, Minister Mufamadi and to George Fivaz.

AN HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  I suppose, Mr Speaker, the "Hear! Hears" just confirm the suspicion that it is a political cover-up.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  You see they cannot report to normal policemen, they have got to report to political appointees.

AN HON MEMBER:  ANC Gestapo. 

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, I suppose Mr George Fivaz was included because he has made previous statements, which we know about in this House, where he said he knew nothing about what NITU was doing at Richmond.

Then there were the widely publicised meetings between Minister Mufamadi and ANC councillors following the murders at Richmond.  It is unfortunate to say the least, and I measure my words, that no police officers were present at these meetings.  Why?  Why do politicians meet with politicians and there are no police present to discuss murder?  It is unfortunate, Mr Speaker, as I say, and what is even more unfortunate is that some of those very councillors are actually witnesses in the Van der Byl murder investigations.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, these ANC councillors then returned from this meeting in Pretoria, and on their return they immediately demanded the removal of certain police officers from Richmond.  This is completely unacceptable, Mr Speaker, and constitutes political interference in policing matters.

One of those they do not wish to be involved at Richmond is a certain Captain Meeding.  At the formal hearing into Richmond no-go areas, Mr John Jeffery, and it is a great pity he is not here, produced a written document under his own hand for the ANC, in which he said there was nothing wrong with the agreement between the ANC and Captain Meeding.  In fact, he went further and he praised him, and he said that this had led to the reduction in crime.  Yet, in August this year, on returning from a meeting with Minister Mufamadi, the ANC Mayor Ragavaloo said that the reason the ANC wanted Captain Meeding removed was the very 1994 agreement, that police would only enter Magoda with Nkabinde's permission.

Now that was the whole purpose of the inquiry.  We get one member sitting opposite who in writing to a formal parliamentary inquiry, says there is nothing wrong, he supports it.  Now we get an ANC Mayor Ragavaloo actually saying that the reason they do not want Captain Meeding there is because he actually had an agreement with Mr Nkabinde that the police could not go into Magoda.

AN HON MEMBER:  The tail is wagging the dog.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  What is going on here?  This becomes, in my judgment, even more surprising, after I had established that the Minister of Health, and I have the greatest respect for him, had insisted that one of the officers who was on the scene of the Van der Byl murder be told to leave.

AN HON MEMBER:  Which Minister?  Tell us which Minister?

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  The hon Minister of Health.  The Minister of Health in police matters.  This was done by cellphone to the murder scene within minutes, and a senior police officer conveyed the message to his colleague who then left the scene of the murder.  What is going on here, Mr Speaker?  You see, the truth hurts unfortunately.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon member has two more minutes.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, I am not going to go further, but it becomes even more serious when you look at the fact that there are subsequent press reports which indicate that Mr van der Byl drove four members to a school where they were subsequently murdered by the ANC.

Mr Speaker, I want to conclude, and I want to say that I find it extremely disturbing to have read in The Natal Witness that Mr John Jeffery on April 7, 1994 refused to give the police assistance with the investigations into those murders.  He actually made a statement that there were ANC regional representatives involved.

This very member actually came to this Parliament and made formal submissions in which he denied these allegations in the full knowledge that he knew that ANC members were involved in violence.  I believe that this Parliament should have a disciplinary inquiry into that, and since Mr Jeffery is a lawyer, I believe that the Natal Law Society should be alerted to this.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, if you will allow me just to conclude.  I will deal with allegations made by the ANC of a so-called third force at Richmond.

Firstly, there is the issue of the freedom of Richmond being conferred on Mr Sifiso Nkabinde.  That Freedom was conferred on him by the ANC-controlled Richmond TLC at Richmond.  The mover was none other than the ANC Mayor, Mr Andrew Ragavaloo.  Present were, among others, my colleague Mr Bheki Cele and the Deputy Town Clerk of Pietermaritzburg, an ANC stalwart, Rob Haswell.  He said that they were giving him the freedom  because of the contribution he had made to the struggle for freedom.

Now, Mr Speaker, did the third force organise this function?  Are the hon Mr Bheki Cele and Mr Haswell creations of the third force?

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  30 seconds.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  And remember, while this function was being planned, and after it had taken place, the most senior leaders of the ANC, and I regret to say including the hon leader of the ANC in this House, had known for years that Mr Nkabinde was an agent, and was involved in violence at Richmond.  When Captain Shoba was sent to train ANC supporters in military matters, was the purpose to create a third force?  When he now meets with the most wanted man in our Province, Mr Bob Ndlovu, is he engaged in third force activities?

I would submit, Mr Speaker, in conclusion, that if there is indeed a third force its name is the African National Congress.  I thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon member's time is over.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now wish to call upon the hon Minister of Health, Dr Mkhize, to address the House for 10 minutes.

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I must say that this debate is a very strange one, considering the background of the request to have this debate.  I hope that at the end of it we will all take the matter more seriously, not only because of the lives of the people that have been lost in Richmond, but because of those that have been lost in KwaZulu-Natal violence.

May I also say, that I hope the hon member Mr Konigkramer will acknowledge, that generally there has been acknowledgement that the hit squad activities have been pointed at the IFP as well.  That is why we have seriously sat down and got involved in peace talks.  Therefore I want to try and understand what is the reason for his comments.  I want to know what is the mission of actually moving in this kind of direction with his talk.  I also want to know when do we start talking about violence in Unit H in Umlazi, Inchanga and other areas, if we are serious about violence and people in Richmond alone.

I also want to say, and put it on record, Mr Speaker, that the ANC has generally reviewed political problems, including deaths and so on.  Where there were political problems the ANC applied political solutions.  Where there were criminal activities the ANC referred those issues to the police for investigation.  As a result, the ITU started investigating Richmond two years before Sifiso Nkabinde was expelled.  If the hon member is not aware, I think he does need to be given a bit more information.

The ANC has also investigated and found that there were third force activities.  This third force was operating within the SAPS, SANDF, political parties, ANC, IFP and others, and of course Mr Nkabinde was expelled when it was found that his alias was Derrick Nene, file number SR 4252.  This issue was publicised.  This, in fact, we have acknowledged.  That a lot of activities that our members have actually been involved in, have happened due to a level of intimidation, and the protection which Mr Nkabinde had actually received, he received from some of the local police.

The ANC also established beyond doubt that Nkabinde was involved in violence as entirely the work of the third force.  Whether of course the hon member Mr Konigkramer refuses to believe it or not.  I therefore challenge the other parties to expose the third force elements in their midst, and that is those who create conflict and violence between the ANC and the IFP and other parties.

The issue of withholding information as was reported in The Natal Witness of 15 September, that the ANC kept the report from the police and suggesting that the hon member Jeffery was responsible.  I just want to indicate that the report is fallacious and misleading.  All the information of benefit to the police, received by the ANC, has in fact been channelled to the police through one channel or the other, and therefore we will challenge the reporter to say which information does Mr Jeffery have that the police does not have.

The truth is, Nkabinde would not have been arrested without an ANC inspired co-operation.  He would not.  The truth is, all 18 murders for which Mr Nkabinde has been charged are ANC members.  Of course, more than 20 members of the ANC have died in four months since Mr van der Byl's death, and all of those were ANC members.  Many died even before Nkabinde was expelled and they were members of the ANC.  Therefore, the ANC could not be party to murders of its own party members or supporters.

I also note that the statement by the hon member Mr Wessel Nel of the DP, about ANC withholding information, we consider it to be political opportunism.  I am sure that the hon member will agree that on the Richmond issue the ANC has been very decisive: with the expulsion of Mr Nkabinde, in the election victory, and of course in the arrest of Mr Nkabinde.

Let me also tell you who withheld some information.  On 13 September 1996 a letter was written by the Commander of the Murder and Robbery Squad, a Superintendent Vermaak, to the Pietermaritzburg Area Commissioner du Preez.  In that letter there was a report on a meeting they had held earlier with Mr Nkabinde, discussing the issue of the arrest of the people who had murdered the police.  In the letter it had been stated that Mr Nkabinde was in possession of 164 AK47 machine guns, 11 landmines and three grenade launchers.  Of course, we have never heard why he was not arrested then.  I am not sure if the hon member Mr Konigkramer, seeing that he has good feedback from the police, whether he has information on that one.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  The ANC has said that there has been sympathy for Mr Nkabinde from certain members of the security forces, because he has been a front for their third force activities.  Now of course, since he has been arrested, we want the whole third force to be exposed.

We also want to advise the DP that they should rather blame the National Party or maybe ask them to expose their whole network.  We have heard a little bit of what was happening in the media, if you listen to what the latest TRC Commission reports have said.  Of course, if they do not expose that network the ANC will.

We have seen a few surprising issues.  When Mr Shabalala was expelled from the IFP, the ANC believed that it was an internal matter and kept out of it.  When Nkabinde was expelled, there was a very strange expression of sympathy from certain members of the IFP, including of course ex-member Mr Shabalala.  The reports that were raised by the hon member Mr Konigkramer, in this Safety and Security Committee, had members of both parties involved, but strange enough, only the members of the ANC then were in fact mentioned.

We also had problems with the report that appeared in The Natal Witness on 27 August, whereby Colonel Schreuder from the SANDF actually complained that there had not been co-operation, when we knew for a fact that many of the ANC members had risked their lives to give information to assist the police.  There were even suggestions that the ANC should negotiate with the NCF, yet all that was needed really was that the criminals be arrested.

We are therefore worried that they were diverting the attention from the criminals and looking at the ANC.  We were concerned about that.  Nevertheless, we want to congratulate the people of Richmond and Director Bushy Engelbrecht for the successful investigation.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  As we were saying, the DP cannot have it both ways.  You cannot approach Holomisa and the NCF to cash-in on the anti-ANC emotions, for the benefit of the declining membership, then escape the stench of Nkabinde's third force criminal activities.  The ANC will not accept responsibility for the crimes that were committed by Nkabinde while he was in the ANC, because this was the agenda of the third force, to damage and divide or discredit the ANC.

We therefore acknowledge that there has been conflict between the ANC members and IFP members.  That is the reason why we are involved in peace talks, and we believe that a constructive approach is needed here.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Two more minutes.

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):

TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, I say let us congratulate the investigator, Mr Bushy Engelbrecht for the job he has done which is commendable.  We also congratulate the police persons that assisted him, together with the community of Richmond, because at the moment at Richmond there is a wind of peace that is blowing as Nkabinde has been arrested.

We would not agree that the sins of a hyena wearing sheep's clothing should be said to be our sins.  For that reason I say the arm of the law must operate.

Other parties must look to themselves because we want to know when they are going to start taking steps regarding that force that we are referring to.  Thank you.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon Minister.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Haygarth to address the House for 13 minutes.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Mr Speaker, it is unfortunate that we have to have once more a debate on the subject of violence.  This party, some considerable time ago, recommended that the Province should appoint a judicial Commission of Inquiry to have a look at violence in Natal, not specifically Richmond, violence in Natal.

I want to ask the hon member there on the other side of the House, who has got a book in front of him, it is called the Natal Story - 14 years of conflict.  If you could see the size of that book.  Sixteen years, I could not quite read it from here, Mr Speaker.  Sixteen years of conflict.  Now that size of the book is indicative of the size of the problems that we are dealing with in this Province.

To take it out of Richmond for a moment, let us have a look at Greytown.  There is a township called Mhlalagahle.  The Mayor, Mr Nkhlobo, was driven out of Mhlalagahle, and he returned to Msinga together with another gentleman called Mr Zondi.  Those people, as in many other townships in Natal, such as Bruntville and Mpumalanga, Umlazi and many of these other places, have all been driven out for political purposes, to create a political no-go area for a political party.

The tragedy of this violence, and it has been well expressed by Mr Konigkramer, it is absolutely shameful that violence of this nature should occur amongst human people.  Brutality, sheer disregard for life, for human life, no regard for the suffering of the individuals.  This has been ongoing in all of these areas, and it is very sad that democracy, now that we have got democracy, those people who were freedom-fighters have turned into terrorists.  That is what has been expressed here.  They are simply outlaws, people who are not under control, and they have no regard for human life whatsoever.  Elderly people, young children.  Only the other day, Richmond I think was referred to as "City of Mourners".  Have a look who was killed there.

Why must old people be killed?  Why must children be killed?  Terrorism.  To put fear into the people so that certain people can maintain control of areas for political purposes.  Can we as the representatives of the public stand by and do nothing to try and resolve this conflict.

I do not believe that the politicians, the political parties have endeavoured adequately to try and find solutions.  They have talked about peace meetings, and following these committees and various things of that nature.  They have achieved nothing.  There is an article in the Helen Suzman Foundation in July concerning the peace initiatives, and the fact that they simply have not been successful.  That sort of thing is continuous.

So what do we have to do?  How do we get a culture amongst the people of democratically accepting the right of everybody to their own political convictions?  I must confess that the ANC have not been free of guilt in this regard, and it is long standing.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR G HAYGARTH:  It has been long standing.  If you have a look at the time of our friend who has just been honoured, and you look at the violence that occurred in Soweto between the Zim-Zim and the Waharara.  Now the Waharara were the ANC and the Zim-Zim were Steve Bikos, and they were driven out.  The Zim-Zim were driven out of Soweto by the Waharara, and that is part of the problem.  It does not only happen in Natal, it is countrywide.

So I think the political parties have got to analyse themselves as to what they can do to achieve this.

My colleague has made reference to the work that was done by the subcommittee.  Certainly there are those who do not like what came out of that subcommittee, there was a lot of conflict.  It was not an easy subcommittee to chair, but the outcome was that there was a recommendation once again, for a judicial Commission of Inquiry which was referred to the Premier of this Province.  It is sad that perhaps three months later or four months later we still have had no progress in this matter.  I want to say that this is a serious omission.

When we look at the arrests that have been made in Richmond, and we do say that at last some tangible action has been achieved ...

AN HON MEMBER:  We welcome that.

MR G HAYGARTH:  We certainly welcome the fact that some arrests have been made, but perhaps it is significant, two things, the murderers of the Mayor I do not see on the list that has been published in the newspapers concerning that particular effort.

For those who were members of the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security, and the Peace Committee that sat in the NCOP boardroom the other day, the widow of that person came and said to every one of us who was there, "We all know who the murderer was.  Why has he not been arrested".  We need to know.  Why has the murderer, whoever he be, whatever third force he happens to represent.

AN HON MEMBER:  Could be a woman.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Whoever he be, that person needs to be dealt with.  A person or persons.  I do not know who they are, but such high profile killing cannot be allowed to continue, and the brutal nature in which that was carried out is absolutely disgraceful and shameful, that somebody should have bullets pumped into him, something like 10 or more bullets pumped into him.  What sort of people do that in a killing?  What sort of people do we have who act in that form?  How can we permit that to continue?

So, Mr Speaker, the National Party continues to press for a judicial Commission of Inquiry, because it believes that it exists in the whole of Natal, and the size of that book is indicative of the volume of violence that is taking place, and especially because of Richmond.  The Richmond one warrants itself a specific Commission of Inquiry because, unlike the other conflicts that tend to be a conflict between the ANC, on the one side, and the IFP on the other, a third force yes, a third force is there now and that is the NCF.  That is now an additional party into the struggle, and we are sitting here expecting an election in 1999.  I said at the subcommittee in the next election period, from now until the next election, unless we do something tangible and positive, we are going to be faced with a continuation of the violence that has existed for the last 16 years.  We need to make sure as the members of this Provincial Parliament, Legislature, whatever it be, we need to make sure that the next elections that are held in 1999 are fully free and fair, and there is nobody here that can deny that that is what we need to achieve.  What we have got to work out together, is how are we going to achieve that in the limited amount of time that is available to us, as members of this House.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR G HAYGARTH:  The colleague here says that Mr Nkabinde is in gaol already.  Is he sure, Mr Speaker, that Mr Nkabinde is the only person who is guilty of violence in Richmond.  Is he sure.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR G HAYGARTH:  Is he sure that Mr Nkabinde, if he remained in gaol, the violence in Richmond would cease forthwith.  I say to that hon member, I believe he is completely mistaken.  The violence is far more deeply rooted than a simple single man.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS


MR G HAYGARTH:  There is no one-man alone who could create the volume of violence that has existed in Richmond.  So do not let us believe that you can sacrifice one of your former members, and say that will cease the violence.  It simply will not.  The violence is going to continue for so long as there is no political tolerance between the parties.  I do not think the IFP has yet had a chance to re-establish its branches in Richmond, and certainly there are other parties who are willing to do so, people who are putting parties into Mpumalanga.  My colleague, Mr Bartlett, has time and again made allegations of the difficulties that the National Party itself is suffering, when it tries to establish political branches in so-called no-go areas.

There is no way that we are simply going to wave this away and expect that peace will suddenly prevail.  For too long we have allowed this to continue without taking active steps to prevent it on the one side.  For example, how can you prevent it at Richmond, you have more than 600 units of security personnel.  Six hundred people endeavouring to try and maintain the peace in that area.  How can they do it in such a vast area covered with forests, long distance roads that are easily used for kidnapping or taking out people.  There simply is no way in which the South African Police Services can actually protect the people, the councillors, and that sort of thing in that area.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Two minutes left.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Two more minutes?  There is simply no way that the position can be a security force solution.  We cannot rely on 600 people to try and maintain that sort of peace in Richmond.  What is happening?  The removal of people, personnel from other areas permits ongoing violence to continue in those areas.  It is sad and true that this violence is continuing throughout the Province.  There are many members here who belong to the Peace Committee.  They know, they go on many occasions, they go out to various areas to meet the people who are involved to try and persuade them, they damp it down in one area, and it rises again in another.  There needs to be a complete disclosure of what are the causes in all of these areas, and what is a practical solution other than security forces to try and reach a solution.

AN HON MEMBER:  Can you tell us about the security?

MR G HAYGARTH:  Mr Speaker, I conclude on the basis that every person, I believe, in Richmond wants peace.  It is the leaders who have to give them the chance to enjoy it.  Thank you very much.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Nel to address the House for eight minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, political parties and politicians bear an awesome responsibility with respect to violence in our country and our Province in particular.  I would think that the ANC owes us some candour and honesty on this matter too.

I am rather surprised that the hon Minister of Health, said to us just earlier, that they expelled Mr Sifiso Nkabinde when they discovered that he was an agent of the previous regime.  Sir, the fact is, that their own story was when they expelled him, that they had already known that for some years.  Why did they not act earlier?

We then are told that he was arrested on ANC information.  The question is, have they forgotten that he was also kept in office and kept operational for many years under ANC protection?  We were read a letter by the Minister that says the police knew that he was in possession of 164 AK47's and yet did not arrest him.  The question arises, what did the ANC do, because they certainly must have known exactly what sort of arms capability the man had?

Then we have interjections here by the hon member the "bubesi" of the media Mr Makhaye, who has now left the chamber, saying that the DP is involved in violence.  Now whatever shortcomings this party has, I would challenge that hon member to produce any shred of evidence, and certainly if we have it, we would be expected to deal with it.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!

MR W U NEL:  Apparently, Mr Speaker, we are now killing people in Soweto, and I challenge that hon member to produce that information.

Perhaps it is inevitable that this debate will be somewhat heated, but if we skirt the real issue, sir, we do the people a grave injustice.  People in our Province, in our country, people we represent.  This debate is about the suffering of people, and lest we forget it, members better listen.

It is about innocent people who have been denied their constitutional rights in Richmond, Magoda and Ndaleni for a number of years now.  It is about countless people who have lost their lives, not only their homes, not people who have just been intimidated and chased out of a township.

When I first got involved in Richmond and Ndaleni, there were other ANC leadership figures there who suddenly disappeared overnight, because it got too hot for them, because of competition within their own ranks.  What happened to those people?

We focus this debate on Ndaleni, Magoda and Richmond, but we must remember that the solution might equally be applied in other areas, Umlazi, Inchanga.  So let us deal with this one properly, and let us try and make some progress.

Political violence could have been stopped a long time ago if there was an honest commitment on the side of politicians.  We asked for this debate especially following a media report in which it was alleged, that the ANC had withheld crucial information on the Richmond and Ndaleni violence for some three years.  We find this an unforgivable transgression.

Sir, the report stated that after the murder of four prominent ANC members in 1994, there was an internal ANC investigation, but no one was ever told of the findings of this investigation.  If they were not concerned about their own ranks, why did they have an internal investigation?

We are told here that the hon member Mr John Jeffery was reluctant or refused to assist in trying to resolve those crimes.  We are told that the police tried to get information, and that even the hon State President's press secretary allegedly made arrangements for the police to see the internal report at Shell House, but when the police arrived they were then sent to someone else, and the report never appeared.  It says, sir, numerous telephone conversations with numerous officials followed for about a year after the murders and yet, the report never surfaced.

Last week we were told by an ANC spokesman that, "We are still investigating", says the ANC, "We are still investigating the allegations, and as soon as we are ready we will make a statement".  The question is, when are they going to be ready to make these statements?

Yesterday, we then had the arrest of Mr Nkabinde, and we hope this is a signal of significant progress, and that we will not only end up with one or two scapegoats, but that all of those who have been involved, either known or covered-up, whatever, will be exposed.

In respect of Richmond, the ANC bears an awesome responsibility, and it is a disgrace that instead of being helpful, that we now see smoke screens, and we create a farce out of this thing.  We trivialise the whole thing and we treat the public like fools.

On the arrest of Mr Nkabinde, the hon Mr Makhaye issues a statement which says that:

	The ANC in KwaZulu-Natal congratulates Mr Bushy Engelbrecht, the Investigation Task Team, the Intelligence Community, members of the SAPS and officers, men and women, the SANDF and everybody else for the arrest of the colleague of Mr Roelf Meyer, Bantu Bonke Holomisa and Tony Leon.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR W U NEL: TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, I am surprised, do they not know him?  I remember that there was a member that had a name that was the name of Petros.  He denied his Lord twice before the cock crowed the third time.  He made his denial just after he had got up, he denied him, but he kept on following him for three years, but he did not know him.  I am surprised.  T/E

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Two minutes left.

MR W U NEL:

TRANSLATION:  Perhaps tomorrow the National Party will say that ~Apartheid~ is something that it does not know, they have forgotten it.  We want to ask from the ANC have you forgotten that there was an hon member, the lion of the Midlands, Mr Harry Gwala, his lieutenant was Sifiso Nkabinde?  Have they forgotten that in 1994 there was an election?  They had a list of names and on that list there was a name Sifiso Nkabinde?  Have they forgotten that last year they took Mr Sifiso Nkabinde and gave him the freedom of Richmond?  Have they forgotten that when the Mayor left before the person that is in the chair today his name was Sifiso Nkabinde, and he held the chair of the ANC?  T/E

Have they forgotten, Mr Speaker, that even in March and April of this year their representatives on the Subcommittee for Flashpoints was Mr Sifiso Nkabinde.  He was their choice.  The very next week he was expelled on information that the ANC, we were told by the ANC itself, they had had for several years.  Now why did they take so long?

The obvious question, is why have they not acted on all these matters earlier?  We want to know whether this is constructive co-operation to eliminate violence.  It will not help to throw up smoke screens here, and to create the impression or try to create the impression that Mr Sifiso Nkabinde is now my colleague and all sorts of irrelevant nonsense.  South Africa is insulted by the way that the ANC treats the public like fools.  This is transparent rubbish, and we expect the ANC to come clean and let us get to grips with violence, not only in Richmond, Magoda and Ndaleni, but throughout our Province.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Nel.  Next on the list is the hon member Mr Ntombela who will speak for five minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!

MR T D NTOMBELA: (Whip): 

TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, I feel embarrassed to speak about this violence which has beset us for so long and which we have talked about for so long.  The truth has come out that that is who is killing the people.  The truth is, Mr Speaker, the time that you have given me has been short, because I would have revealed many truths that have been spoken of for many years.

In my talk today - I am trying to reply to Dumisani, because he says there is a third force, he points to other political parties and organisations and says they too are like that, but the truth is today, the truth has come out, and it has been shown which organisation causes there to be violence in this Province.

Now that Sifiso has been arrested, I am embarrassed to say how short the period is since he has been expelled from the ANC.  For a long time he was in the ANC.  For a long time members of the IFP at Richmond were dying.  For a long time members of the IFP were dying at Impendle, and in the whole Pietermaritzburg region members of the IFP were dying.

People of the Nzimande family were killed at Richmond.  At Pateni they were made to stand against a wall.  Up until today no one has been arrested.  It is said that today if the ANC, three short months after he has been excelled, when members of the ANC are killed, the ANC has gone on a campaign to pressurise the police, to pressurise the magistrates, to pressurise the President to say Sifiso must be arrested.  Indeed Sifiso has now been arrested.  I say today it must be clear to a clever person who wants this country to be governable, that person can see that South Africa has turned into Egypt today.  For this reason - the arrest of Sifiso, I have nothing to do with that, and I do not care about it.

Any one who kills people must be sent to gaol, but what is sad is that the arrests are made on one side only.  When ANC people die people are arrested, when IFP people die no one is arrested.

At Umlazi, Mr Speaker, there was no violence, the violence started when Mxenge died.  The ANC people said Mxenge had been killed by the IFP.  Today it has become clear that it was not IFP people who killed Mxenge, it has become clear they have asked for amnesty, the ANC is quiet, it has closed its mouth.  It says nothing.  Yesterday the President of this country attends rallies and says the hands of the Prince of KwaPhindangene, who is the President of the IFP, are full of blood.  After that Thabo Mbeki came out into the open, came out into the arena into the open and said there was a campaign that Buthelezi was to be killed.

Whose hands are full of blood?  The ANC needs to reply to that.  We have reached a time where the ANC and the IFP need to sit down and see to it that violence comes to an end.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:. [Two minutes].

MR T D NTOMBELA: (Whip): [Makhaye, I am doubtful.  I say, Mr Zuma, sir, Nomalala must discipline Dumisani.  He is saying things which fan violence].

MR D H MAKHAYE:  On a point of order.  On a point of order.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Can we hear the point of order from Mr Makhaye.

MR D H MAKHAYE:  The Dumisani Makhaye is the hon member.  [LAUGHTER]

MR T D NTOMBELA: (Whip): 
TRANSLATION:  If you say so yourself, sir, I also agree.  I say hon Nomalala, if you are still the leader of the ANC in this Province, pull back the hon member Dumisani.  Let him roar in his office, he must not roar on the radio and fan violence.  Dumisani is fanning violence.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER: [One minute left].

MR T D NTOMBELA: (Whip):

TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, at the time when you chased away Sifiso from the position and dealt with the expulsion of Sifiso.  He went and contacted all the parties and said even in the IFP there were informers, and in the National.  Why does Dumisani not say who these informers are?

Mr Speaker, he says there is a third force.  Do you know Richard Sikhosana?  Do you know him?  He belongs to Mkhonto.  He had been obliterating members of the IFP at Mooi River and Estcourt.  Today he is a major in the Defence Force.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:.  [The time of the hon member has expired].

MR T D NTOMBELA: (Whip): 
TRANSLATION:  We will not remain silent and refrain from pointing out the things that are done by the ANC, the ANC causes violence in this Province.  Thank you.  T/E 

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Our next speaker will be the hon member Mr Rajbansi who will speak for three minutes.  Order please.  I wish to make a request to the hon members please.  I know the debate is a heated one, but please let us try and restrain ourselves, because otherwise we are going to waste all of our time.  Mr Rajbansi please.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I want to say that I have a great respect and admiration for the hon David Ntombela, and I regard it as a great honour to follow him.  I do not know his past, and I have great respect for many hon members of this House.  I think we must note that when he was speaking and when the others were speaking there is a friendly animosity in this debate.  [LAUGHTER]

The Richmond issue, as the hon Mr Gordon Haygarth indicated, was debated on numerous occasions.  In this House, in the Portfolio Committee of Safety and Security, we have had the report of the subcommittee.  But, Mr Haygarth emphasised that flowing out of the deliberations of that subcommittee was a recommendation that the Premier of this Province appoint a commission.  I did not support that, and I will not support it, because what is needed was strong police action, not a giant sized headache, tablets to cure a headache, because we must find where the causes are.

It is unfortunate that in this country there have been political killings.  I want to say today with all the frankness at my disposal, because twice the hon Mr Gordon Haygarth referred to the run-up to the 1999 elections.  Yesterday, when I read the headlines in the Daily News about the arrest of a former member of this Legislature, the DP and the NP came in.  When there were killings of local councillors in Richmond, political parties, not the IFP, attack our hon Premier and dragged his name, and said he was responsible, because he has not appointed a Commission of Inquiry.

There is an IFP and there is an IFP.  What I say is that bringing these debates for discussion I want the hon Premier, as the leader of his party in this Province, and the hon Minister of Economic Affairs to note that there are parties in this Province who have commenced the campaign for the 1999 elections, attacking the IFP and attacking the ANC, and no attacks will come from me, because we recognise responsibility.

Why did the Daily News publish yesterday that only the DP and the NP is going to bring this debate, using certain members of the IFP as scapegoats to say that there are three parties.  Look at the speaker's list.  There is not a single Minister participating in this important debate.  We should have had the hon Minister of Safety and Security participating, and also the Premier.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  One minute left.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I want to say to the Premier, that the persons who have been embarrassing you to call for a Commission of Inquiry is one or two individuals who are leading the majority of your members by the nose.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A RAJBANSI:  You should not appoint a Commission of Inquiry.  What has happened with the arrest is what we know.  I was told in this chamber before 1994 that I will be reduced to political dust.  I want to say, if we are looking at violence, you do not have violence against people physically, you commit violence in a non-physical way.

Look at the Hansard of the Separate Amenities Act.  I would like to find out who voted for the Separate Amenities Act in this country, and what destruction the Separate Amenities Act has brought about for these people.  Publish it for the 1999 elections, and you will be shocked to see the names of those people who supported that from all sides of the House.  The House of Assembly was unanimous.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR A RAJBANSI:  I am not an opportunist, I am a realist.  What I say, attack the IFP you will get your name in the press, attack the ANC you will get your name in the press, on the radio, on the TV every day for the 1999 election.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon member's time is over.

MR A RAJBANSI:  This has been put on as a campaign for the 1999 election.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon member, your time is over.

MR A RAJBANSI:  And most of your members who are not serious about this debate have been used as a scapegoat by one or two individuals who want an inquiry, and embarrassing his own Premier.  Thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Next on the list is the hon member Mr Cele who will address the House for eight minutes.

MR B H CELE:  Mr Speaker, the campaign that they have spoken about is a campaign on dead black bodies, not just the campaign, but on black dead bodies.

There has been a stampede on this motion, to such an extent that people had to come together to find out who really moved the motion.  There has been a stampede on this motion.  Some have even threatened to leave the House if it is not said that it is them that brought this motion.

This stampede today is about Richmond, it is not about H-Section, it is not about Qwa-Qwa there where Induna Nkhulwa has been killed, because some people went there to threaten the Induna and the ~Inkosi~ for inviting some speakers of the ANC in that area, and the Induna has been killed in that area, because this makes news.  It is okay for them to debate.

You know who killed the world?  It is not Hitler, it is Goebbels who killed the world.  It is Goebbels who killed the world.  Whether it is "Goebbels" or "Gubels", it does not matter, I am not a German speaker.

AN HON MEMBER:  He was a German.  Who is a German here?

MR B H CELE:  That is the person who killed the world.  Unfortunately that Goebbels did not die with the world then, he still exists.  He wants to make sure that more people die, that Goebbels.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B H CELE:  I do not care what member is that, I am talking about the dying persons, I have not mentioned any, and do not feed me, I am talking about the people, especially blacks that have died in this Province, and you keep quiet if we talk about those people.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Yes, yes, yes.  We bury people here, and they talk too much to make sure that we carry and we kill people, and people die.

AN HON MEMBER:  Do not fight.

MR B H CELE:  I am not fighting.  You listen.  Who killed, the police must answer.  In this Province we are three years old as this body, as this institution, and people have been dying for 16 years we are told by that big book.  There have been police under the National Party here, there have been police under KwaZulu Bantustan here, and since this new Government came ...

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B H CELE:  It has just been the bantustan, no homelands here, it is the bantustan.  Since this new Government came more people have been arrested here, including policemen when it comes to massacres.  Nobody can deny that.  We have been responsible for the police improvement.  We can show the records and their statistics, and tell us why these people have not been arrested all the years.  Please tell us why so many people are dead, yet you have the power to arrest those people and you have not done it.  The only thing you talk about those things instead of doing it.

Governments that have been there.  There were other parties there.  They have never left parliament, they were only talking, but by the time they were talking we were picking up their bodies at Matola, Mozambique, Gaborone, Harare, Zambia.  Today we are still picking up bodies.  This week Eric Nimela who was killed by the police at Ixopo railway station and buried in a shallow grave is exhumed.  Thanks to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B H CELE:  They were there.  The DP was there.  In fact some of Government has been pursuing and killing us.  They should not come in here to be cleaner than thou.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Those in this hon House who are on the receiving end must unite.  People who are on the receiving end must unite and say so to Goebbels, and say so to those who will stand up and preach and come with the statistics that do not give peace in this Province.  Enough is enough.  We urge everybody that when you stand up please begin to contribute to peace in this Province.  It is enough.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Mr Konigkramer is the person that ...

HON MEMBERS:  Hon member.

MR B H CELE:  Hon member Konigkramer is the person who came with the so-called Military Intelligence report, but deliberately and conveniently he always forgets to mention other members that were mentioned in that report.  Please when you sum up Mr Konigkramer, give us the names that were mentioned in that report, not only one, Mr Konigkramer.  Please, hon member.

I hope he will or somebody has told him to shut up.  That is why he is no longer mentioning it, he only remembers Mr Nkabinde.  Maybe those mentioned one day will follow Mr Nkabinde and we will be here saying okay.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Four minutes.

MR B H CELE: [Let the forces that have a common cause come together].

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I think there is a point of order from Mr Powell.  Can we hear the point of order.

MR P POWELL:  Mr Speaker, is the hon member insinuating that there are members of this House, because they were named, who are guilty of criminal activity?

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I think that is a question.  Mr Cele, are you prepared to answer the question?

MR B H CELE:  I am definitely not going to answer this one, because the answer is no, and everybody listened to what I said here.  They have a right to their insinuations, but I made a statement, everybody understood.  Unless you do not want to understand it, you are not going to understand and that is not my business.

To the leadership here, to Mbomvu and to Msholozi, lead us to peace, lead us to the land of honey and milk.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Please refuse those people that are taking us back to Egypt.  Please tell them to let us cross the Red Sea so that we can begin to work in this Province in a proper manner.  Enough is enough.  I thank you, Mr Speaker and your House.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Cele.  Next to speak is the hon member Mr Mkhwanazi who will speak for three minutes.


MR J D MKHWANAZI:.  It is with a very heavy heart that I have to address this House on the matter of violence once again.  Two and a half years I have been standing on the same floor pleading with our people that we must stop killing one another.

It is true that we have gone a long way perhaps from what we were in 1994, but I think we have not worked hard enough.  I sit here listening.  I mean it is a very heated debate.  People speak at the top of their voices.  Thank God this ceiling is very high otherwise we would have burst our eardrums.

What I am trying to say, Mr Speaker, is that I think this debate should help us to come to a peaceful solution.  I understand all that has happened.  People have analysed the whole thing, but I think what is important to each and every one of us here is that what value are we going to get out of this debate.  Is this debate going to take us nearer peace or is it just political manoeuvring, somebody called it campaigning?

I am not impressed by that kind of thing.  What I would like us to do is to reach a situation where we will reduce the deaths in our areas.  It is a fact that politicians or political parties have benefitted from using violence to get more members.  This is a fact.  Some of us go to these places and people tell you that this is the area of this organisation, do not bring a new thing here.  You are going to cause violence.

Now as long as we have that kind of attitude we will not solve the problems of this Province, and of this country.  I therefore appeal, Mr Speaker, to all of us perhaps to re-tune our minds and think what we are going to benefit from this debate.  After this debate will we be able to say it was worthwhile debating, because we have gone so far away from all this.  I appeal to all our people.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Half a minute left.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  In this half a minute, I must re-emphasise, Mr Speaker, that it is absolutely futile for us to make the noises and let the poor people die there, when we ourselves pontify here, and do not die.  I thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon member.  I now call upon the hon member Mr Burrows to address the House for seven minutes.

MR R M BURROWS:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  There is one point I think we can all agree on, and I have heard it expressed.  We are very pleased that arrests have taken place.  We are very pleased that there will be trials.  We are very pleased that witnesses will be called forward, and hopefully protected whilst they give evidence.  I do not think there can be any disagreement in the House.

From the point of view of the Democratic Party, I need to say that I sat across the table from Bantu Holomisa and Roelf Meyer on two occasions with their colleagues, and said to them myself, "The Democratic Party will have nothing to do with your organisation whilst Sifiso Nkabinde is in your ranks in a leading leadership position".  Hear it, and hear it now.  You expelled him.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR R M BURROWS:  You expelled him.  We are not picking him up at all.  Please understand, Mr Speaker, that the matter goes back to the 1980s.  It is not a matter since he was expelled from the ANC.  It goes back a long way.

Those of us who served, and there are members on both side all around this House who served on the Natal Dispute Resolution Committee, will remember the discussions, the debates, the hearings, the people who gave evidence, the refugees from the IFP, from the ANC, from that area who brought the issue of the Richmond violence before that Committee.  How we developed programmes, social and economic, reconstruction and development programmes for those refugees who are still refugees.  Seven/eight years later they are still refugees from Richmond.  So it is not a matter that has suddenly appeared, it has been there.  We have talked about it year in and year out and will continue to do so.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR R M BURROWS:  Now, we raised it in April, we raised it last year.  I can produce the damn motions if you do not believe me.

My colleague has asked the question, when did the ANC know that Sifiso Nkabinde, as they allege, was a police spy?  I have said previously on two occasions in this House, and now I go back nearly two years, that the President of this country, the leader of the ANC, in my company, in my leader's company, described Mr Nkabinde as a criminal - two years ago.

I want to know, when you knew he was a police spy.  Here are the Hansards.  Here are your speeches defending him.  Not my speeches, your speeches defending him.  So from that point of view we have got to get that clarification.

The second question is, if the National Party regime recruited him as a spy from 1994, he was the ANC's police spy, because the ANC is the Government of this country, not the National Party, and the ANC is the Minister of Safety and Security.  I just ask this stupid question.  There must presumably be a list of police informers in place, and I would have presumed that the Minister of Safety and Security would have said, "Give me the list of your informers".
ine 
I want to ask the question, how many more people in the ANC and other ranks are police informers, and do the ANC know who they are.

AN HON MEMBER:  Like Stompie.

MR R M BURROWS:  And will they stand up and tell us.  Those are the kinds of questions.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR R M BURROWS:  Yes, we agree, Mr Speaker.

AN HON MEMBER:  Cebekhulu.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, there is a right-wing element that was involved in destabilising Richmond.  There were people on farms in the area who were running military camps.  We now it.  The evidence is there. 

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR R M BURROWS:  And Mr Konigkramer acknowledged it, and the ANC acknowledges it.  So it is broad agreement, that the police are involved.  That is why, when we look at what The Natal Witness said this morning.  "It is widely believed that no role-player in the Richmond area, the NCF, the ANC, the IFP, the SANDF, the SAPS has clean hands".  I think that is right in the Richmond area, and I think that is why we have got to get to the issue of a Commission of Inquiry.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MR R M BURROWS:  Which we have proposed in the past.  Quite frankly, we have tried it again today.  Can we get this House to accept an unopposed motion proposing a Commission of Inquiry?  The last time we tried the IFP opposed it.  This time the ANC is opposing it.  We are not going to get it.  Somebody somewhere does not want the full truth to be told.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MR R M BURROWS:  We have given 550 pages of documents on the Richmond business to the TRC.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Two minutes.

MR R M BURROWS:  Let us get what we can out of the court cases, let us get what we can out of the TRC position.

What is the most dangerous situation, with respect, Mr Speaker, is not Richmond as such, it is the kind of position the hon Mr Cele was putting, which is that a deal can be struck behind closed doors between one party and another party.

AN HON MEMBER:  Ja, scandalous.

MR R M BURROWS:  To cover up all their misdeeds.  Quite frankly, that is why we supported the TRC, that is why they supported the TRC, because we need exposure, not cover up.  It has got to happen, and it has got to happen over all Natal violence.

So we have opposed the kinds of deals that have been suggested in the past, and we will oppose them in the future.  We have got to go through the court cases, and if the court cases do not occur then we have got to go through an exposed TRC process to tell the truth about all the violence.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!  Well done.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Our next speaker will be the hon member Mrs Galea who will address the House for six minutes.

MRS C E GALEA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The increasing violence is degrading to the basic rights of individuals, the right to life, the right to freedom of movement as well.  Every law-abiding man, woman and child, old or young, rich or poor, deprived or privileged, is subject to this disastrous atmosphere of a crime culture which has taken root in our land every single minute of the day.

For many years some organisations have denigrated the police service and inculcated a spirit of non-co-operation, disobedience, ungovernability and violence.  There is still mistrust, antagonism, and even open hostility in some sections of the community towards the police.

There is a growing realisation that in the absence of community support neither more money, more manpower, better technology, nor more authority will enable the police to shoulder the monumental burden of crime.

Mr Speaker, as mentioned by the hon member Mr Haygarth, on numerous occasions my party, the National Party, has asked for a judicial Commission of Inquiry.  This has fallen on deaf ears.  The subcommittee who met on Richmond also gave their report earlier this year to the Safety and Security Committee, which has been mentioned by a number of hon members, who gave support to this.  I think it was only hon member Mr Rajbansi who did not support it, the request for the Premier to establish a Commission of Inquiry.  To date we have had no response.  Hopefully today something will come forward, something positive.

We read of the continued killings in this area.  One death is too many, and we offer condolences to the families and friends of those who have been killed.  Here as many people have said, we talk and there is lots of hot air, but nothing actually happens at the end of the day.

The residents in the area do not feel secure.  I appeal to all parties to work together with the police, the SANDF, POPS and whoever is doing the investigations.  This is the duty of all political parties, and it should be done if we are sincere about bringing peace to this Province, and that is to work with the people who are trying to do these investigations.  We must get these criminal elements arrested, and prosecuted.  It is no good arresting them, because sometimes they go on bail, there must be sufficient evidence to actually prosecute them.

Perhaps our Witness Protection Scheme should be strengthened.  Unless people are prepared to change their attitudes towards the police services, and work with them at local level, crime and violence will continue.

We have many challenges before us, but let crime prevention be priority number one.  In closing, I encourage the public to become involved in community policing so that we can bring peace into all areas, including Richmond.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Galea.  I now call upon the hon Minister Ndebele to address the House for 12 minutes.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I too do not know why this matter has been brought here.  I also realise that from the side of the IFP, 29 minutes have been given, 24 of which have gone to one person.  It is clear that it is a one-man show.  It is one person who wants to push this thing, it is not the IFP.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  We have just emerged as a democratic state, and those of us who fought for this democracy know that you can never take it for granted.  It can be derailed, it can be reversed.  People thought that democracies that emerged after the First World War would not be derailed, would not be reversed.  Very few countries survived.  Sweden and Switzerland amongst the few.  Spain went under, Italy went under, Germany went under, because the democratic forces were overpowered by the anti-democratic forces in those countries.

HON MEMBER:  Including the Communist Party.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  At one time there was a very interesting episode where two very zealous journalists were arguing, during the time when people were still arguing whether Hitler was a fascist or not.  The German journalist was arguing with an American journalist.  They were in America.  The American journalist was saying that in his country he can say anything.  For instance, he can say, "Down with Roosevelt", and nothing will happen, but you cannot do that in your own country.  You cannot do it in Germany, and this one was defending that, "No, Germany is democratic.  I can also do it", and when they were in Berlin the German journalist also shouted, "Down with Roosevelt.  You see, nothing happens to me.  I am in Berlin and saying down with Roosevelt and nothing happens".

What is the moral here?  The moral, that runs through this is a programme of an anti-ANC front by one young man called Tony Leon.  He called for an anti-democratic front, anti-ANC front which was going to be made up of all the discredited elements in this country.  There is something very common with the people that he wanted to constitute this front with.  Something very common, and it is something that should worry all of us.

The hon Mr Danie Schutte might not be my greatest friend, but I did want him to win the leadership of the National Party simply because I know who he is.  He is a lawyer, anybody can trace him.  There was no time when he deceived anybody, and was a spy.  I did not want this van Schalkwyk to win, because he has been a spy.  A spy can never be trusted.  He spied against his own students.  That is the leadership that you have now, led by a spy who spied against his own students.

You go to Roelf Meyer.  Who is Roelf Meyer?  Again, another leader of spies.  He was a Deputy Minister in charge of Intelligence.  Who is Holomisa?  Another trainee of the Military Intelligence.  That is what comes in.  I therefore worry very much when the hon Mr Konigkramer goes into that company and quotes profusely from sources that are known only to himself.  Where does he get these intelligence reports?  Only him.

Mr Tony Leon, I do not know him.  He is too young for me to know.  I do not know his father either, I know only the people he sentenced.  [LAUGHTER]

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Yes, I only know those.  But I know that the old PFP precisely when it reached this crisis, the honest members of the PFP, the Slabberts, the Cronjes, the Mike Tarrs left that party precisely.  The hon member Mr Nel was talking about Peter denying Jesus three times.

I remember I was on Robben Island, I remember when I relied on the PFP to stand up when the boers went to raid and killed our comrades in Matola.  The PFP sided with them.  When they raided and killed our people in Maseru they voted with the fascist National Party.  When they killed our people in Lusaka they voted with those people, and today they want this anti-fascist front to come together.  What do you use?  They want to come together with these military men, the Holomisas, and the Roelf Meyers and the van Schalkwyks.  [LAUGHTER]  They want to come together with those today and pick a few disgruntled people, the hon Mr Konigkramer from the IFP.  Nobody in the IFP is interested in this thing, it is only Mr Konigkramer and you wonder what the agenda is.  It is not the IFP agenda this.  It is not an ANC agenda.  It is the agenda of Military Intelligence, the old Military Intelligence.

What has also been very, very worrying is that the methods that the DP shows of its men with consciences and women with consciences, the Cronjes and the Mike Tarrs, shown of those people with a conscience, they have been using the police, the network of the police here in Pietermaritzburg.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is a lie.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  I will tell you.  I will tell you.  When the hon Mr Burrows sat together with the military people, Roelf Meyer and Holomisa, their main obstacle was that how do you unite with people.  When Roelf Meyer and Holomisa went to Port Elizabeth University, the students said, "You are dripping with blood.  You work with Nkabinde".  When they went to Pretoria, people said, "You are dripping with blood.  You work with Nkabinde".  When they went to Ngoye they said, "You are dripping with blood.  You work with Nkabinde".  Therefore an attempt was made through very sinister connections between the DP and the police here in Pietermaritzburg.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Speaker, may I ask the hon Minister a question?

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  No, I will not answer it.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Is the hon Minister prepared to take a question?

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  No, I will not.  I will not take a question.  What is burning you?  With very sinister forces in the Alexandra Police Station here.  They come with the headline in The Natal Witness on Monday, which wanted to shift the blame from the Nkabindes to say the ANC is also involved.  You now had citations that the ANC covered up and so forth.

Then we went to the police.  We called the police.  On record, we have got it in writing.  We said where did Mr John Jeffery ever hide this thing.  There is the statement from the police.  They know no such matter, but a journalist working with the police here in Maritzburg and the DP published a front page story to say that the whole problem in Richmond is that the ANC covered up.  What ANC?  There is the story.  What is it?  Is that good enough.  It is not good enough at all.  [LAUGHTER]  Yes.

But, the connections go further with the DP.  We know one policeman last year, June 26 last year, we were contesting an election with a policeman here at Alexandra Police Station.  That policeman was standing for the DP.  Sergeant Cramer was standing for the DP.

MR R M BURROWS:  May I ask him about the policeman who is ANC in Howick.  The ANC policeman in Howick.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  I am not taking any question.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon member is not taking the question.

MR R M BURROWS:  Tell us about him.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Yes, we defeated that policeman of the DP, and that is the policeman that feeds The Natal Witness with very crooked stories.  One time, just for your information, hon Mr Burrows, that very Natal Witness reporter one time was fed by those very police at Alexandra Police Station, fed information to the effect that Mr Makhaye, this Dumisani Makhaye was caught driving while drunk, and it points to that one journalist.  Mr Dumisani Makhaye has not drank even sacramental wine for four years.  The fact of the matter, why does this policeman link up with this one journalist to discredit the ANC on behalf of the DP?  Why is it?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Two minutes left.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  We have a situation here, hon members of the ANC, hon members of the IFP.  I think we must not play into the hands of minority people who fight minority interests.  98% of the mainstream media in this Province, and in South Africa support the 2% DP.  That is what we have, and that is what they will say will echo throughout the world, and now they have forced us to sit one and a half hours here to discuss a non-issue when they have just sat with Mr Konigkramer to say, "Let us concoct this sort of thing".

I will ask very seriously, members of the media, and to say today nobody is above criticism.  Judges are not above criticism.  If we, for instance, who come from Robben Island were to say anybody who comes from Robben Island cannot make a mistake, we defend each other no matter what.  It will be wrong, it will be immoral, it will be incestuous.  Let us leave this matter of saying that any time.  Mr Patrick Hlongwane has come up to say how that, what is this thing, the thing that was formed?

AN HON MEMBER:  REC.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  The Returned Exiles Committee.  It was formed with journalists sitting there to plan together and publicise those matters.  We want journalists to stand up and expose amongst themselves, just like we in the ANC will stand up and expose amongst ourselves, hon Mr Ntombela, we will expose any third force within us.  We want the IFP to do the same.  We want journalists to do the same.  We want Judges to do the same.  That is what reconciliation is about.  Not for us to defend each other and say, like the DP used to tell us, support Malan when you attack Matola and so forth to their shame.  That is why Slabbert left.  That is why Mike Tarr left.  That is why the Cronjes left, because to their shame you were standing up with the fascists in a fascist raid to fight against democracy.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  The hon Minister's time is over.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  To wind up, I say I thank you, Mr Speaker, for tabling an unnecessary motion before us.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  Finally, I wish to call upon the hon member Mr Konigkramer to respond to the debate.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will be brief.  I just want to say in all seriousness that I have found the address delivered by the hon Minister deeply distressing for a number of reasons.  First of all, the attacks on the media.  Secondly, for the attacks on minorities.  Thirdly, to insinuate that might is right.

Mr Speaker, I have the greatest respect for him now, he also attacked me personally, and he made some very wild allegations which I would like to dispel.  Let me assure you, Mr Minister, and members of this House, that there was a meeting of the IFP caucus this morning which was attended by all the members at which the times allocated to the individuals were selected by the caucus and unanimously approved.  So I presume what the hon Minister is saying ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, could I be protected.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Mr Konigkramer, you are protected.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, he gravely insults the intelligence of the caucus.  So I would really ask that he consider more careful those sort of very silly remarks, and I will demonstrate just now to you how silly they are.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, I want to deal very briefly with arms caches.  The hon Minister of Health asked the question about the arms caches.  I cannot answer that question, but what I would like to ask you, sir, is it your police, your ANC police that are in charge.  Why did they not arrest those people?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please, Mr Cele.  Can we all please restrain ourselves.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, there is evidence which was produced to the Goldstone Commission that those arms caches emanated from the Transkei.  So I would suggest to you, hon Minister, that you enquire as to where those come from and particularly you need to establish why Mr Nkabinde was allowed to keep those arms caches for so long.

The other question that has been raised repeatedly is why do we concentrate on Richmond.  I think it has been answered in general terms, but I want to say to you, sir, that I would happily deal with other areas.  For example, let us just deal with Inchanga.  At Inchanga exactly the same thing happened as in Richmond.  An hon member of this House persuaded the police to withdraw from that area, and I am looking straight at him, he persuaded the police to withdraw from that area after internecine violence between ANC factions.  After the police withdrew six people were murdered.

Mr Speaker, and I would address myself now to the hon leader of the ANC, where is the internal ANC report into those killings?  Are we dealing with another report as we have had at Richmond?

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, there have been insinuations by a number of members, but particular by the hon Minister of Transport, insinuating that I have got something to do with Intelligence.  Let me just say this to you, that the Intelligence reports which I have in my possession were given to me by this Parliament, and I would suggest that you read them, sir.  They were given to me by this Parliament.  I have got them from nowhere, and just to counter your insinuations, when I asked your Major General of Natal Command to give me simple answers to questions he hides behind National Intelligence.  What is this?  What is going on here?

Mr Speaker, I want to conclude, and I want to make this observation.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, we can sit in this House and we can berate each other, but at the end of the day you are never going to have peace until you have justice.  There is no way that you are going to have peace unless you have justice.  The only way that you can get to justice is to expose the truth.

Therefore, just now to address myself again specifically to the Minister who made very serious allegations, I want to say to you that we on this side of the House have decided that we will once again get a legal opinion as to whether we have the competence to appoint such a Commission which the hon members opposite have challenged.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, could I be protected.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please!  Order please!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, if that opinion is that we in KwaZulu-Natal have that power, we will appoint that Commission of Inquiry.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Konigkramer.  We have now come to the end of our debate.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  We just have to round off our business for the day.  I just have one announcement to make, that in fact the hon members have already begun to use the new arrangement for the provision of water in this House.  There are two water tanks at the corners.  So if somebody wants to have a glass of water he just indicates to the messengers and they will give you a glass of water.  I think members are already doing that.  So that is a new arrangement.  Water is not going to be put in front on our tables as from today.  That is the one announcement.

Before we wrap up our proceedings, I wish to call upon the hon Premier to make whatever announcements he might have.

THE PREMIER:  Well, there is no announcement other than to thank the members for a very lively debate.  Thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Can I just ask for your indulgence, Mr Speaker?

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  You are welcome.

THE PREMIER:  We had a discussion today in the Cabinet Committee, and we decided that as late as it is, we must let the people of KwaZulu-Natal know that on Saturday there will be the traditional ceremony of Umhlanga at Ehyokeni starting at 10 o'clock.  It is called the Reed Dance in English.  It does not really make much sense when translated like that.  [LAUGHTER]  But anyway, it is that ceremony.  Thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon Premier.  At this juncture I wish to declare the House adjourned sine die.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 17:41 SINE DIE



		DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FOURTH SESSION
	 SIXTH SITTING - FIRST SITTING DAY
	TUESDAY, 18 NOVEMBER 1997

THE HOUSE MET AT 14:04 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, ~ULUNDI~.  THE SPEAKER TOOK THE CHAIR AND READ THE PRAYER.

THE SPEAKER:  

2.	OBITUARIES AND OTHER CEREMONIAL MATTERS

3.	ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS OR AFFIRMATION

4.	ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER

I have received a request from the Women's National Coalition for the Provincial Parliament to open its doors for them to pose questions pertaining to their campaign of "No violence against women".  After consultation with the Whips, we have decided to accommodate them on 27 November 1997 at ten in the morning.  Questions will be received in advance and will be directed to some members of Cabinet.  Copies thereof will be given to Ministers as soon as they have been received.

I think I should also take this opportunity to say that I have been invited, with all the other Speakers, to the Northern Province on the 26th of this month for the Speaker's Forum, which means I will be away for a few days.

Having said so, I take this opportunity to call upon the Premier or the Minister in his place.  I am placed in a rather unfavourable position, because I will not accept that Dr Sutcliffe is in the place of the Premier to make announcements.  I suppose in that event I will skip this item until later, when it will be possible to carry on with it.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

Any tabling of reports.  I am afraid not.

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS 

I will call upon Mr Rajbansi first, and then Mr Nel to move their motions.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I submitted a request to you in terms of the Rules relating to a matter of public importance.  If you have not given a ruling then the matter lies still.

THE SPEAKER:  I will grant that this matter be discussed, but on the 26th of this month and not today.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker, except that I was trying to avoid a protest march this Saturday, but nevertheless let it take place, and I will participate in the march in a very friendly manner.

THE SPEAKER:  Unfortunately this Parliament cannot be run in terms of marches.  I will call upon Mr Nel to move his motion.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, I would advise, that following discussions between the Whips, the matter that I put on the table will also stand over until next week.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Nel.

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

The Chief Whip please.  Mr Volker?

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, under tabling of reports.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR V A VOLKER:  It has just been brought to my notice that the tabling of the report of the Auditor-General, the special report on Annual Financial Statements outstanding, and Arrear Audit Reports in respect of local authorities in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal is now available.  I would like to place it on the table.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Chairman of Public Accounts.  The messenger will please collect the reports.  The Chief Whip please.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, you will be aware that this short session was called primarily to deal with NCOP matters.  Many of the items remaining on the Order Paper have already been dealt with by NCOP, and I request, Mr Speaker, that you afford the Chairman of NCOP an opportunity to address the House on progress in his Committee.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Chief Whip.  It is my pleasure to call upon the Chairman of NCOP to lead us in this connection.

MR P POWELL:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I can report that the NCOP Standing Committee has met, and entertained motions on all the Bills on the Order Paper.  If you would permit me to deal with them individually.

The Public Service Law Second Amendment Bill was disposed of, having received the necessary 75% support in the Committee.  The Financial and Fiscal Commission Bill was similarly supported.  The Revenue Funds Interim Arrangements Bill was supported.  The Chiropractors, Homeopaths and Allied Health Service Professions Amendment Bill was supported.

Mr Speaker, the Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Bill was considered, but there was not the required 75% majority, and accordingly I believe that will be resolved in the House.

The same applies to the Medical, Dental and Supplementary Health Service Professions Amendment Bill where there was also not the required 75% majority.

Mr Speaker, the Water Services Bill was supported.  There were, however, clear guidelines given by the Committee that speakers representing the Province would highlight certain potential problems, which the Province had identified in the negotiation phase.  These related to the issue of unfunded mandates, and also to a lesser extent the relationship between provinces and the National Government on the provision of water supply.

I am pleased to report that on the Welfare Laws Amendment Bill, the Province was successful in persuading the other provinces in the National Council of Provinces to support all of the proposed amendments.  The Standing Committee was therefore in the pleasant position of unanimously supporting the Bill with amendments as tabled by KwaZulu-Natal.

Mr Speaker, the Education Laws Amendment Bill, the Committee considered the Bill and was unable to achieve the 75% majority.  The Housing Bill, similarly, KwaZulu-Natal tabled fairly extensive amendments.  Once again, I am pleased to report that these amendments were accepted by the other provinces.  The Committee can therefore report that it supported the Bill with amendments.

The final Bill that was considered by the Committee was the Independent Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Bill.  Here once again, the necessary 75% was attained, and the matter was disposed of.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Just before you sit down, Mr Chairman of NCOP.  The Bills therefore that will come before the House are 815, 816 and 819?

MR P POWELL:  That is correct, sir.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I do have a list in front of me of the Education Laws Amendment Bill.  We will start with it even though it does not come seriatim in terms of the Order Paper.  I do not think there is any objection to that.  I will deal with it as such.  I do have the following people.  The DP Chairman who will address the House for five minutes on this Bill.  The hon Mr Burrows please.

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES:
EDUCATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL [B85B - 97]

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, the Education Laws Amendment Bill is a Bill, on which there has been a great deal of controversy in the National Legislature.  It is a Bill on which there are clear divisions within this House.  If I may deal with the Bill first of all, from the point of view of where the controversy arises.

There are in fact only three significant controversial areas in this 23 clause Bill.  The remaining 20 clauses are of a technical nature where certain amendments to the South African Schools Act or amendments to the National Education Policy Act consequential upon passing of the final Constitution are made.  The controversial areas are as follows:

In clause 6(11) there is a reference to the governing body employed educators and 


non-educators.  6(11) would read as follows or is proposed to read as follows:

		That after consultation, as contemplated in section 5 of the National Education Policy Act, that is consultation with the other Ministers of Education, the National Minister may determine norms and standards by notice in the Gazette regarding the funds used for the employment of staff referred to in subsections 4 and 5, but such norms and standards may not be interpreted to make the State a joint employer of such staff.

Now the controversy around this rests in the fact that:

		The National Minister is given powers to determine certain norms and standards after consultation with the other Ministers ..."

But note, not in consultation with -

		... by which parent collected funds may be utilised at a school.

So if we were to take examples, that a school which has its staff ration reduced by a national norm determined by the same Minister, then the same Minister may not allow that school, and this is a possibility, to re-employ the people that that school is forced to terminate.  It is one of these very controversial areas where in fact the rights of the governing body, and the rights of individual parents, to spend the funds which they have voted and collected themselves in the manner of employing staff, which they choose for that school whether they be educators or non-educators.

The proposal is vested in the proposition that there should be a norm equality of staff ration across the face of the country.

From the Democratic Party's point of view, Mr Speaker, we believe that this clause proposes that we should go to the lowest common denominator, and in fact that the norm of the worst staffed schools would apply rather than moving those worse staffed schools upwards to a better staff ration.

The second major controversial area is that appending to clause 17(c) of the Bill whereby a public school, now here we are talking about staff employed by the State, but at a public school:

		A public school shall make its recommendations regarding the employment of staff, from candidates identified by the employer, if the number of posts on the establishment contemplated in section 3(1) and 5(3) is reduced by the employer, due to operational requirements, as contemplated in the Labour Relations Act.

The effect of this, Mr Speaker, is simply to make it necessary for all public schools, when filling vacancies, to fill them from a so-called redeployment list.

Now a redeployment list is created in this Province when the 800 schools which are in excess of their State teacher ration, give up certain posts or give up certain teachers.  They appear to be listed in that redeployment list.  So at the end of the day the school at which Dr Sutcliffe's children attend, would not have the right to choose the best teacher that they choose.  They would be forced to take a teacher from a redeployment list, even though there may be better teachers available.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!  Order please, Dr Sutcliffe.

MR A RAJBANSI:  On a point of order, Mr Speaker.  Is it parliamentary for the hon Dr Mike Sutcliffe to suggest to the hon Mr Roger Burrows that he might be redeployed in 1999?  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Whilst I will not go into the question of the unparliamentary or non-parliamentary nature of such reference to the hon member Mr Burrows, I certainly would like Dr Sutcliffe to close his mouth whilst the other mouth is talking.  [LAUGHTER]

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, since we are discussing the Education Laws, I think that should be an education law in this Parliament as well.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  I hope so.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, the controversy vests in the powers that the original South African Schools Act passed last year, gave to the governing body to employ the teachers they chose as best or to choose people coming out of universities and colleges.  By this amendment they are forced to take people from a redeployment list.

It is controversial, it has been opposed in the Portfolio Committee.  The Portfolio Committee itself, by a majority vote, opposes the Bill, because at NCOP there was a disinclination to remove the two clauses necessary.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR R M BURROWS:  As a result, sir, 75% was not obtained in the NCOP.  It comes before the House, and I propose that this House mandates its representatives to oppose this Bill in the NCOP.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Let us get this clear.  I expect order in this House.  If people are unable to hold their peace, and disturb the proceedings, I will have no alternative but to ask them to leave the House.  This is not my intention.  I do not want to do it.  Please do not force my hand to do what I do not want to do.  We will therefore proceed.  There is no provision here for the IFP for ten minutes.  I will accordingly call upon Mr Xaba of the ANC to address the House for six minutes.  For 10 minutes, that is Mr Rehman.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Well, thank you very much, I thought you were not there.

MR M F REHMAN:  Mr Speaker, we in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal would approve striving towards equal quality education for all, but would caution against Minister Bhengu's Bill which would result in equality, but a poor standard of education for all.

We in the IFP support greater parent participation in governing bodies, as opposed to the lessening of powers of governing bodies in the Bill.

Whilst we understand that the Minister wishes to keep school fees affordable, it makes no other sense to curtail the standards of those schools that have the ability to raise extra finance.  In effect, this takes away the powers of the governing bodies, and therefore parents.

This Bill only allows the school to choose educators based upon the list of teachers that the Department has supplied.  This does not allow for employment of the possibly better educators that the school may wish to employ.  The list comprises educators who have been declared superfluous by other schools, and are therefore possibly not the best educators available.

Mr Speaker, I would like to quote an article by the well-known Mamphela Ramphela which appeared in the Sunday Times on 9 November 1997:

		Attempts by the Government to sneak in an amendment to the Schools Bill to nullify the success of Grove High Primary School's High Court challenge to secure governing bodies' rights to use the escape clause to recruit suitable teachers have serious implications for our young democracy.  Respect for proper parliamentary procedures to ensure public participation in the formulation of policies lies at the heart of our hard won democratic system.

Mr Speaker, it is surprising that the ANC in the National Government have approved the original Bill without any amendments.  We in the IFP oppose the Bill.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  May I now call upon Mr Xaba of the ANC to address the House.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  I am not too clear whether we are in the House or not now.  It has not been the habit of this House to see going on what I now see going on.  I have been given to understand that the Ministers are all coming rather on the late side on account of the weather.  The aeroplanes which brought them have been delayed.  That has been brought to my notice.  So I thought at least I would let the House know that, otherwise it seems rather out of the way that the Ministers are not here.  I therefore plead for the patience of the House to wait for that time without having to stop the proceedings of the House.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  I do not know who has one minute left, I do not have any minutes.  [LAUGHTER]  I can speak the whole day and you shut up.  [LAUGHTER]  We will now proceed.  I will call upon the hon Mr Edwards.  Oh Mr Xaba.  Mr Xaba has not stood up.  I am sorry.  Mr Xaba.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Xaba please.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, this is a landmark Bill we are debating today.  It seeks to bring about transformation in our country.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR V C XABA:  Mr Speaker, I want to say this.  That what was clearly evident during the debate of this Bill was that the core of the old ruling block, represented principally by the National Party and the Democratic Party, has not abandoned its struggle to frustrate the process of transformation.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR V C XABA:  The voting patterns in the National Assembly bear testimony to this fact.  The white parties voted against this Bill.

AN HON MEMBER:  Because you are a member of a black party.

MR V C XABA:  The IFP, the PAC ...

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  Order! Order please.

MR V C XABA:  And the ANC stood together and voted for the Bill.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.  Let the speaker have the floor without interference.  Least would I expect an old member like  Mr Schutte to say anything like that.  Will the hon member please proceed.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I see no reason for them to become so agitated, because they know who they are.  They know the difference between what I represent and what they represent.

AN HON MEMBER:  What is that?

MR V C XABA:  They represent white interests.

AN HON MEMBER:  What do you represent?

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR V C XABA:  And we represent broader interests.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Nel.  On a point of order please.  Mr Nel.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, would the speaker take a question?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Are you prepared to take the question Mr Xaba? 

MR V C XABA:  No, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

AN HON MEMBER:  Ja, he would not.  

MR V C XABA:  Mr Burrows, alluded to the fact that the public schools, would not be allowed to go out of this list and get the best educators they need.

MR R M BURROWS:  That is true.

MR V C XABA:  The hon Mr Burrows is in fact missing the point here.  If he is in fact so honourable, as it has been correctly pointed out.

MR R M BURROWS:  Well, unlike the dishonourable members on my right.  [LAUGHTER]

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Mr Speaker, I apologise for this point of order.

THE SPEAKER:  On a point of order.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I would ask you to please request that the hon Burrows withdraws the statement he made.  He very clearly made a statement to say the dishonourable members to his right.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Burrows?

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, if my colleagues on the right are allowed to cast a phrase that I am less than honourable I remove the aspersion that they are dishonourable.  They are all less than honourable.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Well, let that pass on a 50/50 basis.  The hon member, Mr Xaba, you do now have exactly two minutes to complete your task.

MR V C XABA:  No, thank you, Mr Speaker.  The problem here, the nub issue is that schools in Nklandla and Nqutu do not have posts, because those posts are concentrated in the historically advantaged schools.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR V C XABA:  The people who are occupying these posts, who happen to be white, Mr Speaker, are unwilling to be transferred to those areas where they are needed most.  What this Bill seeks to do is that even though they are unwilling for some reasons, but those posts will have to be transferred to those schools.

THE SPEAKER:  One minute left for you to summarise.  One minute only for you to wind-up.  However much you want to say.

MR V C XABA:  In this case, Mr Speaker, we from the ANC side will support the Bill.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE SPEAKER:  Order! Order please.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Edwards to address the House.

MR B V EDWARDS:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I am somewhat dumbfounded at the last comments of the hon Mr Xaba, really playing racism in this Province, and in the country.  It really is totally unnecessary in these democratic days.  I am very surprised at him and his party.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.  Mr Mabuyakhulu, I will not have that.  [LAUGHTER]  If you are tired of sitting in this House say so, and you can march out.

MR B V EDWARDS:  The legislation before us was initially brought before the Education Portfolio Committee of the National Assembly to bring about technical and consequential amendments.  However, at the eleventh hour the ANC, through their Chairman, Mr Blade Nzimande, introduced substantive new amendments which the National Party cannot support, and other parties here obviously cannot either.

It is interesting to note that the IFP supported these amendments in the National Assembly, but sanity has, however, prevailed, and the IFP in this Legislature has now come out in opposition to the Bill.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR B V EDWARDS:  Education in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal finds itself in a parlous state, and I cannot see the ANC helping it the way they are carrying on.

The deficit in funding for this Province for the current fiscal year is expected to be some R800 to R900 million, and this does relate to the Bill.  Taking the average funding in South Africa at a base of 100, KwaZulu-Natal in 96/97 was 93%, and now in 97/98 at 88%, whereas Gauteng and the Western Cape I will mention are both in excess of 130%.

This Province is not in any way assisted by the proposed Bill.  We are underfunded, and we see schools struggling to provide teachers.  We are talking about a lay-off of some 10 000 temporary teachers.  It may be 20 000, and this is a national directive.  This could be 25% of the teacher workforce.  Schools will close, they will be crippled.  No new schools will open.

Clause 6 of the Bill gives the National Minister more central power, to restrict governing bodies from employing additional staff that are required, and to fund their staff in an effort to maintain standards, and we need educational standards.  Education is our lifeblood.  It is one of the few remaining assets we have.

AN HON MEMBER:  What about bantu education?

MR B V EDWARDS:  Bantu education at one stage was outstanding until they burnt the schools down.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR B V EDWARDS:  Even if those parents, those governing bodies were prepared to work to the end of keeping education standards up, the powers of the people, the governing body, the Provincial Minister are being totally eroded, and we cannot support that this happens.

Clause 17(c) creates a situation of again enabling the National Minister to set levels of posts at schools in excess of his norms.  They have again taken the power away from this Provincial Legislature and our Provincial Minister, and placed educators on a redeployment list.

THE SPEAKER:  Only one minute, Mr Edwards.

MR B V EDWARDS:  And being forced to be redeployed or be dismissed.  Can we force people to be redeployed or dismissed?  Is this an infringement on human rights or not?  Of course it is.

THE SPEAKER:  One minute, Mr Edwards.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B V EDWARDS:  I believe totally in human rights, and you know that.

THE SPEAKER:  You were given only three.

MR B V EDWARDS:  The ANC boasts to be the protagonists of human rights, but here they are infringing on people's human rights.  For these reasons, Mr Speaker, I think it is very clear that the National Party cannot support this Bill.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  I will now call upon the hon Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Rajbansi, just a minute.  I have to draw to your attention that in terms of the list I have you have only got two minutes.  I do not know why, because normally you talk longer than two minutes.  [LAUGHTER]  They have given you exactly two minutes here.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I hope my injury time was taken into consideration.  Mr Speaker, this Bill has many positive points.  For that reason I will not oppose the Bill.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A RAJBANSI:  Also, it may have certain negative points.  It depends on how the relevant Minister is going to use the enabling part of this legislation.  I want to say, previously all education legislation in this country has given the Ministers the power to terminate the services of educators even if they are on the permanent staff, if they are overstaffed in a particular school.  This Bill protects the educator.  Nobody has mentioned that ultimately the safeguard or fears about redeployment is given in the Labour Relations Act and the Labour Relations Act will apply.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MR A RAJBANSI:  I am glad that the hon Mr Rehman referred to public participation, and parent participation.  I have a document here which, when released to the press about non-parent participation, non-public participation on the part of our Province will make it shattering news.  I will release this to the press within the next 24 hours.  [LAUGHTER]

The Minority Front will abstain until such time as sure as night follows day the voters will send me to the National Assembly in 1999.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE SPEAKER:  That is the last statement you make.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  I now call upon the hon Mr Mkhwanazi.

MR R M BURROWS:  On a point of order, Mr Speaker.  The hon member is not present today.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Now we proceed therefore to call upon the hon Mrs Downs.  She too, for reasons I cannot explain, has only two minutes.

MRS J M DOWNS:  I can say a lot in two minutes, Mr Speaker.  First of all, let me briefly say that my concerns are very similar to the concerns already expressed in section 6(11) and section 17.  I would like to actually raise some additional concerns.

First of all, from our party's point of view, we have a biblical perspective which says that parents are responsible for the education of their children.  Anything which takes away from the powers of parents to actually educate and be involved in the education of their children is in our view not acceptable.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MRS J M DOWNS:  I would also like to bring to the attention of this House that when discussing this Bill in our Committee, the various clauses which refer to the educators, and their conditions of employment and exactly who employs them and so on, led to many of these members joking that they should renew their legal qualifications, and take up office as lawyers again, because it is going to lead to a lot of law suits between educators and the State.  That is a caution that I do not think anybody has taken into consideration when pushing this Bill through.

The third thing I would like to bring to the attention of this House in section 17, is that the word "qualifications" has been replaced with the word "requirements".  These are referring to the qualifications of educators which has now been replaced with the word "requirements".  They are saying that they need a wider situation than qualifications and hence the word "requirements".

My contention is, actually requirements is a very loose term which could lead to unqualified teachers who do not fulfil the proper role of educators being employed.  To carry on with this, although it is not strictly to do with this Bill, although the Bill refers to it, the Bill refers to the Council of Educators, which we are told has a grandfather clause saying that all presently employed educators will be automatically registered with the Council of Educators.

Now for those who do not realise the implications of this.  It means that unqualified teachers can be placed as registered on the Council of Educators and forevermore be employed as teachers and be allowed to pursue that as qualified teachers.  Now my contention is that the ANC are making big noises about equity, but equity means that unqualified teachers still teaching in rural schools can carry on teaching.  That is not equity, and it is the rural schools that will be affected.

THE SPEAKER:  That is the end of your time, madam.  The discussion on this Bill has now been completed by the number of speakers that have addressed the House.  I will therefore put the Bill before the House.  I choose to repeat the question.

EDUCATION LAWS AMENDMENT BILL [B85B - 97] - REJECTED

THE SPEAKER:  The instructions to the NCOP members is that this House is against that Bill.  Yes, I would ask the Chairman of the NCOP to reply to the debate.

MR P POWELL:  Mr Speaker, on a point of order.  Is it correct for members to be engaged in cell phone conversations during a sitting of the House?

THE SPEAKER:  It is against the Rules.  I am afraid the hon member has not brought it to my notice.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  It has not been brought to my notice.  It is a ruling in this House that cellular phones are not to be used inside the chamber.  It is a pity I do not see anyone doing so.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.  That disposes of that Bill.  I will therefore proceed to the Health Bill.  In the Health Bill I do have Dr Mtalane to open the debate for nine minutes.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, there are two Health Bills that are going to be debated.  Perhaps we should just make clear to members which one we are debating first, and which one second.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Ina.  Let me follow therefore, 8.1.5.  It would appear there are two Bills, 8.1.5 and 8.1.6.  I will therefore start with 8.1.5, Medicine and Related Substances Control.  Ja, that is right.  I do have the following people for nine minutes.  That will be Mrs O Ford to address the House.  The hon Mrs Ford please.  This she does for nine minutes.

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES:
MEDICINES AND RELATED SUBSTANCES CONTROL AMENDMENT BILL 
[B72B - 97]

MRS O FORD:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I am quite sure I will not take nine minutes.  Mr Speaker, the IFP has concerns regarding this Bill on the Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment.

Section 3, relating to the Constitution, the appointment to the Medicines Control Council gives the Minister a blank cheque in appointing that Council.  We feel that the Council should contain a prescribed number of qualified professionals which the Minister would then appoint in consultation with the Medical and Dental Council and the Pharmacy Council.  As the Bill stands now, the Minister can appoint up to 24 people ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Of her buddy-buddies.

MRS O FORD:  Yes, of her buddy-buddies.  They can all be political appointments, there is nothing to say that they must be professionals.

The other concern is that section 10 contravenes the patent rights, and the International Patent Treaties.  A report was distributed to members at the negotiating meeting in Cape Town.  This report was made by Adams and Adams, universally acknowledged as experts on patent laws.  In this report they advise that this Bill is not in compliance with South Africa's obligations in terms of the Trips Agreements, and would moveover violate South Africa's patent laws.

Unfortunately, Mr Speaker, the Minister and her Department were not prepared to listen to any amendments, and despite all the good in this Bill, the IFP unfortunately will not support it.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Ford.  Now I will call upon the hon member Dr Luthuli to address the House for four minutes.  Dr Luthuli.  Oh there you are.

DR A N LUTHULI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker, ladies and gentlemen.  The ANC, through the Minister of Health, on 27 April 1994 was given a mandate by the majority of the people in this country, particularly those who had been left uncared for by the previous system to transform the health care in this country so that it becomes rational.

The Medicines and Related Substances Control Amendment Bill, which is one of the three Bills which are designed to do exactly that, amends the Medicines and Related Substances Control Act of 1965 which was inadequate, and that was an ~Apartheid~ Act.  It aims to facilitate implementation of a national drug policy.  The objectives of the amended Bill are to introduce measures which will bring down the cost of medicines, strengthen controls over the possession and sale of medicines, and transform the composition of the Medicine Control Council, MCC. 

Other parties have found some problems with this amendment Bill with regard to parallel importation.  We in the ANC, we do not really think that that is problematic.  To a large extent it depends on how you interpret the Act.  I am talking about the Patents Act or the Trips Agreement.

So as we stand, the ANC fully supports the Bill, and is fully behind the Minister of Health.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Doctor.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Redinger.  For two minutes.

MR R E REDINGER: (Whip):  Thank you.  Mr Speaker, the National Party has a problem with this Bill.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR R E REDINGER: (Whip):  Yes.  Mr Speaker, the National Party believes in free enterprise.  The National Party supports those pharmaceutical companies who are responsible for probably developing more than 90% of modern drugs as we know them today.  It is those modern drugs that are covered by international patents and it is the only recourse pharmaceutical companies have of recovering their costs of producing those drugs.  If we are going to start flouting those international laws that cover the pharmaceutical companies then we have a problem.

We as a party are not against generic medicine, Mr Speaker.  We believe that when the time period is up, the patent period is up yes certainly, then we are all for buying and making use of generic drugs.  We should not flout international law, and for that reason the National Party opposes this Bill.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Redinger.  

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.  An unusual situation is now arising.  Mr Burrows is supposed to address this House only for one minute.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I will not repeat all the arguments that my colleague Mike Ellis in the National Assembly raised against this legislation.  Suffice it to say that the ANC need to be reminded that they are in exactly the same position as the National Party used to be when they were running this country, and they were opposed by the Democratic Party.  We told them when legislation went wrong.  They said to us, "No, it is always right".  We now know, and history shows, their legislation was wrong, history will show your legislation is wrong.  This is not legally acceptable in international norms in terms of the parallel legislation.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please.

MR R M BURROWS:  The second area, Mr Speaker, that we would oppose in this legislation is that in the constituting of the Council, in that "the Council shall consist of so many members, not more than 24 as the Minister may from time to time determine, and appoint", is a blank cheque.  We reject blank cheques.  We always have.

THE SPEAKER:  Over and out.  Once again, as fate will have it, I now call upon the hon Mr Rajbansi to do exactly what Mr Burrows has done, that is just for one minute.  He is not in the House.  We are spared that exercise.  Now I will call upon Mr Mkhwanazi who is not in the House.  I will call upon Mrs Downs, the only one that is in the House.  There again, long-winded people are not required in terms of these Bills.  One minute only, madam.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Mr Speaker, do you know I would have actually loved to have supported this Bill.  The price of medicine in this country is horrific, and we need to sort out our hospitals, and to provide cheaper medicine.  That is a given, but we cannot do it by illegal means and at the expense of disallowing the pharmaceutical and other big investment companies to come into South Africa and invest, knowing full well that they will make money out of their investment.  After all that is what business is all about.

Having said that, I must just repeat that in this issue I actually really have great sympathy for the Minister, and I hope that another way can be found to lessen the cost of medicines, but we cannot support something that is illegal.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  45 seconds before a minute.  I would like to enquire from the Chairman of the NCOP whether he has any remarks to make, because the list of the speakers on this Bill is now complete.  Unless the hon Chairman of the NCOP has any comment, I will then put the Bill to the House.

MR P POWELL:  Sorry, Mr Speaker, only to point out that in fact there are two Bills.

THE SPEAKER:  Well, I thought we would dispose with 8.1.5 then we come back to 8.1.6.  We are on 8.1.5 now.  Well, I will therefore put the Bill to the House.  I am sure the Order Paper being in front of each one of us you know what I am referring to. I will repeat the question in the hope that people will in fact allow their sound to be consistent with their numbers, and not to shout twice in the hope that you will increase the numbers.  The hon Chief Whip.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I believe the "nos" have it.

THE SPEAKER:  Well, I will make that decision.  Yes.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Mr Speaker, on a point of order.  I noted that at least one person on that side of the bench who said no, spoke from a seat which does not belong to him, and I think you should rule him out of order.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Let us get the Bill over without the technicalities.

MEDICINES AND RELATED SUBSTANCES CONTROL AMENDMENT BILL
[B72B - 97] - REJECTED

THE SPEAKER:  That disposes of this 8.1.5 Bill.  We will therefore proceed to 8.1.6 Bill.  Medical, Dental and Supplementary Health Services.  In front of me is a list of the same persons who will hold the floor on this one.  It is therefore my pleasure to call upon Mrs Ford once again to address the House for nine minutes.

MEDICAL, DENTAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY HEALTH SERVICE PROFESSIONS AMENDMENT BILL [B62B - 97]

MRS O FORD:  Once again, Mr Speaker, I do not think I will take up your time for nine minutes.  I rise to speak on the Medical, Dental and Supplementary Health Services Professions Amendment Bill.

The IFP, I am afraid, are voting against this Bill because of concerns we have in two sections.  In our opinion Section 6, the constitution of the Health Professions Council, allows for too many appointments to be made by the Minister of Health and Ministers of the National Cabinet.  At the end of the day, Mr Speaker, the political dog will wag the professional tail.

The second concern is that the word "after" should have been replaced by "in" when referring to consultation.  We have this argument all the time, Mr Speaker, as to whether something should be after consultation or in consultation.  It is very simple, after consultation means that the Minister must talk to somebody but can make up the Minister's own mind.  In consultation, consensus must be reached.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, once again, in spite of all the good in this Bill, the IFP cannot support it.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Ford.  I will now call upon the hon Dr Luthuli to address the House for four minutes. [PAUSE]  Is the Doctor finding any difficulty in addressing the House?

DR A N LUTHULI:  Mr Chairman.  Mr Speaker, ladies and gentlemen.  The ANC fully supports the Medical, Dental and Supplementary Health Services Professions Amendment Bill, as it is.

THE SPEAKER:  Dr Luthuli.

DR A N LUTHULI:  Yes.

THE SPEAKER:  May I draw to your attention to the fact that you address the Speaker, not a Mr Chairman.  Thank you.

DR A N LUTHULI:  That I am?

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION 

DR A N LUTHULI:  Yes, I did say it.  Sorry, Mr Speaker.  I would just like to bring some figures to the notice of the House here.

We will see for instance, I have some figures here which state that Gauteng has 8 112 doctors.  Natal, 3 756.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

DR A N LUTHULI:  KwaZulu-Natal, yes.  Now, it is those kind of imbalances that we need to look at, and we have a bigger population here, yet we have so few doctors.

Now it is Bills like that which are going to help us to correct these imbalances.

AN HON MEMBER:  Are you going back to Brakpan?

DR A N LUTHULI:  Yes.  Another lot of figures which is interesting is this one.  We have at 3 May 1997 detailed statistics of registered students.  We have inherited this from the past.  We want Bills which are going to go a long way to correct all these imbalances.  We have whites registered 495, coloured 158, Indians 157, blacks 248.  We want some kind of rationalisation regarding community service.  We want people to go out to the rural areas to go and work to serve the population.  That is where most of the people are who really need to be serviced now, because they were never serviced in the past.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

DR A N LUTHULI:  Yet we have figures which show us here that the number of doctors trained, who might be willing to go to service people in those areas is 248 ...

THE SPEAKER:  Will the hon member take her seat please.

DR A N LUTHULI:  Compared to 495 of white doctors who are unwilling to go to the rural areas.  They want to go overseas.

THE SPEAKER:  Will the hon member please listen.  If the hon member is not prepared to listen I will order her out of the House.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

DR A N LUTHULI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Please leave the House if you cannot listen.  [LAUGHTER]

DR A N LUTHULI:  I am sorry.

THE SPEAKER:  Sorry or not sorry, take your seat.  [LAUGHTER]  I will now call upon the hon Mr Redinger.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR R E REDINGER: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, it is precisely for that reason that the National Party opposes this Bill.  We do not believe in enforced community service of trained doctors.  We do not believe in it, Mr Speaker.  Nothing to be forced.  We have a voluntary system where people in the deep rural areas and so on get a 10% bonus at present.  That system could be encouraged where necessary, but to force people to go into areas not of their choice, I am very sorry the National Party cannot support that, so we oppose this Bill.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Redinger.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Burrows with a scanty time always allotted to him, which I cannot understand.

MR R M BURROWS:  I got my one minute again.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, on the other hand, the Democratic Party believes that there should be community service for all young people who undertake tertiary qualifications in this country.  All of them.  Nurses, teachers, doctors, architects, engineers, go across the board, but to single out doctors as if they have been treated any differently at university ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR R M BURROWS:  As if they have been treated at university in any way different from others is unacceptable.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order! Order please.

MR R M BURROWS:  If the party on my right-hand side were to propose a community service nationally, then it is certainly a matter that the Democratic Party would very seriously consider supporting.  That is the one objection.  Do not just single out the doctors.

Secondly, on this one as with the previous one, the Constitution of the new Council is unacceptable.  It is unacceptable in the powers that are granted to the Minister to appoint members not in proportion to the 25 members appointed.

THE SPEAKER:  That is over and out, Mr Burrows.  Mr Rajbansi is not in.  Mr Mkhwanazi is not in.  Mrs Downs, with her one minute.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Mr Speaker, I will take less than a minute.  This is nothing more and nothing less than social engineering at the expense of personal freedom.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Brevity is the sole of whit.  I do not see the Chairman of the NCOP before I put the Bill.  Perhaps the Chief Whip in the absence of the Chairman of the NCOP will probably round up the debate.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I think all that is required now is to put the question.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I therefore put the Bill before the House which is 8.1.6 in terms of the Order Paper in front of you.

MEDICAL, DENTAL AND SUPPLEMENTARY HEALTH SERVICES PROFESSIONS AMENDMENT BILL [B62B - 97] - REJECTED

THE SPEAKER:  That disposes of 8.1.6.  We are now dealing with 8.1.8 in terms of the Order Paper.  8.1.8, Welfare Laws Amendment Bill.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes, Mr Chief Whip.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, just for the sake of correctness, I do not recall you saying that the "nos" have it when the last vote was taken.  I think to comply with that formality.

THE SPEAKER:  No, I did say it.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Then, Mr Speaker, 8.1.6 ...

THE SPEAKER:  I am afraid in fact I did say the "nos" have it.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Well, I am sorry, some of us did not hear you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Oh well, the "nos" have it.  The "nos" have it.  Well, I will repeat it.  The "nos" have it.  That is why I proceeded to the next Bill.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, 8.1.8 has been dealt with.

THE SPEAKER:  8.1?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  8.1.8 was dealt with by the NCOP Committee.

THE SPEAKER:  Oh yes, 8.1.8 has been dealt with.  8.1.9.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  So the Order Paper has now been dealt with for the day, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes, it looks like it is disposed of.  Well, thank you very much, Mr Chief Whip.  That does look like the end of the orders of the day.

I would like to make this announcement at the request of the Chairperson of Committees.  "Kindly make the following announcement for us", that is Mrs Gasa and Mrs Fatima, "We request all members of the Multi-Party Women's Caucus to remain in the House after this session".  Well, there you are.  Women want yet another opportunity for a coup.

I would like to make this one announcement.  I really would not like the House to make a stranger out of me.  I went to hospital for a long time, and I had a serious operation, which I survived.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  During that time the session was on and I was not in.  When I come back here the nature of the House, the respect and order seems to have become so different.  I have become a foreigner as it were in this House.  I just do not know what has happened.

I would kindly request that we are known generally, even in Cape Town, as being the most orderly House in dealing with its duties in the Legislature.  I would please ask that we should not forego and lose that.  Let us continue to be people who can listen, people who can express their opinions, who will treat this House and this Legislative Assembly with dignity and decorum, which is the mark of this House.

I make that appeal because I thought at the time when there was such heckling in the House that I was a stranger.  I was not used to it in this House.  May I hope therefore, that instead of the situation I found, we will carry on and be better in the House.

I will call upon the Premier to make such announcement as he may.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Unfortunately our plane was delayed, hence we came late to this session.  It was not intentional at all, so I proffer my apologies on behalf of myself and my colleagues of the Cabinet.

I must say that we have been shocked by the incidents of violence over the weekend.  We had hoped that politics in the Province were normalising, that political activity was going to be without no-go areas and violent opposition.  I would like to express our condolences to the families who lost members at this very difficult time in our economy.  When we lose breadwinners that brings too much suffering.

I will appeal to my colleagues, all political party leaders in this House, to redouble our efforts to normalise political activity in the Province, to inform our followers that there is no room for this type of intolerance.

I would also like to remind the hon members of the AIDS Awareness Campaign which will be launched tomorrow at 12:30 at the Clairwood Race Course.  This is a collective effort led by Cabinet, but managed by the Department of Health.  It is a comprehensive programme which mobilises every department and every Ministry in the Province to engage in the fight against the scourge of AIDS.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  The House will therefore adjourn until 26 November.

AN HON MEMBER:  Where?

THE SPEAKER:  In the same place here.  We will adjourn till the 26th here at ~Ulundi~.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 15:14 UNTIL
	WEDNESDAY, 26 NOVEMBER 1997

	DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FOURTH SESSION
	SEVENTH SITTING - FIRST SITTING DAY
	WEDNESDAY, 26 NOVEMBER 1997

THE HOUSE MET AT 14:12 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, ~ULUNDI~.  THE DEPUTY SPEAKER TOOK THE CHAIR AND READ THE PRAYER.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  

2.	OBITUARIES AND OTHER CEREMONIAL MATTERS

3.	ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS OR AFFIRMATION

4.	ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER

I have an announcement to make.  The announcement is that some time during this year, this House was left by the first Premier of this Province.  On that occasion this House resolved that a portrait of the Premier would be made.  I wish to then announce that there will be an activity now, which has to do with the implementation of that resolution.

What I have planned to do has been that because the resolution was taken by the House in sitting, I have arranged that this be done during the House in sitting.  That is for this House to see what that portrait looks like, and for the first Premier of this Province to see what that portrait looks like.  I have given permission to Dr Frank Mdlalose to be brought into the Chamber for the purposes of going through with the activity that I have just outlined.  I call on the messengers to please escort Dr Mdlalose into the House.

In the meantime I would like to request the Chief Whip of the majority party to just give an indication on the venue of Action Abafazi.  Mr Chief Whip?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I understand this is to be in the IFP caucus room.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I suppose that that has been heard by all members, that we have an activity which is part of the announcements that we are making, an activity that is called Action Abafazi.  That activity is a play.  It is a play called Action Abafazi.  That play will now take place at half past five to half past six, and as you have all heard, it will be in the IFP caucus room. 

DR F MDLALOSE IS ESCORTED INTO THE CHAMBER    [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  On behalf of this House, I wish to welcome Dr Frank Mdlalose to this House again, after having been the first to lead this House during the days of difficulties, up until the time when Dr Mdlalose retired from politics.  We wish to welcome you, Doctor.

I will, without ado, call upon the Premier of this Province to, on behalf of this House, kindly say a few words to Dr Mdlalose, as well as to perform the task that we have asked him to do, to hand over to Dr Mdlalose the portrait that this House resolved to make.

What I would like to, from the outset, say to our hon Dr Mdlalose is that as the resolution was taken, it must be made known to you, sir, that this portrait that you are just about to be presented with has duplicates.  The intention is that the original will be placed in the Legislature at ~Ulundi~.  There is a duplicate which will be placed at the Legislature in Pietermaritzburg.  It is likely that at some stage that could alternate.  A third duplicate will be offered to you in honour of your contributions to this House.  Having outlined that, I now call upon the Premier to officially unveil that portrait with a few words.

THE PREMIER:  Mr Speaker, hon members.  To our beloved Dr Frank, as he was popularly known, my predecessor in the post and position of Premier of the Province, it is indeed a most auspicious afternoon and wonderful occasion that we welcome you back to this House, the House that you have been associated with for many, many years.

You came in and served the KwaZulu Government as the Minister of Interior during those days, dealing with issues of Home Affairs in the KwaZulu Government.  You then went on to serve as Minister of Health and ultimately as Minister without Portfolio.  With the elections in 1994 you assumed the premiership of this Province.  It was you, sir, who established the traditions in the democratic South Africa, traditions that are guiding us today as we deal with the issue of provincial governance.

You have dedicated your life to service, to public service, and you have set a sterling example and a good track record.  As someone who has followed in your footsteps when you left the Ministry of Health in KwaZulu I took over your job, and again I have taken over your job.  It is doubly pleasurable therefore that I am the one who welcomes you back and will hand over the portrait to you.

We wish you good health.  You, your dear wife and your family.  I hear that you are now a keen farmer.  I think I must learn a few tricks from you, because I am also interested in farming at some stage or other.  Most welcome indeed.  Thank you.  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier.  I will then request Dr Mdlalose to pose with the Premier whilst the Premier unveils the portrait.  [APPLAUSE]  I will go further and allow the Premier to use his ex-podium to say something.  [LAUGHTER]

DR F MDLALOSE:  Mr Speaker, Mr Premier, Dr Ngubane, members of the Cabinet and members of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Parliament.  How sweet and seemly it appears to be for me to occupy this podium with your permission, sir, with your agreement once more to be here.  My presence here today raises many feelings.  Feelings are welling up in me, the yesteryears, many of them, and even the yesterdays.

The memory of the days spent with you, my colleagues, when I think back on the difficult start we had with KwaZulu-Natal parliamentary activities.  When I think back and remember the distrust that we had among us all between different parties.  When I think back and remember the poor judgment of what the Provincial Government was all about.  We were guilty of ignorance, we were guilty of prejudice, we were guilty of having no foresight about what it was all about.  But steadily these things improved.  We found ourselves moving forward, attempts to work together were not without problems.  I dare say today most of those problems have gone by the way.

We had to persevere, we had to tolerate one another, we had to learn to work together.  It was a blessing in disguise which my colleague Mr Zuma has more often than not touched upon.  The blessing in disguise was that we did not have such a big absolute majority as some people have in some Parliament elsewhere.  We did not have such a big majority that we could say we have over 60% and therefore we can always muscle through an act and over.  We had to go kahle [do not rush], we had to do an act dance.  That in itself I think was a blessing in disguise in that we had to be tolerant, we had to hear the other man's point of view.  We had to listen carefully and think what the other man is saying.  We did not have to sit down and say, "Well, we will let them talk", and when it is time to vote you get up and say, "We are voting.  Now which side do we vote, Doctor?  Are we agreed or are we not".  No, we did not have that majority, we had to go very steadily.  That in itself was a lesson and blessing in disguise.

Today's gift to me by you, my colleagues, KwaZulu-Natal Parliament, raises nostalgia within me.  There is a judicious measure of sadness and happiness as I look at that picture.  The portrait yes, it looks like me and a copy of it will hang in my house somewhere.  But I want to look behind it, I want to look back and say it is not that portrait in itself that is of importance, what is of importance is in fact the symbol that it presents, the way you have treated me, the way you have accepted me, the way you have liked me, the way we have all worked together.

I am left with just a word of saying, thank you.  This is wonderful.  My wishes to you and to all of us, and to our Province, peace and progress in KwaZulu-Natal.  Happiness and understanding between parties and let this Province be an example to the Republic of South Africa of how people, differing as they may in their political ideas and ideals, may work together.  Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to all.  Thank you ever so much, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  Thank you very much, Doctor.  I will request Baba Mdlalose to just bear with me a little bit and resume his seat whilst I call upon the hon Minister Zuma to say a few words please. 

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I have not been talking for a long time.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Ja, that is true.  That is why I am reminding the Minister that it is still an old House that we have been sitting in.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker, the Premier of the Province, my colleagues in the Legislature, our special guest today, Dr Mdlalose.  I am sure when Dr Mdlalose was about to leave us, we had an opportunity to say a few words in bidding him farewell.  I used an expression which I would want to repeat which to me in a sense summarises the nature in politics, and outside politics of our brother here.

I said he was like a pilot who will never land his aircraft without the wheels out.  To me that summarised what man Dr Mdlalose is.  I think this decision by this Legislature to give you this portrait is a fitting act from all of us.  In any household the first born is an important person.  It is one of the things that I listened to from my mother very well.  In her happy moods she used to say, , ["I always saw myself as a person"] because I am the first born.

The fact that Dr Mdlalose was the first Premier of this Province is a historical fact that will remain forever, and important indeed, but whether it were to be failures or successes of how this Province operated was to be seen in how he performed.

We are therefore very happy today, that he is here with us to receive this gift, which is an expression of acknowledging his contribution.  He has referred to experiences that we went through together.  Before he was a Premier, as the National Chairperson of the IFP, when we dealt with issues relating to violence, we had more to share under difficult conditions.

At times when both from the IFP and the ANC, some of our colleagues did not think it was necessary to talk peace.  I am not talking about the organisations, I am talking about the individuals, and probably when some would say, if you are talking you are selling out.  I found him unshakable under those trying times when we had to ask ourselves a question, should we fight for peace in this Province or participate in the war.  It was always easy to find an answer from Dr Mdlalose.  That as leaders we have to ensure that we participate in the collective leadership to lead this Province to peace and stability.  It was not difficult to raise any issue.  It was because of my working with him that I summarised his nature as he was going away.  Like a man from a village when a first born goes to Johannesburg or Durban, the first occasion when he comes back is [wearing long trousers no longer wearing short pants, that is what the situation is today.  He has bread, it is nice, we are happy, we are saying: Long live Nyanda]. 

As I said as you were leaving, your not being with us in Government structures, you are still a citizen in the Province.  We certainly expect you to play a role in making this Province a winning Province, a successful Province.  I do not think your being out and farming would make you forget that as part of us you have a role to play wherever we need you.  When we go wrong, as an elder brother we expect that irrespective of political affiliation, you will be able to give the wise advice to all of us, sithi unwele olude Nyanda siyabonga. [we are saying: Live long, Nyanda.  Thank you].

Thank you, Mr Speaker.  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Zuma.  I now call upon Mr Bartlett for two minutes.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Speaker, in the absence of my leader, it is a great pleasure and privilege for me to rise on this particular occasion, and to say, Mr Speaker, through you, how pleased I am to see our old friend looking so well.  It is quite clear that for him there is life after the Executive, and after Parliament.  I see farming is obviously doing him a lot of good.  Who knows, maybe there will be some other people from the ranks of this Parliament joining him in retirement in the not too distant future.

Mr Speaker, we are here today to pay tribute to him, and to present this portrait.  My colleague who has just sat down took one of the things I would like to say, namely that he was the first.  That in itself is a distinct honour.  He was the first Premier of this newly democratically elected Legislature of this great Province of ours.

The portrait will hang for future generations to look at it and to consider it.  I think that the important thing about an official portrait, is that it will remind people of these times through which we have lived and through which we were led by our old friend Dr Frank.

My friendship with him and association with him goes back before this Parliament was elected, when our respective parties gathered in think-tanks debating the future of this Province.  I must say that I always found in Dr Frank Mdlalose a man you could talk to, a man who had a great capacity to reason, and it is for that reason I believe he became our first Premier.

Also looking back to the early days of bringing together the two legislative bodies of this Province, the old KwaZulu Government and the former Natal Provincial Administration in the Joint Executive Authority, we find that he played a leading role.  All that is history, and he has made a name for himself in the history books of this Province and this country, and in the future when our children and our great-grandchildren come to our Parliament and they look upon this portrait, I believe they will look at it and say, "There was a man who was a credit to KwaZulu-Natal.  There was a man, a friendly and a wise man.  A man who played his role at a very crucial time in the history of this Province".

To him now, from my personal point of view and from that of the National Party, we wish him well and I hope that his cattle are doing well.  I hope that his dear wife is also relaxing in retirement; I am sure they are, and if ever they are passing my farm which they have got to do if you go down the N3, please find the time to come and have a cup of tea, especially when I too have retired.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.    [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Bartlett.  Mr Burrows?  Can I request the party speakers to please assist me with time.  I do not want to be nasty.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I am sure you are never nasty, but I take the hint.  Mr Speaker, Dr Frank, you know we look at the portrait and those of us who are grey haired and bearded, we recognise in the portrait a venerable, wise person.

I look at that portrait and then I look at the reality and I am sure the reality is not as grey as the portrait.  [LAUGHTER]  I think perhaps when you left this House you became less grey.  [LAUGHTER]  That the opposition is giving you less grey hairs.  I want to say, together with my colleagues, that posterity has placed you first in this Province.  There can be no taking that away from you, from your family and from history.  You cast a shadow before you.  Premiers, here is one and there will be others, will have to move in that shadow, sir.

Certainly from our side, my colleague and I who had dealings with you over a number of years, we recognise the situation you held, we recognise and congratulate you on your retirement and say we look forward to seeing you on a number of occasions, socially, so that we can quietly explore the political changes in this country.  We wish you well.  Thank you very much.  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows, especially for setting that example.  I now wish to call upon Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  In addition to what my colleagues have stated about our wonderful first Premier of the Province, I think successive generations will always recognise the excellent and the very high standard you have kept.  The photograph of our former Premier in reality reminds us of four characteristics.  Integrity, high character, credibility and dignity.

Furthermore, this Province is moving positively and in reality towards peace.  I am reminded of a wonderful picture you had when in capacity as a Premier with the Minister of Economic Affairs, both in the typical Zulu way you know, very amiable, smiling to build up the future of this Province with peace.

Of course the hon Mr Jacob Zuma indicated that you still have a role to play.  I hope that the emerging new Deputy President is listening to this and gives you a role as a diplomat of this country.  [LAUGHTER AND APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi, for that.  I think I would like to just make a comment on what Mr Rajbansi is saying.  If National Parliament has not as yet passed their pension law maybe that is worth considering, that iNyanda yePhahla gets a post somewhere.  Otherwise the reserves are going to run dry.  I will then call upon Baba Nkwali yeNkosi. 

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I want to start off by borrowing a few words from the English literature which I was forced to learn and love.  The evil that men do lives after them, but the good is often interred with their bones.

I want to deviate and say, but it is not so with our Premier, Frank Mdlalose.  That portrait is evidence of the fact that the good which he did lives with him.  He had tea and I had lunch this afternoon, just by coincidence, and when I looked at him I saw him being fresh like my colleague has just said, and he made an honest admission that he has retired from politics, but it seems he has not retired from activity.  I said to him, "Well, Nyanda, there is no way you can retire from the national service of this Province and of this country.  You will only retire when we put you six feet under the earth".  So I want to say it now in public.  Baba Nyanda, there is no way you can retire from the service of this nation.  We will always look upon you to do something for the nation.  Only your ancestors will call you and your God will call you, then you will have full retirement.  I thank you.  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you Nkwali yeNkosi.  I now call upon the hon Mrs Downs.

MRS J M DOWNS:  You were the first Premier, sir, and I have the last word.  I do not want to take away from anything other than what I am going to say.  In the good book which I know you believe in says, "Blessed are the peacemakers for they shall see their God".  I could not wish for anything better for you, and I think you will always be known as a peacemaker in this Province.  [APPLAUSE]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Downs.  That concludes the contributions by leaders of parties.  I think I am getting an indication from our first Premier that he would like to say something.  When he was still Premier that is what he wanted to do.  That is how he reacted.  I am assured that he has had his say, and I think Dr Mdlalose, on behalf of this House again I would love to then release you and say we have been happy to be with you, and please have a safe journey home, and like all have said, long live you.  Thank you.  [APPLAUSE]

We now continue with our Order Paper.

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

Mr Premier?

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker, colleagues, hon members.  I would like to thank the KwaZulu-Natal press and the media in general for taking up the Cabinet's initiative of a Province wide campaign against AIDS and HIV infection.  They have given coverage almost on a daily basis with a lot of depth, and they have also published the programme of action as the campaign unfolds.  We would like to express our thanks for the co-operation, and hope that it is going to continue.  We thank business as well, because business can be a very useful partner in this initiative by extending information to the shop floor, and by using the other facilities that business does possess.  This is what I wanted to say.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Burrows?

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, as Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Education and Culture, I hereby wish to report that the Committee has considered the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill, 1997 which was submitted to it in January, and wishes to report the Bill to the House with amendments.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Mr Makhaye?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can we have order please.

MR D H MAKHAYE:  Order.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I call everybody to order, including those who are calling "order" from the floor.

MR D H MAKHAYE:  Mr Speaker, I table the report of the Finance Portfolio Committee on the mid-year budget review.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Makhaye.  Mr Volker?

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, as Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, I wish to table resolutions of the Public Accounts Committee that have been taken at various Committee meetings to date, and request that these be placed on the agenda of Parliament for discussion at some future date.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Volker.  The hon Minister of Education, Dr V T Zulu?

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, may I table the KwaZulu-Natal Monuments Council Annual Report, 1995/1996.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  I do not see any members rising to table any reports or papers.  That concludes item 6 on the Order Paper.

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS 

Mr Burrows?




MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day:

		Noting the financial crisis facing the Departments of Education, Welfare and Health.  Commits itself to ensure that the highest priority is given to social spending in disadvantaged communities; and instructs the Cabinet to re-prioritise the expenditure of KwaZulu-Natal to reflect this commitment.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Volker?

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, I would like to give note that on the next sitting day I would like to move the following motion:

		That in order to assure the success of the Masakhane campaign, and in order to improve the attitude of the public generally towards the payment for municipal services and charges, the Minister of Local Government and Housing be requested to promote, through the MINMEC process, the need for Local Government Councillors, who fail to pay rates and service charges, to be removed from office.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Haygarth?

MR G HAYGARTH:  Mr Speaker, I give notice that I will move on the following sitting day:

		That this House notes with concern the current unsatisfactory situation concerning collection of rates and service charges by local authorities and requests the hon Minister of Local Government and Housing as a matter of urgency to ensure by whatever means appropriate that sufficient and satisfactory powers are granted to Local authorities:

		(a)	to implement strong sanctions against non-payers in respect of service charges; and

		(b)	to recover rates from either owners or occupiers of houses in major townships, especially where difficulties arise from the question of the Ingonyama Trust Lands, and in this regard the statutory powers granted to the South African Revenue Services be examined.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Minister Mkhize?

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I wish to move without notice as follows:

MOTION:
		THAT THIS HOUSE NOTING:

		1.	The dramatic increase in the prevalence of HIV and AIDS epidemic in the Province;

		2.	HIV/AIDS is not a health issue, but has catastrophic implications for all our departments and for the economy and the future of our Province;

		3.	that the World AIDS day for this year focuses on the impact of the infection to our children.

		Members of the House hereby resolve to:

		(a)	Commend the Premier and Cabinet for leading the way in the fight against the spread of HIV and AIDS, a campaign which will inter alia feature a candle lighting vigil at King Edward Hospital and all hospitals as well as World AIDS day events to be addressed by Ministers in all regions.

		(b)	Pledge to support this campaign and mobilise for all sectors of our communities to join in this campaign in order to:

			(i)	increase awareness about the seriousness of this disease and achieve behavioral change;

			(ii)	to destigmatise the disease and discourage discrimination against people with AIDS.

		(c)	Join our hands regardless of the differences of our views and political parties; to fight for the common good of our Province and its people so that together we can win.

		(d)	Commend the media, business, and all our citizens who have embraced this campaign.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Rajbansi?

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I think we have to deal with that.  It was without notice, because he says we all have to win.  If you do not put it we will be in a no-winning situation.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  That takes care of ...

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I think Mr Rajbansi was pointing out that the hon Minister's motion on AIDS moved without notice would require to be put to the House, then Mr Rajbansi will move another motion.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  That motion has been put without notice, and I now wish to put it to the House. 

THE MOTION AS PROPOSED BY DR MKHIZE IS PUT TO THE HOUSE AND PASSED.


THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you.  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move 

on the next sitting day of this hon House as follows:

		That all of us are looking forward to a cheerful Christmas and therefore it be resolved to request our hon Premier and all the Ministers to ensure that all threats and termination of services of Education and that civil servants are reminded that all procedures in terms of the Labour Relations Act are complied with together with the Trade Unions Teacher Bodies.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  There being no further hon members.  Oh, Mr Mchunu, I just cannot see you.  There is a light that is blurring my vision that side.

MR S E MCHUNU:  Mr Speaker, I wish to give notice that at the next sitting day of the House I shall move as follows:

		That this House commits itself to the promotion of peace, democracy and development for all the people of KwaZulu-Natal in particular and South Africa in general, with priority given to the poor rural communities;

		that all elected officials behave in an exemplary manner in promoting these objectives; and

		that the year 1998 becomes the year of equitable, efficient and effective governance.

Thank you.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I think that concludes the number of hon members wanting to raise motions.  

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  On the order of the day I will now proceed to allow replies to questions.  In terms of questions I have got questions standing over from question 105 to question 161.  I have no indication whether these questions have now been answered to the satisfaction of the hon members.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS APPEAR IN THE IVORY PAGES AT THE BACK OF THIS VOLUME.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you to the Minister Mkhize.  That concludes our session on questions.  I now proceed with the Order Paper to 8.2, and that will be the debate on the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill.  To that extent I will call upon the Minister of Education and Culture, Dr V T Zulu, to introduce the Bill please.

KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE BILL, 1997.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill.  The Bill is to provide for the establishment of a statutory body to administer heritage conservation on behalf of the Provincial Government of KwaZulu-Natal, in particular the care for, maintenance, repair and management of historically important sites; architecturally important buildings, public monuments and memorials; military cemeteries and other important graves; traditional burial places; archaeological and palaeotological sites and artifacts; rock art; meteorites, historical shipwrecks, important cultural objects and trade therein, and the traditional building techniques of the people of the Province, by way of providing protections relevant to the type of site or artefact, and its relative significance; integration of protective measures into planning, development and local government systems and by providing for the establishment of educational, training, interpretive and tourism related projects; and to provide for matters incidental hereto.

I hereby present the Bill.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you very much, Mr Minister.  I wish to then call upon the Chair of the Portfolio Committee on Education, Mr Burrows.  The hon member will have ten minutes in total.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, it is not often that the House is placed in a position of discussing legislation that in both the national and international context is ground breaking.  This is such legislation.

The KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill has a long history, as all heritage matters should have.  It goes back to proposals stemming from the KwaZulu Monuments Council, of at least three years ago, where there were proposals to create a piece of common legislation, that would incorporate the most recent moves in heritage protection internationally, and would provide us with a single piece of legislation to protect heritage in this country.  To the extent that members have had the opportunity of looking at the Bill, they will recognise in it legislation that protects in chronological terms from the archaeology of our very far distant past right through to the graves of the liberation struggle combatants.  That is as it should be.

Heritage is what we all have together.  There is no sectoral heritage, it is all our past.  If I may quote from the tabled document that you have just received from the KwaZulu Monuments Council a paragraph quoted by the Acting Chairperson:

		The framework for the new legislation was prepared incorporating principles and ideas generated by submissions to the regional ACTAG public forums and consultations with a range of role-players in the Province.  The draft document was submitted to the National Monuments Council for comment and was subsequently used as the core document for the drafting of the National Heritage Resources Bill.  It has been stated by independent UNESCO observers that the proposed legislation, both provincial, the one we have before us, and national, ranks with the best international heritage legislation currently in place.

I would like to on behalf of the Portfolio Committee and the House extend our thanks to all of those who were responsible for the preparing of the drafts of the legislation that was submitted to the Minister in March last year, and which culminated in a Bill being gazetted in November of last year in the Provincial Gazette.  That Bill was gazetted once again in the three languages of this Province in January of 1997.  It was at that point that the Portfolio Committee took up the process.

It held a number of public meetings, advertised in the media, it held some eight to ten meetings in all during the course of this year to consider the legislation.  In particular, it received representation from various of the Provincial departments, from the Durban Metro, from the University of Potchefstroom or the owner of certain lands in this Province, from the Majuba Feesterrein Komitee, and from other organisations all of which were dealt with by the Portfolio Committee and the Department.

The Bill was referred to the House of Traditional Leaders in May for their comments, and the House returned it to the Portfolio Committee with certain amendments that it proposed to the Bill.  These amendments were considered by the Committee with full discussion, and some differences were placed before the Committee.

In particular, and here I need to make this point, there was some difficulty regarding the wording related to royal graves as a particular item within the Bill itself, and at the end of the day a division was called on the wording proposed by the House of Traditional Leaders.  The wording as suggested by the House was passed by the Portfolio Committee.  One must recognise that there was a division in the House at this point.

There was also discussion on the point of the congruity between this piece of legislation, and a piece of legislation that falls under the Minister of Local Government and Housing, that is the Cemeteries and Crematoria Act, and particularly as it pertains to graves of all persons in this Province.  It was recognised by legal advisors to the Committee that the Cemeteries and Crematoria Act has general application to all graves whether they be the graves of princes or the graves of paupers, and one cannot distinguish between the two, that that piece of legislation does apply.

I must point out that this morning I received a letter addressed to myself from the hon the Premier, and I have not had an opportunity to discuss the matter with him, in which he encloses a letter from the hon member Advocate Danie Schutte requesting that the Bill be referred back to the Portfolio Committee for reconsideration.  The Premier points out a number of issues which he believes merit further examination.

This matter was discussed by the Whips, as I understand it, and the position is that the Bill as it rests before the House at the present moment is being tabled, is being discussed.  The hon member or his party representatives have the opportunity under Rule 127 to raise amendments to you, sir, and you have the right and responsibility, in fact it says you shall, if such amendments are proposed, you shall refer it back to the Portfolio Committee for consideration.  Arrangements have been made for the Portfolio to consider such amendments if they are submitted to you in writing today.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Were they not represented at the Portfolio Committee?

MR R M BURROWS:  I must point out, with respect, Mr Speaker, I do not need the legal advice of the hon legally advised Mr Jeffery at this point, because my notes in fact say that the hon member Mr Schutte and his party were represented at the Portfolio Committee, did not move such amendments in the Committee at that point.  But be that as it may, every party, and I am sure Mr Jeffery will be aware of this, can make use of every opportunity of making amendments at any point they so choose.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Was the Bill not published last year?

MR R M BURROWS:  Might I also point out, Mr Speaker, that it is not my intention to go into great detail concerning the Bill itself.  As I understand, the Acting Chairperson of the KwaZulu Monuments Council will have an opportunity of speaking on the Bill itself.  I must point out that the Heritage Council that is proposed, the Amafa KwaZulu-Natali, Heritage KwaZulu-Natal, Erfenis KwaZulu-Natal has wide powers both to advise the Minister to protect the heritage of this Province, to liaise with Provincial departments and local authorities, to formally protect sites either as heritage landmarks, as heritage objects, to draft the heritage register, to provide provisional protection where it is necessary and to designate sensitive sites where they surround heritage landmark sites.

There is general protection given that the Council will so offer to structures including all graves in this Province which are of historical significance, burial places, battlefields, archaeological sites and so on.

The Bill also deals with heritage resource management, a new concept in the conservation of heritage sites, and I think places this Province in the forefront of the protection of heritage areas in the country.

The Council also has the right to grant permits, to grant exemptions from application for permits to consider offences and appeals against offences.  It has the right to order the making good of people who vandalise or cause action against historical sites.  It also has the right to issue no development orders, in order to restrict development in that which is regarded as a heritage landmark or heritage site.

Mr Speaker, it is with pleasure as Chair of the Portfolio Committee that I move that the Bill be considered and approved by this House.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  I now call upon Mr A J Konigkramer who has 15 minutes.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, as I have said in this House before, KwaZulu-Natal has a history and a heritage that is unique and exciting in world terms.  I do not make that statement lightly.  There is evidence that modern man, homo sapiens, sapiens originates from this part of the world.

So, Mr Speaker, as I have said before, even Europeans, should they wish to discover their roots can do so in KwaZulu-Natal.  In Border Cave we have a site that is likely soon to be declared a world heritage site, and it has an occupation which spans 150 000 years, which is a long time indeed.

Early iron age man has lived in our Province for at least 190 years after the birth of Christ, and left behind him a cultural heritage that is quite exceptional.  The later iron age people have lived in our Province for the last 1 000 years or lived in the Province for more than 1 000 years.  In other words, from the turn of the millennium, and to the keen observer, if you look closely on the ground, you can see their rich heritage over a very vast area of the Province.

Mr Speaker, stone age man lived in our Province before the advent of the iron age for tens of centuries.  These people have left behind one of the largest and most unique rock art collections in the world.

Against this background, I think it is fitting that this piece of legislation, as Mr Burrows has pointed out, I think one can genuinely say that it is actually quite unique.  I think it will do our Province proud in the longer term.

I just want to deal very briefly with the process.  The process, as Mr Burrows pointed out, began very soon after the transformation in 1994.  The hon Minister of Education and Culture appointed a task team, consisting of eight people, which first of all laid the ground rules and then to draft the legislation culminating in a report which was submitted to the Ministry in April 1995.  The central recommendation of that group which was incidentally also, and I think this is quite unique and few people know this, it was a multi-party group and there was never any difference of opinion in it, made a recommendation that the existing KwaZulu Monuments Council's powers be extended to go beyond the old areas of KwaZulu and to encompass the entire Province of KwaZulu-Natal.  That is the starting point, Mr Speaker.

The Act, as the hon Minister has pointed out, provides for a new statutory body to be known as Amafa aKwaZulu-Natali.  The Zulu name is the preferred name.  This statutory body will be run by councillors who will be appointed after a process of public nominations.

In terms of the existing constitutional dispensation in the country, as you are aware, cultural matters are a concurrent power.  We are also pleased to say, as Mr Burrows has pointed out, that the existing KwaZulu Heritage Act or the Act which we will be considering, we in KwaZulu-Natal are breaking new ground in the sense that we are the first Province to do so.  What is encouraging is that this Act is fully in conformity with the provisions of the National Bill.  As Mr Burrows also pointed out to this House, I think we can be proud of the fact that our Act actually served as the base document for the National legislation.

This new Act, Mr Speaker, will replace the KwaZulu Monuments Council Act, 19 of 1980.  As I said, once this happens the powers of the Council will be extended to the entire Province of KwaZulu-Natal.

In formulating the Act, Mr Speaker, we took account of legislation from a number of emerging economies, countries with emerging economies, as well as established legislation in the major countries of the West.  Further discussions relating to the basic principles of this Act were held with UNESCO in depth.  We also consulted the World Heritage Council, and both the South African and Namibian National Monuments Councils were consulted.

We also had lengthy discussions with the director and management staff of the Museums and Monuments Commissions of Zimbabwe, and also with the International Commission for Monuments and Sites, ICOMOS.  With what is known as SAMA, the South African Museums Association and the Southern African Association of Archaeologists, members of the South African Institute of Architects and role-players within the Town and Regional Planning Commissions.

Mr Speaker, as I think has also been pointed out, early public consultation ran in tandem with a series of public meetings organised and conducted by the then Minister of Arts and Culture, Dr Ben Ngubane.  These meetings coincided with the ACTAG meetings, and then as the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee pointed out, further public meetings were held at which our Bill specifically was dealt with.

While the Act provides empowering legislation to protect the cultural resources of the Province, effective management is also emphasised.  This is a critical factor where I think particularly the National Monuments Council Act of South Africa had very great weaknesses.

The legislation establishes the basis of an integrated heritage conservation system which, as Mr Burrows has also pointed out, is actually ground breaking, whereby communities and non-Government organisations can be empowered to identify and manage heritage resources under the stewardship of Amafa. 
A variety of new and innovative protective mechanisms and management tools have been introduced to enable appropriate recognition of places and objects of cultural significance for all sectors of the people of the Province.

Mr Speaker, I would like to deal briefly with one aspect in particular which I think is going to need closer scrutiny in the years to come.  Those of you that are interested in the preservation of our heritage will have noticed the controversy that arose over the demolition of Oxenham's Bakery in Maritzburg.

The demolition permit was duly issued by the National Monuments Council and in our judgment it was done without proper consultation.  Certainly there was no provision in terms of which the people of Maritzburg could actually express their views on whether that building should be demolished or not.  The sole criterion was in fact the architectural merit or otherwise in the eyes of those that made the decision.  We believe this legislation will make it possible that the people in general should be allowed to express their views on a sense of place, that any particular structure or building may have, and that they should in fact be consulted before demolition permits are granted.

Mr Speaker, the legislation establishes essentially four categories of protection for cultural resources.  First of all ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I will allow the member to use another microphone please.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, there are four categories of protection for cultural resources that we make provision for in the Act.  

(i)		The first is heritage landmarks, and these essentially are sites which are not the property of the Province. 
(ii)		Secondly, there are Provincial Landmarks for sites which are the property of the Province.
(iii)		Thirdly, there are Heritage Objects which can be artifacts or collections thereof or substantial aesthetic, historic, scientific or technological importance, or which have a significant connection to a site protected in terms of the Act.
(iv)		Then finally, the Provincial Heritage Register.  There will be a Provincial Heritage Register which will be an inventory of conservation worthy sites as published by a notice in the Provincial Gazette.  I think that is also quite innovative, because now all the people will be able to see what sites are actually protected, and obviously that will hopefully raise people's respect for it.

Mr Speaker, I also want to make mention to this House that as you know, in terms of new legislation passed by the National Parliament, you cannot embark on development, particularly in the tourism field, without an environmental impact assessment.  This Act I think is also quite unique in that even although this might have applied, this Act gives us the power to actually control sites which we believe to be of historic significance.  We can in fact require our own assessments to be made in order to ensure that the heritage is not destroyed.

I would also just like to remind this House that in terms of National legislation, all the old monuments in terms of the National Monuments Act, will retain their status until they have been re-evaluated, and then there will be negotiation between the central and ourselves, but the monuments will be managed on an agency basis by Amafa.

One of the last issues I would like to raise, and I think it is very important, is that one of the principles contained in the Act is that heritage conservation should, under the stewardship of Amafa, be devolved to the lowest appropriate level of Government to ensure that heritage conservation is accessible as possible to local communities, and that they also have a voice in determining what they consider to be of cultural significance.

It is going to make it easier for us to recycle old buildings.  I would in particular like to make an appeal to the major banking institutions and particularly to those people who effectively have the control of money in their hands in South Africa, to ensure in future that buildings that are perfectly good are not demolished, but that we look more carefully at recycling existing buildings.

Mr Speaker, as I come towards the end, I want to mention one specific project which I think certainly we would like to have declared as one of our first major projects in terms of this new legislation, and that is the eMakhosini Valley.  Those of you who know the history of this Province know, that Valley is the real heartland of the Zulu people.  Zulu ~Inkosi~s and Kings have lived there for more than four centuries.  
 
That land, in terms of a very unjust past, fell into white hands and it became part of the old Vryheid Republic.  It is the intention of the KwaZulu Monuments Council, and hopefully the new Amafa KwaZulu to acquire most of that land.  In fact we have already acquired 6 000 hectares of that land, and we wish to turn that into a major tourism venture, and obviously the major objective is to conserve the heritage.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I would just like to again reiterate that this legislation has come about after very broad, and very long, and very inclusive consultation.  I believe that it is a piece of legislation that not only can be supported in this House, but I think will enjoy support outside the House.  I think it also, and this is hopefully an issue which will not divide us, although I know the hon Mr Schutte has introduced or sought to introduce amendments which quite frankly I find surprising, but it does enable this House to provide protection for the cultural heritage of all groups of people that live in this Province.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I would hope that we can unanimously approve this piece of legislation.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Konigkramer.  It then leaves us with the next speaker on the list, Mr C Xaba.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The ANC, Mr Speaker, adds its full support to the Bill.  It is a ground breaking piece of legislation.  It represents a breakaway with the past which was eurocentric in dealing with heritage matters, and introduces a new approach to conservation of the Province's rich heritage resources.

Previously cultural resources and matters related thereto in the Province were 

regulated by two sets of legislation, namely:

1.	The KwaZulu Monuments Act which was limited in its jurisdiction to areas that fell within the territory of the former KwaZulu Government; and

2.	National Monuments Act.  This Act governed heritage matters that fell within what was known as white South Africa.

Mr Speaker, the local authorities and communities will be active players in deciding which sites/places they consider important for proclamation as heritage sites/places for purposes of protection.  

Anything 60 years or older, be it shipwrecks, archaeological objects, graves will automatically become the property of this Government.  For that reason be conserved and protected by the Amafa KwaZulu-Natal, a statutory body created by this Act to conserve, protect and administer the Province's cultural resources on behalf of all of us.  Important graves, including graves associated with the liberation struggle will be identified for purposes of protection.  This is a very significant milestone in the history of our country.

The implementation of this Act, if done properly and sensitively, will contribute significantly in the healing and reconciliation process.  I do not want to emphasise that this Act will see a recognition of a real South African history that stood up unflinchingly against the supremacy of the white colonial history.

Mr Speaker, we are grateful that we are passing this Bill today which has been a matter of controversy for some time until fine tuned in the Committee.  I am sure the Minister will be at ease now.  With all these words, Mr Speaker, the ANC will vote for this Bill.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I wish to then proceed on an amended list, and on the amended list I will now call upon the hon Mr Rehman.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, South Africa has just celebrated Heritage Day on 24 September 1997, and the Macufe Culture and Arts Festival was successfully held recently in Bloemfontein.

The reason for this widespread interest in the country's history and culture can probably be put down to a new awareness amongst a broader spectrum of our community.  The importance of our heritage, is not only for patriotic reasons, but also a very valuable means of encouraging tourism to South Africa.

Mr Speaker, the Heritage Bill provides for the establishment of a statutory body to administer heritage conservation on behalf of KwaZulu-Natal, particularly the care, maintenance, repair and management of historically important sites, architecturally important buildings, military cemeteries, important graves and traditional burial places.

Heritage matters in KwaZulu-Natal are currently regulated by two sets of legislation.  The KwaZulu Monuments Act, governs all heritage matters that fall within the territory of the former KwaZulu-Natal Government, with formerly white KwaZulu-Natal falling under the National Monuments Act.  The Amafa aKwaZulu-Natali will be an empowered statutory body.

This point is manifest in the fact that once the legislation is passed it will become illegal to demolish anything older than 60 years without first obtaining Provincial Government permission.

The Heritage Bill has been praised not only locally, but by the United Nations as ground breaking legislation.  Various other countries, including Namibia are examining it with a view to amending their own legislation.  The past South African heritage legislation tended to deal with everything in a eurocentric way, concentrating for example, largely on buildings and objects that were mainly concerned with white heritage.  The new legislation takes care of things that were never given consideration in the past.  There was a time when if it did not have a Cape Dutch gable it could not be declared a monument.  

Mr Speaker, in the South African Arts, Culture and Heritage 1997 calendar, an article by the Mail and Guardian, one reads that South Africa ...

MR A RAJBANSI:  Will the hon member take a question?

MR R M BURROWS:  It is from a historical monument.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I get a response from the hon member?

MR A RAJBANSI:  Taking into consideration, the hon members says that ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I get a response from the hon member?

MR M F REHMAN:  No, I am not taking a question.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  You are not taking a question?

MR M F REHMAN:  No.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The hon member is not taking a question, Mr Rajbansi.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Please resume your seat and can the hon member proceed.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can we have order.  Can the hon member proceed. 

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you.  Mr Speaker, in the South African Arts, Culture and Heritage 1997 calendar an article by the Mail and Guardian, one reads that South Africa can justifiably be called the museum country of Africa.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Of the world, not only Africa.

MR M F REHMAN:  And that nearly half of the approximately 1 000 museums in Africa are situated here, with the largest dating back to the middle of the 19th century as in Europe.  The biggest museums in Africa are situated in major cities such as Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town, Pietermaritzburg and Bloemfontein.  Many of these institutions, given the long history of white minority rule, do not cover the full range of this country's heritage.  However, new efforts are being made to correct this imbalance and the museums collections that do not exist generally are well managed.

Mr Speaker, we from the IFP fully support this wonderful piece of legislation.  I would like to conclude with these wise words:

		When the righteous prosper, the city rejoices.  When the wicked perish, there are shouts of joy.

I thank you.

MR A RAJBANSI:  They go like rats.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rehman.  Can I now ask for, still on an amended list, I wish to ask for Mr Rajbansi to address the House please.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  This Bill levels the playing field.  As the hon Mr Rehman has indicated, that in the past the heritage of a particular sector of a society was recognised.  I did not say in jest about my house, my personal family home in Hottentot Road has been declared a national monument.

Of course, we wanted to propose certain amendments, Mr Speaker, not today.  We do not want to delay the passage of this excellent Bill.  It levels the playing field, it gives recognition to communities, organisations and movement that deserves recognition over the years in our Province.  The shortcomings are, we talk of shipwrecks, but we do not talk of ship arrivals and forced departures from this country.  We are not talking of sports, for example.  I am of the view that the Somtseu Road ground should be declared a national monument.

Of course the hon Mr Konigkramer quite correctly referred to the history.  We must not forget a forgotten chapter, that Indian seafarers were in this country 1 200 years ago.  There is evidence of that in the northern part of this particular Province.

With these words, Mr Speaker, I support this Bill with the suggestion that we will propose amendments at a later date.  We should support this Bill today unanimously.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  Having called on Mr Rajbansi, I now go on to request ~Inkosi~ Mdletshe to address the House.  ~Inkosi~ has five minutes.

~INKOSI~ B N MDLETSHE: 

TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, I think that this afternoon when a person looks at this Bill, it is a very good Bill which we should all support.  I support what was said by the honourable member Rajbansi that even if there are certain things, we will have to see to them next time.

When you look at this Bill, Mr Speaker, it is a Bill which protects and looks after the inheritance of the nation, it is not a Bill which breaks down things in which the nation takes pride.  So if one looks at the situation and realises that the inheritance of the nation will be built up, it provides for proper and efficient ways in regard to who is going to do that work.

Mr Speaker, I did hear that there are certain programmes which have already been started in order to develop that area which belongs to ~Amakhosi~.  That area is historical to us.  It is also from where we derive the power of ubuKhosi, we who are ~Amakhosi~.

It also shows where we come from, where we are, and where we are going.  It is important for this area to be developed, it must be kept in an orderly state, it must be respected the world over.

Mr Speaker, you can see that this Bill from today and tomorrow, it will be a Bill which protects, which develops, and which preserves the inheritance of a nation.

I take this opportunity to say that there are certain areas which we regard as being important to us as a nation of KwaZulu, such as Ncome.

That is a place where the Zulu nation fought.  It is important for this Legislature to attend to that.  It will be a problem, Mr Speaker, if there are going to be people, or some people in this country of ours who are going to regard this area as their area and usurp it from us so that it no longer forms part of our inheritance as a nation, but becomes an area for some, there is a danger in that.

I think that it is important that they be warned, those who think like that.  They must not attempt to play around with things which are our inheritance.  We all want to gain from these areas.  We also want to go and see these areas, we also want these areas to be preserved, preserved for us.

So, Mr Speaker, all these areas that are present here in KwaZulu-Natal are our areas, they are not areas that belong only to some.  As I have mentioned the area of Isancome, you will find that there are some people who get together and call us rude names, they still call us kaffirs here when they are together, there is a danger in that.  I do not want to say too much about that issue.

I think that it is very important indeed for this matter to be rectified quickly.  I therefore support this Bill fully because it is going to straighten out the problems that exist and rectify them.

Awu!  the ~Inkosi~ has spoken.  Thank you, Mr Speaker. T/E

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  I now wish to call upon, according to my list here, I have Advocate Schutte to please address the House for six minutes.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  I thank you for the opportunity of addressing this House on this very, very important Bill.  I apologise for the fact that the member of our party on that Committee, Mr Brian Edwards, is not able to address this House.  We were informed early this morning that this Bill would not be debated today.

Mr Speaker, I would like at the outset to emphasise the importance of this Bill.  If ever there was a province I believe that needs a Bill like this, it is this Province.  We have a rich culture, we have a rich diversity, we have a rich history that we have got to protect and look after.  The richness of the Boer/Brit war, of the Boer/Zulu war, of the Zulu/Brit war, I do not think that there is another province with that richness that we have in this Province.  We have to protect and look after the interests of that.

The second aspect that I think is of paramount importance, Mr Speaker, is that this being a cultural matter, we should go out of our way to ensure that there is absolute consensus.

In dealing with cultural matters it is the one aspect that I believe we should ensure that there is room, that there is space for all our cultures to develop to their utmost.  There should not be a feeling that one culture is preferred above another culture, or the cultures are not allowed an opportunity of developing to its fullest context.

It is for that reason, Mr Speaker, that our party feels very strongly about the fact that there should be consensus about this Bill.  Let me just very briefly give you the background to it.

The member of my party on this Committee, I have been informed, did not vote for the Bill, but abstained from voting on this Bill.  I believe that members of the ANC did the same, because there were certain aspects that concerns us.  It is for that reason that I also approached the hon the Premier to ask that we have another opportunity of seeing whether we cannot support this Bill, because we believe that this is a Bill that should be, if it is to be successful, should be supported by all the persons concerned.

I am therefore giving notice, Mr Speaker, that I will make amendments in terms of Rule 127 to a number of clauses.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  It took you a long time to wake up.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  And may I just refer to them at this stage.  I do not apologise for the fact that we are doing it now.

AN HON MEMBER:  Is it not a delaying tactic?

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  I have referred to the history of it, as in your case you did not support it in the Committee.  We also did not support it in the Committee, but we have gone out of our way to ensure that we try and get consensus on it.  For that reason, Mr Speaker ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can we have order.  Order! Order! Order!  Can we accept that when members are speaking they will do it through the Speaker, because it really is going to cause such a commotion if we end up with members addressing each other. 

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  Mr Speaker, we will propose amendments to the following ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I ask the hon member to just hold his peace.  I have recognised a member who seems to be rising on some point of order or something else.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, I have asked if the hon member will take a question.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  I will take a question.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Point of order, Mr Speaker.  The hon member Mr Konigkramer was not speaking from his seat.  He has now made a miraculous recovery there.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I have allowed the hon member to use that microphone, because of the fault with his microphone.  Therefore he was in order to speak from that microphone.  I have not heard the answer from the hon member.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  I am prepared to take a question.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  You are prepared to take a question.  Can we then allow Mr Konigkramer.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the hon member whether he is aware of the fact that Dr Ivor Pols who is the director of the Voortrekker Museum has been in this process right from the inception and in fact was a member of the original task team in 1994?

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  That may be the case, Mr Speaker.  I am not here to defend Dr Pols or anybody for that matter.

HON MEMBERS:  Microphone please.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  Mr Speaker, the matters that we will propose amendments to, are clauses 7.16 and 26.10.  These proposals are clearly conflicting.  The one section gives the power to the Minister to expropriate, and the other one to the Council to expropriate.  You cannot have them both.  It must either be the one or the other.

Then as far as clause 15(b) is concerned, and a number of other clauses, there appears to be different conflicting references to the Council and to its other name.  I believe that there should be agreement that there be one reference to the Council to make it clear.

As far as clause 15.1 is concerned, there is reference to sectoral interests on the Council.  Sectoral interests are economic interests, agricultural interests, and that kind of interest.  It does not refer to cultural groupings and to cultural interests.  I believe, Mr Speaker, the one aspect that we must be absolutely certain about is that all the major cultural groupings in this Province are represented on this Council.

As far as section 46 is concerned, I believe that legal advice/opinion has been obtained on this.  Mr Speaker, I believe that this matter should be looked at again, and that is to see whether this meets the constitutional requirements as to legal succession, and whether it in fact meets the constitutional requirements in this regard.

Then as far as the section 26.6(a) is concerned, the question is why should small scale agricultural activities be allowed to damage matters of historical and cultural interest?  I believe that there cannot be any good reason why, if large scale agricultural activities cannot be allowed to do that, why small scale agricultural activities should be allowed to do that.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I now hand in three amendments.  I will hand in a further three amendments within this debate.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Schutte.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, the member of the National Party says he will hand in something later on, if I heard him correctly.  Mr Speaker, can I rise on a point of order.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  What is the order?

MR A RAJBANSI:  In the light of the fact that this amendment is moved, it means the Bill has to be sent back to the Portfolio Committee.  I want to suggest that the Bill is not properly tabled on the Order Paper in terms of our Rules, that when it goes to the Committee, Rule 125(2) must be complied with.  It is not complied with, and if anybody applies to you for a ruling to throw this Bill out, it can be thrown out.  I am suggesting that 125(2) be complied with when the Portfolio Committee sends this Bill back on the Order Paper.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  I take it that especially the Minister in charge is aware of that, and will comply with that.  That leaves me with the next member, Mrs Downs.  Unfortunately for some reason, you have been allocated one minute, but you usually use 30 seconds.

MRS J M DOWNS:  I think it is a plot, sir, to keep us from talking too loudly.  Having said that, there is not much more to be said about this Bill in that it is fair to everybody, it takes all cultures into consideration, and we therefore thoroughly support it.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Oh, so they knew very well that the lady will take 30 seconds.  30 seconds Nkwali yeNkosi.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Yabonga, Baba Somlomo.  The PAC supports this Bill fully.  However, we have one question to the Minister.  We are very happy to support this Bill, particularly in my personal capacity, because both my maternal and paternal grandfathers fought at Isandlwana.  We are happy that Isandlwana will be treated accordingly.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Of course they were on the side where they belonged.  [LAUGHTER]  Secondly, Mr Speaker, we would like the Minister to clarify to us on the question of the statues of our colonisers, like Queen Victoria standing in front of the Parliament buildings in Pietermaritzburg, and Sir Theophilus Shepstone.  Do we give them the same status as King Shaka and the others?  We would like to know that, because while we appreciate that all cultures are being taken care of, we do recognise that the question of Queen Victoria was not a cultural issue, it was a colonising issue.  Therefore we are a little bit jittery, but we support the Bill.  Hopefully such things will be looked into.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Shamase.  Mr Burrows for some reason is now being offered one minute.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, thank you.  The one minute is in order to reflect the Democratic Party's view on the Bill.  The Democratic Party will quite naturally support the Bill, and praise those who are responsible for its drafting.

I must reflect on my colleague from the PAC, that to my knowledge heritage includes all matters, including both the colonialists and the anti-colonialists.  So the one great thing about this piece of legislation is that when it talks about graves of the victims of conflict, it makes no difference between the Boer and the Brit, the Zulu and English, the Zulu and the Boer, the anti-colonialists and the colonialists.  The graves are all of ours, and they must all be respected.

One of the things, and I think he has put a finger on it, we need to look at the statues and say are there too many of one kind, and too few of another kind.  We really need to address whether we in fact have given enough to those who have participated in the building of this country, and who opposed the colonialists, and who opposed ~Apartheid~.  Yes, I think we must accept that that part of our heritage needs to be respected and built up.

I think that the piece of legislation that we have before us is a framework on which all of us, including Mr Rajbansi and the items he has mentioned, can build and build into the future, and build well.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Burrows.  I now then call upon Mr Bhamjee, and the amended time slot is ten minutes.

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  Mr Speaker, we wish to congratulate the Minister and the Portfolio Committee for tabling this Bill.  I think it is going to be one that is going to transform our attitudes to each other, it is going to promote a new patriotism that is going to take us forward.

When the White Paper on arts, culture, science and technology was introduced, all South Africans, and in particular South Africans from the historically disadvantaged communities welcomed it with open arms.  The White Paper offered an opportunity to usher in a cultural renaissance.  A renaissance, I am sad to say, needs to go back in history.  The National Party has put forward new amendments.  The preamble to these amendments forces one to be sceptical, because these amendments are aimed to perpetuate the past.

To appreciate the past, we need to ask where we come from, because ours is a multi-cultural society.  If you do not have a past you are lost!  My forefathers were brought here as indentured labourers by your forefathers, and they were given slavelike status ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Not by mine.  [LAUGHTER]

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  Well, you have been part of the white power structure, and they treated them as slaves.  We need to understand our past.  If you look at the history books, we find that there is a suggestion that black people, and in particular the African majority do not have a past.

As early as 1962 the Communist Party in its document, The Road to South African Freedom, stated:

		The White ruling classes, and especially the leaders of the Nationalist Party have manufactured a version of the past and the present of this country which they systematically attempt to impose everywhere, from the schoolroom to international opinion.  According to this picture the early White settlers penetrated peacefully into a virtually unoccupied country.  The African population, who are depicted as savage barbarians without culture, achievements or history, are represented as relative newcomers who entered the country at about the same time as the Whites, and conducted aggressive wars and raids against them.  The impression is given that African occupation was always more or less confined to the present Reserves - the 'Bantu Homelands'.  This version of South Africa's past is entirely false.

Mr Speaker, this version of South Africa's past cannot be forgotten.  It is only by remembering the past will we appreciate that we have a rich history.  If we do not remember our history we are naked.  Therefore this Bill ensures that all - and in particular the history of the oppressed people occupy their rightful place in the South African sun.

Social identity and social memory are key to the Heritage Bill.  As the hon Burrows has clearly indicated, it is a framework Bill.  As such it ensures that all South Africans in terms of the multi-cultural collectivity of our society have an opportunity to enrich our new South African culture. 

More so, this Bill also says we must not become locked in provincialism.  We need to reach outside our provinces, we need to recognise the Yusuf Dadoos, the Moses Kotanes, the J B Marks, the Braam Fischers, who have helped to build our nation, who have helped to ensure that we can sit down together and share our heritage.

Mr Speaker, we must not forget our past, because our past is the future.  More so, we need to also recognise that without a patriotism, without encouraging us to become patriotic to South Africa, to our Province, this Bill will simply collect dust.  We need to ask ourselves who we are.  We are South Africans who are prepared to occupy our place in Africa and in the world.  To do that we must be prepared to say that we will not forget the past, we will collectively charter the future, we will respect the heritage of everyone, of all South Africans so that we can all walk tall in the future.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Bhamjee.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can members have order whilst the Minister closes the debate.  I will not hesitate to take drastic measures.  
AN HON MEMBER:  Like throwing out Burrows.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Will the Minister close the debate please.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity.  The most important thing I want to do right now is to thank the members for their contribution to the Bill.  I want to particularly thank the members that have supported the Bill.

It is true that the Bill is a piece of legislation that is ground breaking.  It looks at heritage not in a sectorial fashion, and we want to observe that KwaZulu-Natal has a unique heritage.  Some of the members have referred to the fact that it reverses an eurocentric approach to heritage.  I also note that the roots of some Europeans are right here in KwaZulu.  Surely I think the Bill does us proud, does the Province proud.

Of course I am a little distressed at the fact that some amendments are still proposed at this stage.  The Bill has been going around for quite some time now.  I am surprised that there are so many amendments that are being proposed. 

AN HON MEMBER:  Unfortunately Mr Schutte is rather slow.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Be that as it may, people have the democratic right to do that when perhaps they have been reflecting on some of the aspects which perhaps they were not aware of earlier on.  We then, according to the Rules, will obviously have to consider that, but that is not for me to say.  The Speaker will do that.  I am happy that some members have even referred to the fact that the Bill has been lauded even on international level.

We do want to note and observe, and also accept that KwaZulu-Natal is rich in culture and its diversity and history is diverse.  One does hope that at some stage we will have to go forward, even if, in our diversity, we do not all have the desired consensus.

The Bill of course brings about some new awareness.  It may even promote or make it easier for the Tourism Board to promote its activities.  We are eager to have this Bill.  You know I remember at one time one hon member, the hon Mr Meer who is not here, raised a motion about recognising in forms of monuments.  Some of them are heroes in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal.  Oh, he is right here.  You talk of the devil.  [LAUGHTER]

MR I C MEER:  Mr Speaker, I have never been called a devil in my life.  [LAUGHTER]  I will lodge my objection through you to protect me.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  You are a good devil.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I have the hon member sitting and then resuming his chair, and not speaking from there.  [LAUGHTER]  Thank you, can the Minister continue.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  And the Bill now before us makes it easy for the Province or the Department to start looking seriously at such motions that were proposed.  Mr Speaker, I was talking about people like Albert Luthuli, Dlomo...

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  And others, and others.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION  [LAUGHTER]

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, I am eager for this Bill to be passed because we are eagerly, looking forward to a time and situation where these things can be effected.  This to me is indeed ground breaking.  I want to thank the members who have contributed.  I am hoping that we will take very little time in going through those proposed amendments, and we will come back and pass the Bill.  If of course there are still some hitches, I cannot see a Bill really that will satisfy everybody.  Well, in a democratic sense we will definitely have to go by the majority.

Mr Speaker, with those words, and thanking the House for their contribution, I leave the matter to you.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  In terms of Rule 127(1), there has been amendments to the Bill.  I now recommit the Bill to the Portfolio Committee of Education and Culture for them to consider it and to report back on the deliberations, and indicate whether there has been acceptance on the amendments or not, whereafter we will then put the Bill to the vote.  The Bill stands recommitted to the Portfolio Committee.  Thank you.

THE KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE BILL, 1997 IS RECOMMITTED TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  That closes our debate on the Heritage Bill, and thus concludes our 8.2 on the Order Paper.  We will therefore now go on to 8.3 which is going to be a debate on a matter of public importance.  I would love us to just note that that matter is treated as a matter of public importance, and not as a matter of urgent public importance.  The matter was introduced by Mr Rajbansi.  It was referred for discussion to this sitting.  I therefor call upon Mr Rajbansi to introduce this debate for five minutes.

DEBATE ON A MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE RE EDUCATION.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, firstly, I want to place on record certain facts.  The purpose of requesting this debate is not to embarrass anyone, not to score any political points, but to ensure that in the highest institution of this Province, a debate of general public concern on a grave matter takes place, because across the spectrum in this Province there is a concern about education.  There is a concern about the under-funding of education by the Central Government to this Province.  There is a concern about cleaners.  There is a concern about security etcetera.

I want to also make another point very clear.  That it is not my intention, and I do not think any member of this hon House wants any disadvantageous situation relating to communities to continue.  At the same time, we do not want communities of former home affairs administrations, schools that had the advantage for those advantages to continue.  We must recognise the fact that the schools under the control of the former KwaZulu Government and the Department of Education and Training did not have cleaning services to the extent to which schools under the control of the former House of Assembly, or NED, or the House of Delegates, or the House of Representatives had.

We are bound, Mr Speaker, by the Labour Relations Act, and therefore there are certain schools where the school cleaners who are employees of our Provincial Government cannot be redeployed before there are discussions in established bargaining chambers.  Last year, Mr Speaker, there was concern about the termination of the contracts of the cleaning services in the former House of Delegates schools.  I am not protecting those schools, because after 1994 the situation in those schools changed, that they are not mainly or exclusively for Indian children.  A large percentage of schools in Chatsworth, Phoenix and other areas are occupied by children from the former African areas.

Those children who belong to the most disadvantaged groups are occupying schools that were under the control of the former House of Delegates.

Of course, I want to suggest to the hon Minister, there is a nice dictum, "Plan with the people, do with the people and consult with the people".  It is not only the cleaning contractors who are involved, we are worried today about the welfare of workers.  The welfare of about 2 500 workers, the cleaners.  They are poor workers, and they are concerned about their work, they are concerned about the future.  They were former employees of the State, and as a result of avarice on the part of certain people who belonged to the Executive of the Broerderbond, at the time, made certain changes and instead of Government employees, they were transferred to contractors, full cleaning contractors.

I want to read from a joint statement issued by our hon Minister after he has had, quite correctly, discussion with role-players.  He said:

		A new system for the provision of cleaning services at schools will be provided by the Department after consultation with all stakeholders.

We have the organised teaching profession.  We had worker representatives.  We have the community through the parents organisations.  I know that the hon Minister has had discussions with the contractors, but he also said that:

		The new system will provide opportunity for all present employees to be absorbed.

That is our main concern.  Not about contractors, but these employees were given an undertaking at the time that whatever changes that are to take place they are going to be absorbed.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I notify the member that he has got exactly half a minute.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Right.  I am not saying that the former NED must not have caretakers.  I think the norm is that each school should have one caretaker, and let there be an equitable provision of cleaning services throughout the Province.

My appeal to the hon Minister, that in order to avoid ugly situations in our schools that are damaging, that this decision to terminate the services of the contractors where the workers are affected should be put on hold, pending a discussion with the Portfolio Committee, discussion with all parties so that an amicable solution can be found.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  I now call upon the hon member Mr Konigkramer.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Oh, I am sorry, but can I request the Whips to assist me please to alert me of amendments that take place.  Please, that is just by the way, but nonetheless I am now calling upon Madam Gasa.  I hope you still have five minutes, and that there has been no amendment to that.

MRS F X GASA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I would like us to be very careful when we handle this issue.  I would like to remind the House that we have just been dealing with a debate that reminded us of our history, therefore our past.  I am very happy that Mr Rajbansi is saying we need to be cool, because this is how this part of the House wants the whole matter to be addressed in a very cool, dignified and integrated manner.

The cleaning of schools, and contractors, and labour and all those things, we are aware of them, but the IFP is a bit worried.  If we are going to be talking about disadvantaged schools and still perpetuate that disadvantaged situation, we need to guard against rhetoric.

The black children in this country have paid for their education, have paid for the upkeep of their schools, have paid for their uniforms, have paid for almost everything.  The leader of the IFP and all responsible leaders of the other political parties have called for a calm in racial discussion.

This House has got to deal with this case in such a way that we do not raise racial tension, because if we take stock and audit as to which schools are cleaned right now, and which schools children have still to use their hands to clean their own toilets, we will still be shocked.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MRS F X GASA:  We have no time for rhetoric, Mr Speaker.  We have got time for facts.  If the time has come for children to clean let every child in every nook of this country clean, and remove [old people] from cleaning.  If it means somebody has got to come and clean, let the children learn and let the children not be the cleaners.

I have an example, I came from a situation where we were talking about protection of children, and here our children are scorned by other children of certain groups to say go and clean the toilets.  This was said at the summit which we attended, by social workers.  We cannot continue to subject our children to that type of thing.

So when we talk we must remember that the debate is not about what happens, it is about what should happen.  We must be mindful of the fact that we are underfunded, and we must not start by attacking without looking at how far underfunded we are.

I feel very bad, Mr Speaker, that we have got to stand here and we must articulate the outrage at the arrogance of people who continue to perpetrate inequality.  We have to sit down, and we have to call a halt, and we have to explain to everybody that when we start moving, we all move together.  We do not want one section, we are not staggering services, we are saying services have got to go from one right up, or from up down.  No section should still be having people cleaning and [our children] they are subjected to cleaning.  Even as I am talking now people are complaining that they are paying R20,00 for cleaning, it is a hue and cry.  We have always cleaned, and let those children when we are still discussing the labour and toyi-toyiing, let us be able to say what every child has got to do, whatever colour he or she is.

I am trying to say here, let us be careful that we do not plunge education into a racial conflict.  In this House the Education Committee has done its best at what cost.  We have tried to find each other, we have seen faults together and we have tried to correct them.  So let us not posture here, and talk nicely while others are still clinging to an old system and we are not subjected to a new system.  Let us be honest for once.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Madam Gasa.  I now then call upon Mr Cele who has four minutes.

MR B H CELE:  Mr Speaker, the matter is a bit complex.  Definitely we should try to analyse it and find an answer that at the end of the day gives the cool and reduces the tension that seems to be mounting.  We should guard against again plunging  education into further troubled waters in the Province.

I would not like to discuss the matter in the direction of the ex-HOD, ex whatever ODs.  There were too many ODs and ETs and all that.  The problem about that, we are arguing the extension and perpetuation of the problem that has always been there, and we cannot stand here and argue on that basis.  That is the main problem about this argument.

The problem, as my colleague Mrs Gasa has said, the matter has been discussed quite extensively in the Portfolio Education and Culture.  Unfortunately, there were cards that were not put on the table from the very word go.  For instance, it took us some time to get to know the agreements between the Minister and the stakeholders.  I am not going to repeat and read them again.  It has disadvantaged those people who did not know that there was such an agreement.

That kind of agreement will have to be honoured.  Honoured in a way that at the end of the day the matter is about cleaning at schools, not in certain schools.  On that we will have to be very clear, otherwise we are not going to defend any sectional privileges that were acquired under ~Apartheid~ and up till today was still defending sectional privileges.  It cannot happen that way.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR B H CELE:  That must be very clear.  Maybe lastly, it will be said if the people that are still privileged, because we argue this one, for instance there is a document that tells us that 424 schools are provided with a total of 2 697 posts in this Province, and 370 of them are cleaned by private contractors.  4 387 schools have neither posts nor contracts.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I request the hon member to just give me an indulgence please.  When we are in the House of Parliament, whether we are members or visitors, we are requested not to use cellular phones.  I am saying that because I do not want to use the sergeant-at-arms.  I am requesting the two ladies sitting on the gallery to please move outside with the cellular phone.  I am requesting others to please close their phones immediately.  I hope everybody respects Parliament, and I hope we are not going to be plunged into another crisis.  Can the hon member continue.
Unfortunately for one minute.  

MR B H CELE:  Thanks, Mr Speaker.  As I have indicated that 4 378 schools, and I can guess where those schools are.  Definitely when we begin to resolve this matter one will have to make sure that it is the last time we argue this matter on a sectional basis, that some schools do have and others do not have.

Secondly, when we debate these matters, all the cards will have to be on the table and understand exactly who is involved, and what is involved.

Thirdly, those aggrieved workers out there, they must make sure that they use methods that will not erode the sympathy that is there in the broader community, because I understand that some schools are vandalised based on this issue.

It is very funny to me, and sometimes with the ANC, that some people could not partake and fight hard against ~Apartheid~, but on this matter now they can even vandalise schools based on defending their only individual rights.

So people will have to be very careful, while we deal with this matter.  The sympathy must be brought and do not erode the sympathy by beginning to vandalise schools.  Those schools have to be there.  We all know that there is no money to build more schools, we must look after our property.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  That brings me to this list, the next speaker is Mr Edwards.  I am aware that Mr Edwards is not around and the list has not been amended.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is Mr Waugh.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Waugh.  I give Mr Waugh one minute.

MR J N C WAUGH:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  It is with regret that this topic is being discussed in Parliament today.  These are issues that should be dealt with by the Department in such a way that it does not become a crisis.

We have now come to a situation where the budget of Education has been overspent by the tune of plus/minus R900 million.  Now suddenly cleaning services and security services at schools have been suspended at short notice.

We on this side of the House believe that if there has to be change it must be done in an orderly and structured manner.  The situation is that many companies have long standing contracts with the Department.  Does this now open the Province to legal action which could possibly cost the Department large amounts of money?  Why did the Department not stagger this decision and phase it out over a period of time?  What about the workers who will now be out of jobs?  Has all this been considered?

Mr Speaker, if we had known today that this money will be going to communities in need, one could have easily accepted that.  But no, sir, it now goes towards repaying the backlog created within the Department.

In closing, one can just say, Mr Speaker, departments will have to keep a tight reign on expenditure from day one so that decisions like this does not repeat itself.  If it has to be done, it be done in a phased out manner and all role-players be taken on board.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now call upon Mr Burrows, also with one minute, sir.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, we have an inadequate budget for education.  Let us not go into that now, we need to prioritise our spending.  I agree with the hon Mrs Gasa and Mr Cele, that if we are going to look at spending we need to look at those who have been most disadvantaged.  What we need to do quite frankly is to do more of going into schools and telling them the financial truth.  They are going to have a less advantaged situation than they have at present.  We need more people to go and do that.  We need to shift staff.  Those who are in permanent employment, and Mr Cele has mentioned them, need to be given notice.  The public service bargaining chamber, the negotiations between the State and the union are going on now.

The unfortunate situation that Mr Rajbansi has raised is that of the ministerial agreement and whether it is going to be implemented or not.

Now I think what we need to accept at the end of the day, we are going to have a policy that is applicable to everybody, and we have to start, as Mrs Gasa said, from a level playing field.  So a lot of people who are in schools that are advantaged at the moment are going to have to give up their advantages.  That has got to happen in order to redistribute.

I go along with what Mr Cele has said, it is utterly unacceptable, and this House must make it clear, the trashing of schools is not a labour worker initiative that we will accept.  By all means, and the Labour Relations Act gives the right for picketing, it gives the right for demonstrations, but trashing of schools, creating health hazards, creating school closing, we must reject as worker tactics.

AN HON MEMBER:  Put them in gaol.

MR R M BURROWS:  What we need to do, Mr Speaker, as a Parliament, is to recognise the inadequacy of the budget, reprioritisation, care for the poorest of the poor, and in fact then work from that basis, but condemn the trashing of schools.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  I now call upon Shamazi, Baba.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Yabonga, Baba Somlomo.  I am proud to say that I am a former principal of a disadvantaged school.  The school went on.  My school children cleaned their school.  Both the grounds and the classrooms.  I am proud to say that they are today serving this Province.  I can name just two.  Wilson Ntuli at the Premier's office and also Eric Ngubane at the Premier's office.  They cleaned their school, and there is nothing that shows that they are short of anything because they cleaned their own schools.

AN HON MEMBER:  Exactly.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  I am glad this debate came, because I am sure comrade - oh, hon Rajbansi.  [LAUGHTER]  Hon Rajbansi must be having a treasure from certain communities.  It is better if it comes here, and we say it clearly so that the whole Province knows that the days of first world South Africa and third world South Africa are over and gone.  Period.

What we need to do as a Legislature, we should say we appreciate the problem suffered by the workers, because they have been working, they have their own budget and plans, but that must be separated from school.  I cannot stomach parents encouraging their children to vandalise schools which have been built by the money taken also from the poor people.  As the hon Cele said, it will open a Pandoras box which nobody will be able to control.

So please let us inform those people to hold their horses.  The Department must see what it can do with the workers, but the children must be taught, I think we must come out clear, schools must be cleaned when they are dirty.  Who must clean them?  The owners of the schools who are the children.  The children must clean the school.  Nothing will happen to them.  We cleaned schools, here we are today.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Shamazi.  I am very happy that the hon member ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can we have order please.  I am saying I am very happy that the hon member corrected his language before I had to rule whether it is parliamentary or unparliamentary.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Oh, which one?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  That was your comrades.  [LAUGHTER]  I now call upon Mrs Downs.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I would rather clarify this.  I believe in comradeship, that is the future of this country.  I have been a comrade, will be a comrade and always be a comrade.  [LAUGHTER]

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I am happy that there was no time for you to speak, but Mrs Downs, can we have you for one minute.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Yes, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I would like to raise the level of this debate actually to another level, and just say I would like to ask this House a question.  Is it fair that the Western Cape has an abundance of teachers, has cleaners, has facilities, has fences, has security when KwaZulu-Natal does not?

AN HON MEMBER:  Where the NATS are in power.

MRS J M DOWNS:  And I blame this problem fairly and squarely on the fact that we are thoroughly underfunded.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can the hon member stop a little bit.  I would now really like the sergeant-at-arms to deal with the members on the gallery.  I requested that cellular phones be closed, and there seems to be some defiance.  The hon member can proceed please.

MRS J M DOWNS:  May I continue, sir.  If I may just reiterate, sir, that this Province compared to the Western Cape has been underfunded by R700,00 per person in the Province.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS J M DOWNS:  May I continue, Mr Speaker?  I see you are very alarmed at the goings on in the gallery.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  No, I have requested the sergeant-at-arms to remove the lady who is consistently defying the House and remove her for good, for her not to come back.  Continue.  Continue, hon lady.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MRS J M DOWNS:  Thank you, sir.  If I may reiterate sir, it is unfair that KwaZulu-Natal is underfunded and we are therefore having this debate about cleaners, we are thinking about retrenching teachers that we desperately need because we have received R700,00 per person less than other provinces like the Western Cape.  I think that that is where the problem lies, and if this situation is rectified we would not need to have this debate.  Thank you, sir.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now call upon the hon Minister to please reply to this debate.  Mr Minister?

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, well maybe I should say I have mixed feelings about this debate, but I am glad it took place, because at some stage one did not know how members of Parliament felt about the issue.  I have had a sense of how the Portfolio Committee felt about the issue, I mean the Portfolio Committee on Education.  We have been dealing with this issue of security and cleaning for quite some time now, and it does not seem to be going away.

The question of equalising services, the question of equity is a very difficult issue.  It brings about affirmative action.  One thing for sure, affirmative action is always resisted, vehemently by those that were previously advantaged by the system.  You can always expect that in all communities, and that is exactly what is happening here, it is resistance to affirmative action.  To some extent I am not surprised, but I am surprised at that antic, and the manner in which the matter is being handled.  The hype with which it is being handled and the politics that are involved in checking the issue, and making use of the issue for political gain.  It is a very sensitive subject.  Education for the children is always a sensitive issue.

If I may just indicate to members, the schools that have cleaning services are the schools that belong to the old NED, the schools that belonged to HOD and some schools in the HOR, some schools in KwaZulu, for instance the so-called keep schools, there is just four of them in the whole of KwaZulu-Natal, and some territorial schools that were mainly boarding schools whose services were mainly supplied by the Government.

Now all these schools combined, the schools that received cleaning, form about 25% of the school population in the Province.  The allocation for cleaning is very small.  We indicated this to the companies that are providing cleaning services.  A long time ago, about June, their contracts were being renewed on a monthly basis.  In August we said to them we cannot go beyond November, because this crunch about the financial situation was beginning to show its head.  We said we would be unable, after November, to continue with this, go and tell your people, and go and inform your unions.

There is this question about reneging on an agreement.  The agreement is talking about thrashing out a formula for cleaning in the KwaZulu-Natal schools, and no one has reneged on drawing up that formula.  We are still prepared to draw up that formula, but what has happened right now is that there is no money to continue providing cleaning services to this minority.  No one is reneging on anything.  We are saying we can still talk about the formula that we are going to be using in all schools, because we have to clean all schools if we have to.  If we do not have enough money to clean all schools we have to stop.  Therefore they keep on talking about reneging on an agreement.  In fact we are discussing the matter here because it is in Parliament.

Today the case is in court.  They have taken us to court, the companies that were providing the cleaning services.  The unfortunate part about the whole thing is that the people who are behind all this havoc, are the people who stand to gain.  They will talk about the workers all the time.  The stance will be the workers, the workers, whereas in fact it is the people that stand to gain from what we are providing.  They even go to the extent of using some people, even some people in Parliament to continue with these interests.

The matter therefore gets so very distorted.  I do want to add my voice, we have already said this as a Department, that the trashing of the schools does not make any sense.  We have told these people that there is no money and we are not playing games about the money.  Everybody knows, it is a fact in the country, not only in KwaZulu-Natal, it is a fact that there is no money.  We have been repeating this thing and repeating this thing, but trashing the schools, it means we are going to be paying thousands towards the repairing of these schools.

These people who are crying and crying, they want us to pay them more money, but what about the money that we will be using to repair those schools.  We have not taken them to court for trashing our schools.  They will pretend that some thugs came into the schools, made use of the situation and went into the schools.

I have serious reservations about the approach, the whole approach to this question of cleaning.  I have very serious reservations.  Some members have mentioned this and some people are beginning to make statements like I am anti-Indian, and it disturbs me.  I mean people that have sat down with me and talked about issues know that I handle issues on a non-racial basis, but to go out there and make statements like, "This Minister is anti-Indian".

In the beginning we were talking about transport.  There was an outcry about stopping transport, because the transport was serving only the white and Indian sections.  There was an outcry when we started talking about the security, because this also was concentrated on the white and Indian sections, an outcry that I am anti-Indian, I am anti-white.  Now this thing is repeating itself.  There is no question about my sympathy for the people that are going to lose their jobs.  Most of those people are black people that are providing cleaning services in those schools.  Then you are made to look like you are anti-people, and you do not want people to get paid, and it is all politics.

People must get serious now.  This is a new South Africa.  They must stop resisting affirmative action.  You know, getting in some gimmicks because it happens to be a black Minister who is in charge.  They must begin to accept the situation that we are talking about majorities and people that have won the vote.  Those are the people who will be in charge.  To make insinuations about who the Minister is, and not accepting, and starting all these kinds of accusations it makes one sick.  We need to sit down and talk about these issues, but stop gimmicks and politicking.

I want all the schools to be cleaned, but right now I do not have the money.  I am not faking the fact that there is no money.  So I would wish that we really get serious about discussing these issues.  Some people even get co-opted into singing this kind of song.  The fact that there are now black kids in the Indian schools, it is insignificant when you talk about the whole situation.  There are really some black children in the Indian and white schools, and that is happening because of the new situation, but there is a lot behind that.

I would therefore plead that we talk about this matter in a very cool and responsible fashion.  I am prepared to talk to anyone.  There are some people who even call themselves Association of Parents for KwaZulu-Natal, when they just come from one section of the population.  They write in the papers and make statements they say, "We are talking on behalf of all the parents of KwaZulu-Natal".  It is politics, cheap politics.

Mr Speaker, thank you very much, and I leave the matter to you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  I now call upon Mr Rajbansi who has one minute.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, what I said in my opening remarks is no different from what our dear sister, hon Faith Gasa has stated.  What we say, we need a new system.  I said that African schools, African children suffered the most.

Minister Miller made the biggest cheers on the other side, followed by hon Mr Powell.  From 1 December this year ~Apartheid~ will continue in the former white schools.  Let us bring equatability, let us bring that equatability, because everybody is keeping quiet as to what is going to happen in the former NED and House of Assembly schools from 1 December, protected by the Labour Relations Act.

What I am saying, we have one school, one cleaner, let us have them from 1 December.  Even if you want to give the African children more, let them have it because they suffered in the past.  That is what I said.

First of all, I am publicly certifying from my experience and discussion with the hon Minister, he is not anti-Indian, he is not anti-coloured, he is not anti-white and he is not anti-Zulu.  I will certify that.  [LAUGHTER]  I will certify that.

In any case, there are people who are using this for political gain.  There is no doubt about this, but there are parents who are genuine.  What I am saying, there are 2 600 workers, and the majority of these people are African workers.  The Minister has said in a public undertaking that when we introduce a new system, I do not say keep them in HOD schools, that they will be absorbed.  I want to repeat for the benefit of those who were cheering the loudest, and keeping silent, that all former white schools will have the usual caretakers from 1 December, and they are glorious about it.  No protection, no mention even in a caucus or the National Council.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  That concludes this debate on a matter of public importance.  I now wish to then continue to the next item on our Order Paper. Item 8.4 on the Order Paper is a resolution motion, a motion on the Children's Commissioner.  According to my list here, things have turned the other way round.  Mrs Downs will introduce the motion and has eight minutes instead of one minute.  I hope you remember, hon member, you have eight minutes and not one minute.

MOTION: 

		This House noting the unanimous resolution of the Welfare Portfolio Committee hereby resolves to:

		(i)	Accept in principle the aims and objects of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial office of the Commissioner for Children Bill, 1997;

		(ii)	Approve the submission of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial office of the Commissioner for Children Bill, 1997 to the Provincial office of the National Council of Provinces for revision and thereafter submission to the National Council of Provinces for passing and referral to the National Assembly for consideration as a National Act in terms of Section 76(2) of the Constitution, Act 108, 1996.

MRS J M DOWNS:  I almost, Mr Speaker, do not know what to do with eight minutes.  I have never had such a long time before.  [LAUGHTER]  I can assure you, I will do my best to fill it.

If I can introduce the motion this way.  The motion actually states that following the resolution of the Welfare Portfolio Committee which is included in our Order Papers, that this House sends the Children's Commissioner Bill to the National Council of Provinces, I am just paraphrasing it, for consideration as a National Bill.  If I may say that this is a very important Bill today, and it is also a very historic debate for a number of reasons.

First of all, because we tabled the Bill obviously, but because of its content we think that it is a very important Bill.  I and my party are particularly passionate about the protection of children.  We feel that not enough is being done and that our children are voiceless.  Every time we pass the cities we see more and more street children, our hospitals are full of abandoned babies, the child abuse statistics are rising on a daily basis, and we seem powerless to do something about it.  Our hope and our prayer is that this Bill actually addresses that need and that issue.

Number one, it will help to prevent child abuse.  Number two, it will set up a register to register predatory sex offenders who prey on children on a regular basis.  It sets up abilities of the Children's Commissioner to act on a certain seizure basis to prevent kiddie porn and kiddie prostitution, and also to look for and prevent child abuse of minors.

I am very well aware that, for example, when the farming community are hit, the farming community get together, they protest, they write letters to President Mandela, and they take it forward to him and something is done about it.  They have a voice.  I feel that nobody has a voice to speak for children.  There is no cohesive and coherent policy to deal with the problems relating to children.  There is no one specifically to stand up and speak for them.  There is no one to speak for them in court when they are embroiled with the legal justice system, both as victims and as perpetrators.  There is no cohesive system to deal with street children.  People have lost faith in the welfare system.  They do not want to give money to the welfare system because they feel that the welfare system will send it into the bureaucracy or it will be stolen or it will stray.  We feel that this Bill addresses all of those needs.  We feel that it is important for those very reasons.

We also feel that it is important, and this debate here is important today.  I do not think it was an accident that Dr Mdlalose actually came into our chamber today and addressed us and said that we were fortunate in KwaZulu-Natal not to have huge majorities on one side, and the other side, and that we have learnt to practice multi-party democracy. 

I am very proud to be a South African, but even more than that, I am very proud to be a KwaZulu-Natalian.  I think that the fact that a very small minority party like the ACDP, can put a private member's Bill, in which can be recognised a very good piece of legislation, and that this Province has the courage and the foresight to actually band together and promote something like this through to the NCOP, says a great deal about the level of multi-party democracy that has been practised in this Province.  I think it is highly important for that reason.

We need to congratulate ourselves.  Every member that is sitting here today of different political parties, that on important issues we can band together, that we can form a cohesive group, and that we can agree to do something about that.  I think that is vitally important.

So, it is thoroughly historic that today, and I think it is wonderful that today there is a possibility that the very first piece of legislation ever to arise from the Province, ever to go through to the National Council of Provinces can come from KwaZulu-Natal, and that it is a private member's Bill makes it an absolute miracle.  I want to thank everybody for that, because I really believe that we have done something wonderful and that we are about to do something wonderful.  What we have achieved is incredible.

I would just like to end off, I do not want to belabour the point, I think most people are aware of the aims and objects of the Children's Commissioner Bill, but I would just like to end off by saying that in the Bible, King Solomon who was known as the wisest person that ever lived, and the best King that ever lived, King Solomon's mother gave him some advice in Proverbs.  She said to him that he can be aware of all of the people that come to him with petitions and so on, but that the State, the Government in those days as represented by the King, must always be aware of the voiceless people, and that the State, the King, had an onus and a duty to speak out for those that cannot speak for themselves.

Today, KwaZulu-Natal has an opportunity to speak out for the voiceless, and those are our children and our future who do not vote, who cannot protest and who cannot speak to us.  We need to speak for them.  I believe that this Bill, and by us forwarding it to the NCOP for consideration as National legislation can do that.

If I could make a further appeal, that this Province puts everything that we have behind a push to speak, to lobby, and talk to the other provinces so that they too can support this Bill.  That is my motion.  I thank you for that, Mr Speaker.  

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Downs.  I now call upon Madam Gasa, who also has eight minutes.

MRS F X GASA:  Mr Speaker, our children indeed are our future.  Children are as important to any society as the aged.  A society that takes care of its children, is a society that takes care of its future and it looks at its future in a very serious light.

This Bill puts forward an honourable act which causes us to focus on the needs of our children, broadly and generally at National level and specifically at Provincial level.

In the past two days we have been looking at Provincial level, focusing and drawing means and ways by which we can combat crime in our Province.  The Premier and our hon Minister Zuma, as our two leaders, spoke quite eloquently, and I think it is also at this time when one needs to commend members of our Legislature, because of the participation which we displayed at that summit.  It indeed gave a good picture that we care about crime prevention in the Province.  It is at this time that we as IFP feel that this piece of legislation comes at the right time.

There is no doubt in my mind, Mr Speaker, that the purpose of setting the Commissioner in place will ensure effective administration and networking of all matters which concern children.  We have to thank Mrs Downs for her unflinching courage in pushing for this piece of legislation.

However, I do wish to raise a few concerns on matters of funding.  I can identify the following departments which need to assist this Commissioner so that we do not fail our children.  The Department of Welfare, the Education Department, the Health Department.  I do know that it is from their coffers that we will be looking for assistance from time to time.  Unfortunately, and we appreciate the fact that much as they would like to assist, and I do know they will, they have got a tremendous fiscal strain on them.

However, this Bill has such good intentions for the welfare of the children against abuse, that even in these difficult times, regarding the funding situation in our Province and in the country, that even passing it with a delayed date of implementation can only be a step towards the right direction.

Mr Speaker, we need to look for more funding.  We need to assist this Commissioner to take route and look for alternate ways of assisting.  I am also thinking that as we look at the fiscal aspect of assisting this Commission, we also ask the Department of Safety and Security to fight and assist, that in every nook of our Province we set up child protection units, even if we have got a scarcity of funds.  This will be in keeping with the spirit of assisting this Bill.

Mr Speaker, we shall have failed our children if we do not lend our support in the manner that I have recommended above.  In support of this Bill, the IFP wishes to call on all South Africans to go back to the ethos of protecting our children.  These are some of the things we can embark on without saying we have got financial constraints.  We will remember that in keeping with our traditional ways of bringing our children up it was more of love, more of attention, distribution of clothing and resources, but everything was tied up with love and attention.  If we bring back this ethos in our community and our families this is going to assist this process that has been embarked upon right now.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, in keeping with our good performance in the NCOP, the IFP would like to support this Bill in toto, and actually hope that as we debate the practicalities of the most difficult aspects, we shall be doing it all in the spirit of one family, in the spirit of binding together.  This is one Bill that is going to assist us to strengthen the ties that are already in our midst, and even in the Legislature.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  Mr Dlamini has six minutes.

MR F DLAMINI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I would like to preface my comments with the remarks I made at the Portfolio Committee, when we discussed this private member's Bill.  Namely, that we hope this Bill is not aimed at becoming or creating an employment shelter, by establishing a body of Commissioners.  Secondly, that we need to give some thought to whether this Commission should not be part of a youth Commission following on what my colleague, the hon Mrs Gasa has said with regards to the fiscal position.

Having said that, Mr Speaker, we would like to welcome the introduction of this private member's Bill.  It comes at a time when there is serious concern about the plight of children who are exposed to all kinds of abuse.  It comes at a time when the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Welfare is looking at the children and youth at risk and possible plans to meet their needs.  It comes at a time when there is planning on how to tackle the question of street children.  It comes at a time when a lot of work is going on at National level with regards to positive amendments to enabling legislation in welfare.  Therefore, this Bill does not really come into a void, but it is an addition to the effort that is being made to improve the welfare of the children.

The problem of child abuse is an indication of the decadence of society's moral fibre.  The following are some of the highlights related to the plight of children, namely violence in all communities has resulted in the breakdown of family structures, resulting in total social disorganisation.  Violence in the family is another symptom of a sick society.  An obvious lack of centralised community services is another problem that we have in our communities.  There is an apparent lack of fulfilment of basic emotional and physical needs in the form of food, clothing, shelter and basic hygiene in planning for street children.

Whilst there may be some identification of children at risk, our welfare system particularly in our Province, with a preponderance of street children, has not established preventative mechanisms.  Very few welfare organisations focus on child abuse, counselling, and family support to facilitate the re-integration of children into families and communities.  There are a large number of children, and street children in particular, who are not treated justly by the law enforcement system.  There are a number of street children who have no access to supportive and remedial services.

Section 19(1) of the Child Care Act, No 79 of 1983, as amended, prohibits employment of children under 15 years.  Mr Speaker, I wonder how many children under the age of 15 are subjected to unlawful labour practises in this Province in particular.  Children are subjected to all forms of abuse, be they street children, children from broken homes, children subjected to child labour are all soft targets for the spread of the scourge of HIV/AIDS.

Without statistics at hand, I would like to say that it is everybody's guess as to how high the number of children with HIV/AIDS is, contracted through child abuse or inherited from their parents.  It is mind boggling that this Province is now talking about what to do with 200 000 orphans whose parents will die of AIDS before the turn of the century.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, this Bill will add to the statutory instruments aimed at ensuring that the children's rights are taken cognisance of, particularly those expressed in the following articles in the Convention of the Rights of Children, referring to basic material and emotional needs of children, namely article 6 of the Convention that talks about survival and development, and expresses an inherent right of children to life.

Article 18 that refers to parental responsibility, which states very clearly that it is parents' primary responsibility to raise children.

Article 26 of the said instrument that deals with social security, the right to benefit from social security, as it has been so well illustrated by the introduction of the child support programme through the Welfare Laws Amendment Act that was passed last week on Thursday, on the 19 November, as a National Bill.

Article 27, dealing with the standard of living.  A child's right to an adequate standard of living, namely physical, mental, spiritual, moral and social development.  Looking at the Bill against the background of all these, and the aims that have been spelt out in the Bill, we felt that we need to accept the Bill, and recommend the Bill for consideration at NCOP level.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Dlamini.  I now call upon Mr Waugh who has three minutes.

MR J N C WAUGH:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  It is a great privilege for me to participate in this debate today.  Being a parent with children within the age group as defined in this Act, one can only congratulate the hon member Mrs Downs for bringing this motion to this House today.

If one looks at the preamble of this Bill when it says that the Commission will look at the best interests of our children and will not accept crimes against the child, we must support this Bill.

Mr Speaker, we are not here today debating the Bill clause by clause, as it is to be referred to the NCOP for passing and referral to the National Assembly as a National Act.  At that stage one will deal with the crossing of the Ts and dotting of the Is.

Seeing that this Bill is not being finalised, one hopes that this Bill will go through a process of public hearings.  There are many NGOs out there involved in children's matters, and would gladly like to make recommendations on the Bill.  I found it very difficult to get comment on this Bill from most people, because most of the people out there involved in NGOs are not aware that this Bill is on the table today.

Coming back to the Bill, I am sure that the Commissioner appointed could assist in curbing crime against the child.  However, the Commissioner will have to co-operate and liaise fully with other departments.  One thinks, for example, of the Department of Safety and Security.  Soon, as we have heard, the Provincial Youth Commission Bill will also be passed, then the Youth Commission will be established and one sees that there will be close co-operation between these two bodies.  Once both Commissions are established, youth up to the age of 35 will then be catered for.

At this stage, the one concern one has is that overlapping with departments can take place.  This will influence the co-operation with the Commissioner, and we must caution against this.

A step one welcomes, is the register the Commissioner has to draw up of sex offenders and that such a register be made available to the public.  In this regard, South Africa is far behind.  Other countries have been doing this for a long time.

Mr Speaker, we support the motion before this House, because any step taken that will reduce crime against the child can only be applauded.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Waugh.  I now call upon Mr Burrows, and you have got two minutes, sir.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, the Democratic Party is in broad agreement with the principles and objects of the Bill. It is happy that it be passed by this House and forwarded to the NCOP.

As with other members, there are areas within the draft legislation that we do believe require amendments.  We need to stress that we do disagree with certain of the points raised in the Bill in some of the detail areas.  So we are not writing a blank cheque on this Bill, we are simply saying that the principles, the objects behind the Bill meet with our approval.

There are also certain areas within the Bill itself, and certain proposals that we think raise some constitutional questions.  They too must be addressed.  There are certain areas, and I know other colleagues have referred to them, that address the matter of certain economic and other implications, including whether the creation of a fulltime Commission Council is in fact what we should be looking for.

As far as the Bill goes to defend the rights of the child, as far as it goes to ensure that we who uphold legislative competency in this Province, we wish to set quite clearly our joint multi-party agreement to the rights of every child in this Province, we would agree that this Bill goes forward.

I must, however, caution that, and I know she has made reference to it, that the honourable proposer of this motion, Mrs Downs, has experienced some difficulty in even getting the Bill to this point.  I must urge that the office of the NCOP Committee must, together with Mrs Downs, together with the representatives of the Welfare Committee guide and proceed with this process through the NCOP to the National Assembly.

The Democratic Party supports the principles and objects of the Bill.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  I now ask, on an amended list, the hon Shamazi for one minute.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The Bible says children are a precious gift from God.  Blessed is the man whose house is filled with them.  That being the case, Mr Speaker, the PAC and myself have no choice but to support this motion fully.

Mr Speaker, if you did not have the rule that we should not listen to our cellular phones, I would have received a message informing me whether my expected grandchild has been born yet.  I am sure the message is here, and I am very much concerned.  As soon as I get out of this chamber I will open and listen to the message to hear whether that baby has been born.

We know that the mothers will say this better; how difficult it is to bring a child into this world.  When you see the children, some of the babies thrown away into dustbins, and some left to go loose on the streets, you really wonder how the woman who bore that child for nine months, and suffered the final pains, although some are afraid of suffering when they go for the shortcut, the caesarian way.  Children are so important.

I think when we consider this, it is not only the children who are abused, the children have been turned into abusers and murderers themselves.  Those also need protection.  If you go through the records, the muggings, and the bag snatching at the beach, it is done by the little toddlers.  An attempt was made to snatch this cellular phone from me.  I feel for that little toddler, because it is not his responsibility that he is there.

We therefore support this motion, and hope we will discuss the details when the Bill has been referred to the NCOP.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  I now call upon the hon mover of this motion to reply to the debate.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Mr Speaker, I just want to address one concern, and that is the concern of cost.  We never drew up this Bill to be an employment shelter for anybody.  It was meant to be a very tight situation that would not allow for huge bureaucracies, and employment for hundreds.  If you look at the actual nitty-gritty little clauses in the Bill, you will see, number one, that we have actually amended the number of Commissioners, and put a ceiling on it of a total of the High Commissioners plus four others, so that there is no huge growth in this Commission.

The second thing that we did when we drew up the Bill, because we always had it in mind for it to be a lean-mean machine, that we allowed for the formation of part-time Committees, which would allow the Commissioner to draw upon the best brains in the Province.  Say university people, or people with specific expertise to give voluntarily of their time to serve the Commission.  That was the idea behind it.

We also have a huge section on fund-raising, because we envisaged that this Commission could almost be self-funding.  We put in a lot of curbs, checks, and balances.  As I said in my opening speech, that many of the people who would like to give for the welfare of children are concerned about giving to the Welfare Department, because they do not feel that it will find the place for which it was intended.  That is why we have put in these checks and balances, and the fund-raising aspect into this Bill so that funds can be raised, and that people can be sure that the funds will not be spent on bureaucracy, but will go to the children who so sorely need them.  So if I can allay the fears about this costing the Province a huge amount of money, I would like to do so.

The second thing that I would like to say is that we really need to prioritise as a Province, and I want to speak for the children today.  We really need this Bill.  We need a Commissioner for children.  We need someone to speak for them, and it needs to be a priority.  We have not put it in the Welfare Department, or the Education Department, or the Health Department, we have actually put it under the capable hands of our Premier, who is also the Finance Minister.

With that I would like to just read the preamble from the Bill and end off:

		We the people of KwaZulu-Natal, having recognised the inherent vulnerability of our children, and in the interests of justice and domestic tranquillity, do hereby establish and ordain the office of the Children's Commissioner.  
		
		Whereas to protect the welfare, education and social development of our children whilst remaining faithful at all times to their innocence and best interests.  
		
		Whereas we as democratic people founded on the integrity of the family and love for our children and respect for human dignity do hereby declare that we will not accept crimes against the child.  May God, who is loved, protect our children.

Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Downs.  We have now concluded the debate on this motion.  I have been advised that we have got a quorum.  In that case I will now put the motion to the House.

		This House noting the unanimous resolution of the Welfare Portfolio Committee hereby resolves to:

		(i)	Accept in principle the aims and objects of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial office of the Commissioner for Children Bill, 1997;

		(ii)	Approve the submission of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial office of the Commissioner for Children Bill, 1997 to the Provincial office of the National Council of Provinces for revision and thereafter submission to the National Council of Provinces for passing and referral to the National Assembly for consideration as a National Act in terms of Section 76(2) of the Constitution, Act 108, 1996.

THE MOTION AS PROPOSED BY MRS DOWNS - AGREED TO.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  This matter closes our business for the day, but before we can take any further steps, I recognise the Chief Whip of the majority party.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, thank you very much, and thank you for the opportunity to deal with a matter which we omitted to deal with earlier on in the afternoon.  That relates to an IFP motion which we wish to debate in the House tomorrow.  The motion reads as follows, Mr Speaker:

		This House, noting the serious budget overruns which are inevitable in the current financial year, and believing that these overruns are largely due to:

		1.	unfunded mandates imposed on us by Central Government;

		2.	discrepancies in per capita funding between provinces; and

		3.	inequitable sharing of the National budget -

		RESOLVES:

		that cabinet uses all means at its disposal to press for a revision of the formula on which provinces are funded.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Tarr.  I wish to make these announcements.  I am to remind all members of the Safety and Security Portfolio Committee that their meeting is still scheduled for today at 19:00 at the Prince Mangosuthu Room in the Garden Court Holiday Inn, ~Ulundi~.  Mr Burrows?

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I did not have an opportunity of sending a note to you, but may I remind members of the Portfolio Committee on Education and Culture that they will consider the matter of the National Party amendments to the Heritage Bill at 6:30 in the Mnyamana Room upstairs this evening.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Further to that, I am still to remind members that the play is on at the IFP caucus room as was reported to you this morning.  Can I then take this opportunity to invite the Premier to make whatever announcements he may have before we close today's business.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I have no announcements.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier.  In that event, before I proceed with the further steps of this meeting, I have now just received a notice.  An announcement that I have to read here which says:

		To all members and alternates of Safety and Security Portfolio Committee - Change of Venue.

		Please be advised that the above meeting has been changed from Holiday Inn to Mnyamana Conference Room, Parliamentary Complex, ~Ulundi~ at 19:00 to 19:45.  Sorry for any inconvenience caused.

19:00 to 19:45.  It is simply a change of venue.  It is no longer in the Holiday Inn Garden Court, it is now in the Mnyamana Conference Room, in the Parliamentary Complex.

Having finished our day's business, the House now stands adjourned.  We will reconvene in this House tomorrow morning at 10:00.  Thank you.  The House stands adjourned.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 17:43 UNTIL
	10:00 ON THURSDAY, 27 NOVEMBER 1997

		DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FOURTH SESSION
	SEVENTH SITTING - SECOND SITTING DAY
	THURSDAY, 27 NOVEMBER 1997

THE HOUSE MET AT 10:26 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, ~ULUNDI~.  THE DEPUTY SPEAKER TOOK THE CHAIR AND READ THE PRAYER.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  

2.	OBITUARIES AND OTHER CEREMONIAL MATTERS

3.	ADMINISTRATION OF OATHS OR AFFIRMATION

4.	ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE SPEAKER

I wish to announce that, according to today's programme, we should have started at 10 o'clock with a briefing from the National Women's Coalition who were given the right to come over here to this city and into the chamber to pose questions to Ministers.  By quarter past ten they had not arrived and we have had no indication of their whereabouts.

We had also agreed that we would, together with them, allow the Commission on Gender Equity to make a presentation to the parliamentarians.  We have also tried to locate them.  We are told they are somewhere along the route on their way here.  Because of the very packed programme of today, I then decided that we would start the formal sitting.  As soon as they have arrived I will be informed and we will see how we can accommodate them, but we will accommodate them.  That is the end of the announcement.

I am also advised that we have received a thank you card from Mrs A B Ngcobo for the contribution of members of this Legislature during the time of her sorrow when the hon A B Ngcobo left us.  That is a further announcement.

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

The hon Premier?

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  There are no real reports or announcements, except to say we do welcome as the Executive, opportunities to deal with the public and answer questions.  I think it would be only fair to the members of the Executive Committee, the Ministers that is, to have written questions, because some answers to questions need a lot of information and figures and facts which only departmental officials can provide.  So in future if there are people wanting to ask questions they should indicate in writing, the scope at least, so we know whether it is just easy to reply to these orally on our feet or whether we need to have inputs from our departments.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier.  Mr Premier, I just want to take this opportunity to clarify to the House what transpired in terms of this request.  That is to put the Ministers at ease in particular.

We received a letter from the National Women's Coalition requesting that we open Parliament to them on 25 November.  That request was acceded to, but we then were not able to sit on 25 November, and it was then postponed to today.

We further informed them that in accordance with their letter sent to us, they were supposed to have sent questions to the Ministers six weeks before, which was not complied with.  We did indicate, that however late it was, we still requested that those questions be sent to the Ministers for the Ministers to be able to respond.  We did indicate that that should be the case.

From the Legislature's side, I think, we did bring it to their attention that some of these matters would need some kind of investigation and research before Ministers were able to respond.  Unfortunately we had planned with the Whips that we would meet with them at quarter to ten in order to clarify these issues, that if there were questions that were not answered properly here, they should not blame the Ministers because those would be questions which would need to be researched before answering.  So I am hoping that even when they arrive we will still make that point.  Thank you, Mr Premier.

Whilst we are at this stage, I have agreed to allow one member of this Legislature to make an announcement, because I regarded that announcement to be vital to one of the members of the Legislature, and to all the members it would be important that that announcement is made.  I wish to then now call upon the hon Mr Rudi Redinger to make that announcement.

MR R E REDINGER: (Whip):  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.  I crave the indulgence of the House just to bear with me for a moment, Mr Speaker.

Some six months ago it really dawned on me that life is very short, that we only pass this way but once, that there is still so much to be done.  In discussions with my wife and sons who are all in the family business, we came to the conclusion that if a certain business arrangement fell into place, that was where my duty lay.

My call to politics really came as early as 1985 when firstly, a world embargo, economic embargo was placed on South Africa not with a little conniving of the ANC at the time, and then the church in which I practice my faith was literally torn apart by those who worked at upholding, and those who wanted to tear down ~Apartheid~.  This rift ran through many a home, splitting its fabric which much heartache on either side.

Like so many colleagues within the NP at the time, we realised that real change had to come, that that change could really only come through legislation in Parliament, and that there was an imperative to kill ~Apartheid~.  To replace it with real democracy in a constitutional state, guaranteeing the rights of all.  The rest is history.

It was my singular honour to, under the leadership of President de Klerk, and enormous goodwill emanating from all political parties that in my 10 years I could see our history rewritten.  To be a member of Parliament calls for much sacrifice, not only from the member but even more so from the family.

Although the new South Africa has brought with it totally unforeseen levels of crime and violence, and I am encouraged by the new spirit developing across all political divides to get tough with the situation.  I have a wonderful sense of relief and achievement that we have come this far.  For present and future politicians there remains an onerous duty to at all times ensure that true democracy, multi-party participation in Government and opposition remain a cornerstone of South Africa.  Allow me to say do not tamper with the Rules of Parliament lightly.

The NP, in Marthinus van Schalkwyk, has a wonderfully talented new leader to sideline him and leaders like him and what he stands for, would be to rob this country of its future.  I thank God for offering me and my family choices, that at this stage of my life I may turn to the private sector and get really involved there where the future of our country really lies.

What remains is to say thank you to Danie Schutte, to colleagues and friends within my caucus, and thank you especially to good friends within the other parties.  I love you all, and God bless you.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Redinger.  I wish to then on behalf of this Legislature bid you farewell and to say that I hope I am talking on behalf of all of us, that your contributions have been very valuable.  You have been a friend, you studied with all of us in this new era, and it is a pity to see you go, but nonetheless farewell and good luck.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

MR M M MACKENZIE:  Mr Speaker, I wish to table a progress report from the Portfolio Committee on Agriculture on the Pounds Bill.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr MacKenzie.  Tabling of reports.  Mr Jeffery.

MR J H JEFFERY:  In terms of Rule 119, on behalf of the Environment and Conservation Portfolio Committee, I wish to report that the Committee has approved the Conservation Management Bill with amendments, and to formally table the Bill before the House, together with the separate report of the amendments that the Committee agreed to, together with the memorandum on the objectives of the Bill.  The Bill will be debated later in the day.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Jeffery.  Tabling of further reports?

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS

Mr Miller.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Mr Speaker, I wish to give notice of my intention to introduce a Bill.  Authority has been obtained from you, sir, in terms of Rule 120(b) to introduce this Bill without prior publication, and should that notice be approved, then the Bill will be debated later today.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Miller.  Mr Meer.

MR I C MEER:  Mr Speaker, at the ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Meer, can I have a point of order please.  Can you resume your seat.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  The point of order was that we had agreed at the Portfolio Committee this morning that the Minister would actually table this Bill without notice in the Legislature so that we could deal with it immediately.  Could I just refer him to that, because that is why there was no report tabled.  It was because we presumed this Bill would be dealt with without notice.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Meer, resume your seat for a short while please.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Sir, I was seeking authority, and I must have been misunderstood to do exactly that, to table the Bill without notice and to seek authority for the fact that it was not published previously.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you for that correction of confusing the process on my side.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Could I then, as Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Local Government, indicate that we met this morning.  The Bill was tabled and it was accepted unanimously without any amendments.  We accept that notice of urgency.  Could you then, sir, put that Bill to the House?

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  A request was made to me as Speaker to give authority for a Bill to be tabled without publication.  That authority was granted on the understanding that the Portfolio Committee was meeting to discuss the matter.  I have now established that the Portfolio Committee has unanimously agreed that the Bill be tabled for debate.  I now seek endorsement from the House.  Mrs Cronje.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, in fact the matter can be dealt with under 8.6 on the Order Paper.  It has in fact been set down, and I think it can be put to the House under that item.  Sorry, I think the request has been granted so we do not need to deal with it any further at this stage.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I crave your indulgence.  There are other matters where the Rules have to be waived.  I want to say that in the spirit of co-operative coexistence, notwithstanding the fact that the two major parties are stifling minor parties, my one vote is required and I am giving it.  On other occasions we will bear that in mind.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  On a point of order.  No vote is required at this stage.  [LAUGHTER]

MR A RAJBANSI:  I hope the hon Chief Whip of the ANC realises that at this stage it is a temporary thing.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The Bill shall be discussed then under 8.6 on the Order Paper.  Any further notices of Bills or motions?  Mr Meer.

MR I C MEER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  There is a saying, third time lucky.  I intend to move the following motion at the next sitting day of this House:

		That the Liberation History Foundation has declared the Year 1998 as the LUTHULI CENTENARY YEAR, this House of KwaZulu-Natal Parliament fully endorses this call and requests South Africa as a whole to observe this CENTENARY in the appropriate manner.  Chief Luthuli, born on December 25, 1898 was Africa's first NOBEL PEACE PRIZE AWARDEE, an honour conferred on him for his dedicated leadership towards the establishment of a democratic Government in our country.

Thank you, sir.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Meer.  Mr Nel.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day that:

		Noting the continuing murders in our Province which are apparently politically motivated, and 

		Noting further the escalation of brutal attacks on members of the farming community and violent crime in general, and 

		Noting further the recent acquittal of accused persons in several highly publicised criminal cases including rape, murder and the R31 million Pinetown robbery on what appeared to be technicalities arising from inadequate investigation and prosecution procedures.

		Therefore call on the Provincial Minister of Safety and Security together with the National Ministers of Safety and Security and of Justice to publicly announce as a matter of urgency concrete steps which will reassure the increasingly desperate public that they will receive appropriate protection from violent marauding criminals.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Nel.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I hereby give notice that I shall move tomorrow as follows:

		That this House notes with very deep appreciation the sentiments being expressed by the hon State President, Mr Nelson Mandela, and the hon Minister of Home Affairs, the hon Dr M G Buthelezi that Restitution of Land Rights will contribute also towards healing the wounds of ~Apartheid~ and notes that certain people, especially at Local Government Level in Durban who are adopting attitudes in respect of restitution and prices that are worse than the ~Apartheid~ days.

		Calls upon the hon Minister of Local Government and Housing and all party structures to ensure that the guarantees that have been assured to victims of the Group Areas Act by the Transitional Executive Council are respected and honoured to the extent that the hon Minister be also requested to take the North and South Central Councils to the High Court if necessary.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  Mr Nel.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day that:

		This House endorsing the valuable role ...

MR A RAJBANSI:  On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR A RAJBANSI:  When I stood up and moved a motion it was this hon member who jumped up and objected.

MR W U NEL:  This one?  Which one?

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Nel was one of those, and the Speaker gave a ruling on the suggestion of the Whips that only one motion be allowed, not exceeding 250 words.  So he threw a banana peel on which today he is slipping.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  Yes, Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I give notice that on the next sitting day I shall move: 

	That this House:

		1.	Endorsing the valuable role which properly supported Spatial Development initiatives can play in the development of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal; and

		2.	Recognising the importance of ensuring the urgent implementation of such development initiatives.

		Nevertheless express its concern over the hitherto inadequate consultation by National Government with the Government of KwaZulu-Natal and with relevant representative structures or other organisations in the cause of developing the frameworks for implementation of the SDIs; and

		Therefore calls on Cabinet to ensure that adequate consultation takes place hence-forth so that these initiatives can receive universal and enthusiastic support.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  There seems to be no further motions.

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

8.1	REPORT OF THE EDUCATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON AMENDMENTS TO THE HERITAGE BILL, 1997.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I call upon the Chair of the Education Portfolio Committee to make this report.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, in accordance with the Rules, as instructed by you, the Committee received yesterday evening certain amendments, that had been proposed in the House during the course of the debate yesterday by the hon Mr Danie Schutte.  These amendments were considered by a quorate Committee.

The following amendments to the Bill were agreed upon by the Committee, and are therefore recommended to the House for inclusion in the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill of 1997.

In clause 7(16), to delete all the words in that particular clause and to substitute, and the introit is:

		The Council shall make recommendations to the Minister regarding the expropriation of property in terms of subsection 26(10).

And then in 26(10), consequentially after the word "may", to add the words:

		On the recommendation of the Council.

And the second amendment that was accepted was to clause 26(6)(a) where it was reworded.  The wording was deleted and its substitute:

		No person may destroy, damage, excavate, alter, write or draw upon, or otherwise disturb any archaeological rock art, palaeotological, battlefield or meteorite site except under the authority of a permit issued by the Amafa KwaZulu-Natali, provided that the Amafa KwaZulu-Natali may, regarding archaeological sites take account of existing small scale agricultural activities.

Three further amendment clauses, Mr Speaker, were discussed, and after discussion were withdrawn by Mr Schutte.

Mr Speaker, I must also give notice on a matter raised by Mr Rajbansi in the House yesterday, that a memorandum to the Bill as amended has not been received by the House.  Mr Rajbansi will move, before we vote on the Bill, a proposed suspension of that particular Rule.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I crave your indulgence again.  I will support waiving that Rule, but we have a problem in terms of Rule 124.  In terms of Rule 124 we need the amended Bill.  What the Committee has given us are the amendments to which they agreed and I propose that before we start debating that, we waive Rule 124.  It leads to the minority party to give support to waive the Rules.  I hope the Whips realise this and stop cutting our speaking time.

I move that Rule 124 be suspended in order to enable us to deliberate on this Bill.  We need in terms of Rule 184 the amended version of the Bill which is not tabled.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I request the House to indicate support.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, the ANC will agree to the suspension of the Rules and to the amendments.  However, we wish to place on record our serious concern that we have to resort to a suspension of the Rules.  We want that to be on record.  We are not happy that this should be done, but in the circumstances and in the interest of moving forward and co-operation, we will agree to it today.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, the point is noted and will be reacted upon.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I was disturbed whilst I was proceeding.  I will again put the question on the suspension of the Rule.

RULE 124 SUSPENDED

MR A RAJBANSI:  Can I deal with the other matter.  I move that Rule 125 also be suspended in order to enable us to deal with this matter.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  There is another Rule.  I think the same sentiments would also accompany that.

RULE 125(2) SUSPENDED

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The Rules are suspended.  Rule 124 and Rule 125(2) are suspended for the purposes of dealing with this matter, the Heritage Bill and the amendments.

Having complied with that, I will now put to the vote the amendments to the Bill as proposed by the Education Portfolio Committee.  Yes, Mr Schutte?

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  On a point of order.  There are a number of speakers still to speak on this.

MR R M BURROWS:  With respect, Mr Speaker, there is a speakers' list in this respect, starting with I think the hon Mr Konigkramer of the IFP.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Oh.  I am sorry.  Let us then, on this report, the Chairperson Mr Burrows has spoken already.  I will then request the following member to speak on the report.  Mr Konigkramer.

DEBATE ON THE AMENDMENTS TO THE KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE BILL, 1997.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will be very brief.  I would just like to again place on record that I believe this is really a superb piece of legislation.  I think we can all be proud of it.  It is my hope that the hon Mr Ismail Meer, in his usual wisdom, will have been prophetic in the article he wrote in the Natal Mercury, and that when we put it to the vote later today that it will be unanimously approved.  I address those remarks in particular to my colleague Mr Schutte.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Konigkramer.  Then I call upon Mr Schutte for one minute.  Oh Mr Xaba.  I am sorry, Mr Xaba for one minute.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I also want to add our voice as ANC to support the amendments as tabled.  Further, I want to say that there were other proposals raised by Advocate Schutte.  Some of those were unfortunate and antiquated so we had to reject them.  With those words, Mr Speaker, we support those which have been tabled here.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Xaba.  The next will be Mr Schutte for one minute.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Portfolio Committee for dealing with this matter in such a constructive way in adopting three of the amendments.  I believe that sanity has prevailed.  Some of the amendments must have had some merit.  In view of the fact that this Bill has now been amended in this fashion, we will be supporting the Bill.

I would also like to say that we will be supporting the Bill in view of certain assurances that have been given, and particularly with regard to the way that the council will be constituted.

Mr Speaker, we have raised it that it is of crucial importance that this being a cultural matter, that the major cultural groupings in this Province should be represented in this council.  We have been assured that that is the interpretation to be given to the word "sectoral".  On that assurance we will then support the Bill.

I must emphasise, Mr Speaker, that when we are dealing with cultural matters it is a very sensitive issue.  That is the one aspect where we must accord all the cultural groupings in this Province the required respect, and that required respect should not be devaluated in any way.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Schutte.  Mr Rajbansi, you have one minute.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I think we must compliment the Education Portfolio Committee for having considered these amendments.  It speaks a lot for multi-party democracy.  It also confirms the dictum that when good suggestions are made you must not look at who makes the suggestion, as the hon member John Jeffery was saying yesterday.  I am glad that the real ANC, the real democratic ANC saw good suggestions and supported it.  Yesterday we had comments from the artificial part of the ANC.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  I now call upon the hon Mr Mkhwanazi.  Shamazi, one minute.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The PAC supports the Bill with amendments, but the PAC wants to assure those in KwaZulu and in Africa who seem to be worried about their cultural rights, that they should learn from the rest of Africa.  The African people are magnanimous in accommodating all the people who have made Africa their home.  Particularly the Afrikaner people since they call them Africans, because I think Afrikaner means African in English, should have the least worry.

We therefore want to assure them that they are part of this Province, and they are part of this country, and part of this continent.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Mkhwanazi.  Mrs Downs, you now have one minute.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Being about a fourth generation African, I am very glad to hear my predecessor echo those words.  We support the amendments as tabled, and support the Bill in its entirety.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  That concludes that debate.  Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, in order that we may make progress from 8.1 on the Order Paper to 8.2, I ask you to put the amendments collectively to the House so that they might be accepted to be incorporated in the amended Bill, and then we will put the Bill as a whole.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Mr Rajbansi.  Oh, thank you.  I now put the question on the amendments to the Heritage Bill.

AMENDMENTS TO THE KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE BILL, 1997 - PASSED.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The amendments have been agreed to unanimously.  We are now going to deal with 8.2, the decision on the Bill with amendments.  I put the question on the Heritage Bill.

KWAZULU-NATAL HERITAGE BILL, 1997 - PASSED

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The Bill is passed unanimously with amendments.  That concludes our 8.2 on the Order Paper.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Yes, Mr Burrows. 

MR R M BURROWS:  I know we do not pass many Bills in the year, but I think procedurally the point is the clerk must now read it.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I request the clerk to read the short title of the Bill.

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill, 1997.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you very much.  That concludes our Bill.  I now wish to announce again that I have been informed that the members of the Commission on Gender Equity have arrived.  I have not as yet been informed of the status and the whereabouts of the members of the National Coalition of Women.  I am therefore going to suspend the business of the House so that members will be able to get information on the activities and functioning of the Commission on Gender Equity.  That will be for 30 minutes.

I request all members to please avail themselves and be present for that presentation.  I am making this earnest request because we have had an experienced in the past where some of these matters have been questioned when we had availed an opportunity for such institutions to make presentations, and for members to have access to information.  On this occasion I wish that all members please respect that.  The business of the House is suspended, and I therefore adjourn this sitting for a short time.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE SUSPENDED AT 11:05

	THE HOUSE IS ADDRESSED BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION ON GENDER 	EQUALITY

	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE RESUMED AT 12:35

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  When we suspended the business of the House we were on 8.2, and we had completed 8.2.  We are now going to 8.3 on our Order Paper which is debate on the Finance Committee Report.  According to my list here of speakers, the report is to be tabled by Mr D Makhaye, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Finance who has 20 minutes to introduce the debate, table the report and debate.  Mr Makhaye.

DEBATE ON FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT

MR D H MAKHAYE:  Mr Speaker, I have got 20 minutes to speak both as the Chair of the Finance Portfolio Committee, and perhaps also as an ordinary taxpayer.

Yesterday the Portfolio Committee tabled a five page report to this Legislature.  I have nothing to add to that report, and nothing to subtract from it, except that I would appeal to all members of the Legislature, members of the Executive included, and especially to the Chairpersons of various Portfolio Committees, to study this report and internalise it, in order to implement some of the ideas contained in it.

I also wish to report that this morning, the Finance Committee had a meeting to look at the monthly budget.  In that meeting, the Premier, who is also the Minister of Finance, was present.  His presence actually assisted us.

Allow me, Mr Speaker, to now speak as a taxpayer and put across some ideas on the financial situation of our Province, and perhaps the whole of our country.  Allow me to start with what is or ought to be the obvious.  South Africa has sufficient funds to afford a decent life for all its citizens.  Yet, South Africa, including KwaZulu-Natal, suffers from a shortage of funds to afford all our people a better life.  The problem is not that South Africa is a poor country.  Perhaps the problem lies in the distribution of the wealth of the country.  It is either we choose to redistribute the wealth of the country and thrive together, or we choose to redistribute the poverty in our country and perish together.  There can be no middle road.

Perhaps it is time that we do not approach budgetary matters in a traditional mechanical way.  The task of financial managers or accounting officers in various departments, is not to constantly complain that they are receiving insufficient funds for their work, it is to ensure that they work within their budgets, and this is possible.  The task number one of any accounting officer is to ensure that financial controls are in place, reduce waste in the departments and avoid duplications.

Perhaps it has come to the notice of some of us, that some political heads of departments, the Executive, are not paying sufficient attention to the work of financial sections or units in their departments.  They are often not in a position to detect in time, and therefore take the necessary executive decisions to obviate financial crisis in their respective departments.  Perhaps it is time that financial matters become a standard item in the weekly meetings of the Executive.  This will ensure that every member of the Executive keeps abreast of the financial situation, not only in his or her department, but in the entire Government of KwaZulu-Natal.  The Executive must take the ultimate responsibility as a collective of the financial situation in each and every department and therefore the Government as a whole.  It is only when we embark on such a programme that we can fairly talk of the collective responsibility of the Executive as a whole.

Of course, we must be careful that individual members of the Executive do not find an excuse in the concept of collective responsibility.  There can be no collective responsibility without individual responsibility.  There must be personal bitterness when a task is not accomplished.

Perhaps at the beginning of every financial year when budget allocations are made, each accounting officer must make an undertaking that he or she will work within his or her budget and he or she must take full responsibility for his or her budget.  Without this there is absolutely no reason for budgeting at all.

We are spending about 80% of our budget on personnel and administration.  Very little is left for development.  The greatest asset of our Province is our people, the civil servants employed to carry out the policies of this Government, and ensure good services to our people.  Yet this greatest asset can also be our greatest liability.

The drive by our Government to come up with accurate figures of how many people we do employ as a Government is commendable.  But we must not be interested only in the mechanical number of people we employ.  Of greater importance is to undertake a performance audit of all our personnel.  At a glance we seem to have an over-bloated bureaucracy.  This results in the high rate of absenteeism and people who are always represented by their jackets in their offices.  This leads to the demoralisation of even those civil servants who are efficient and hard working.  This inevitably leads to waste, the unfulfillment of tasks and the poor servicing of our people.  It is therefore important that our personnel policy must be aimed at producing the greatest quality output.

If a person is absent from work and his or her colleagues do not feel and extra strain as a result of his or her absence, does that not mean that in fact that absent worker is in the first place not necessary?  We must ask as a Government, and as the people, to ensure that we better our work ethics.  Laziness and sloppiness must not find space in our midst.  They must be isolated and be condemned by all our people.

The anti-fraud drive of the Government must be owned by all our people.  Our people must not feel that their only task is to report corruption and fraud.  They must not only react, but they must be pro-active.  Our people must be empowered to prevent fraud and corruption.  We must, as political parties, agree on a binding moral protocol and code of conduct, that we shall all fight corruption irrespective of the political affiliation of the culprits.  Let us aim for a healthy morality among our people.  Only then can we talk of civil servants as an asset.

In order to achieve this, we need both a carrot and a stick.  Those who under-perform must be kicked out of the system.  Those who perform must receive incentives.  Perhaps the time has come that positions and promotions in the civil service are all contested for, not really following the hierarchial line of command.  If there is a vacancy, the immediate junior must not take it for granted that he or she will get into the shoes of his or her immediate superior who has resigned or retired.  The position must be taken up by the best candidate, of course, taking into account the task of correcting the historical injustice.

As a Government and as Parliament, we need to depart from the stereotypes of the past.  We need to break from tradition if that tradition becomes a fetter to progress.  We must ask ourselves whether the activities we are engaged in are all absolutely necessary.  How much do we spend on such activities, and what is the output, we must ask ourselves?  For an example, do we as a Government need to own houses that are used by members of the Executive, and how much do we pay to run such houses?  Obviously, this may not include the Premier.  Is the accommodation of the Executive, civil servants and parliamentarians not really a private matter, of course with some subsidisation?

How much do we spend on maintaining and administrating Government garages?  Would it not save us money and headaches if we dispensed with these garages and hire cars when the need arises?  How many times do we use our flats, as members of Parliament, at ~Ulundi~ and other areas?  Do we really need 20-person Portfolio Committees in Parliament?  Do we need to fly three officials to interview one junior official in Cape Town?  Obviously this has got nothing to do with national norms and standards, it has much to do with reasoning.

Mr Speaker, if we really want to redistribute wealth and not poverty, we must agree on some untouchables in our budgets.  The definition of our untouchables must be all those areas of our activities that are aimed at closing the gap between the poor and the affluent communities.  It is those activities that have a direct bearing on the betterment of the lives of those who were deprived in the past.

It is within this context that the provision of pension funds to our aged, the construction of community access roads, especially in rural areas, the rural clinic construction programmes, education and health programmes among the deprived communities and agricultural extension programmes, provision of clean water and sewage should rank among the untouchables in our budget.

Mr Speaker, to conclude, I think it is important to avoid two extremes.  One extreme is to blame all the problems on the National Government.  The other extreme is to blame all the problems on the Government of Provincial Unity in KwaZulu-Natal.  We must be careful, we must not give people who do not want to do their work excuses, that after all, even members of Parliament do understand that it is impossible to fulfil this task when it is possible with little extra work, and the necessary discipline.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you very much, Mr Makhaye.  I have a difficulty here.  I can see ten minutes being wasted if we do not proceed with the next speaker.  I am inclined to then request that I allow Mr Haygarth to address this House for 14 minutes.

MR G HAYGARTH:  I had already put my papers away because I was not anticipating addressing the House before lunch, but I will now take the opportunity.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  You are at least here.

MR G HAYGARTH:  I am at least here.

AN HON MEMBER:  You will be very quick, because your stomach is a bit empty.

MR G HAYGARTH:  No, I am not hungry at the moment.  I am hungry for certain things though.

Mr Speaker, I want to, first of all, follow my colleague the Chairman, and look at what the legislation says in respect of what we are dealing with.  I first want to look at the powers of the Provincial Legislatures, because that is where we are at the present time.  We are here as the Legislature to undertake a function.  We must note that all provincial executive organs of State in the Province are accountable to us, number one.  Our duty is to maintain oversight of the exercise of Provincial Executive authority in the Province, including the implementation of legislation, and any provincial organ of State.  One of the most important issues that the Provincial Executive authority, is to handle the budget which this Legislature gave to them, in an efficient and economical manner.

In regard to the accountability and responsibilities of the Executive Council, they are accountable collectively and individually to the Legislature for the exercise of their powers and the performance of their functions.

When this Legislature is faced at its halfway stage with a budget deficit, or overspend if you like, of R2,2 billion, I think we have a very serious situation.  Perhaps what we are saying is that when we look around and see how many Ministers are here, and see how many accounting officers are here, we must be a little bit unhappy that the necessary concern in this regard is not being paid by the Executive to their responsibilities in this matter.  In particular, and it is mentioned in the report, that of all the departments that came to the Committee to deal with their budget, I think only two were represented by ministerial representatives.  Only two out of the number that we have.  There are 11 in all.

That is significant when you find that even some department's accounting officers were not present, because one of the most important issues is that having determined a budget, then it is important that everyone, Ministers and accounting officers and all of the staff concerned, are involved in taking an interest in the outcome thereof.

We have as a Province a good governance programme.  One of the points of a good governance programme is essentially that you use that budget economically and effectively, and on that score we appear to have failed.  Why?  Do the departments, do the Portfolio Committees see the Minister on a regular basis?  Does the Minister take an interest in the monthly statement which is prepared by the Department of Finance, presented to the Finance Committee and each Portfolio Committee, the Minister of course receiving a copy beforehand?  Are the meetings to which my colleague, the hon member Dumisani Makhaye referred to, do they have regular meetings in the department on the budget?  I know some do.  There are some very responsible departments, but I am not sure that all departments do that, because any department in a municipality that overspends its budget by the figures that we talk about here, the head of department would be fired.  It is as simple as that.  You simply do not have a situation where you create a budget and overspend it by these sort of amounts.

There are reasons.  There are some reasons which we should canvass.  One of them is the question of an allocation of an equitable source of revenue to the Province and to Local Government.  My colleague, the hon Dumisani Makhaye, referred to redistribution.  It is a favourite subject of his.  I think we need to look in the Constitution, we must look ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

AN HON MEMBER:  No, we are looking at your pension.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Yes, I know you are looking at my pension fund.  [LAUGHTER].  

	An Act of Parliament must provide for - 
	(a)	the equitable division of revenue raised nationally among the national, provincial and local spheres of Government; 
	(b)	the determination of each province's equitable share of the provincial share of that revenue.

The points which need to be taken into account, and there are about seven or eight of them, but I will read the four that are more important.

	(d)	The need to ensure that the provinces and municipalities are able to provide basic services and perform the functions allocated to them.  

We have to ask the question in respect of education.  Have we had allocated to us the sum of money that is necessary to perform the basic services, the promise of the Government in power to ensure that every school-going child is given a basic service?  

AN HON MEMBER:  No.

MR G HAYGARTH:  The answer is no.  Thank you from the Portfolio Committee chairman of Education.  Then we need to look at the next one, (g), which says:

	(g)	Economic disparities within and among the provinces. 

I want to ask, are those economic disparities taken into account, because the Premier said this morning, that if you look at per capita allocation on certain aspects, this Province is substantially underfunded.  So these sections of the Constitution, the ones I am reading, come into effect on 1 January 1998 and they are in section 214.

The next one is the obligations.  To meet our obligations we require an adequate equitable distribution.  

	(i)	the desirability of stable and predictable allocations of revenue shares;

I suggest that we are not getting at this stage a predictable allocation of revenue share.

That is the one side.  On the redistribution side the National Government is failing this Province, and we must be quite clear on that.  The National Government is failing to determine an equitable share.  It is failing to determine a formula.  It is being run on an ad hoc basis at the present time, and I believe that is completely unsatisfactory.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR G HAYGARTH:  What we need for the year 1998/1999 is a proper formula of redistribution.  The Fiscal and Financial Commission in a previous report provided a suitable framework of a phased in period, by which there would be a redistribution between those provinces which are well endowed, and those provinces which are not.  What I heard the Premier say this morning is that in his view that proposal has suddenly ceased, come to a stop and why?  Why is Natal being prejudiced in that matter?

I think this Legislature has to ask the Premier in so far as this section comes into operation on 1 January 1998, if the Province continues to get an inequitable allocation of National funds, is this Province going to take the National Government to court on a constitutional basis, on the basis of an inequitable distribution of income.  I have referred to that on a number of occasions, because in the interim Constitution Local Government itself was supposed to get an equitable distribution of income, which it fails to do.  There is no formula.  It is being ad hoced at the present time, and I think this is something on which we want to express a great deal of concern.

Those are the two issues that I wanted to start with.  Firstly, the responsibility of the Provincial Executive Committee, the Cabinet, and in our view, its general failure to meet the necessary controls of the budget.  Secondly, the failure of the National Government to distribute an equitable share to this Province.

I do not want to repeat what the Chairman has said in regard to departmental organisation, but it is also an area which needs to have the attention of the Cabinet.

Then dealing with specific issues, for example the voluntary retirement/retrenchment packages.  In the Education Department I understand that that package cost something of the order of R306 million.  The substitute teachers who replaced those, not in accordance with the original principles, are costing in the order of R280 million.  One must take serious exception to policies of the State which are given to this Province to implement and the Province fails to take into account the process which is involved.  People have been given pensions who legitimately were not entitled to them, people have taken advantage of this, and this has been to the detriment of our budget and something which we should show great concern on.

Also in regard to the Department of Works.  There is this continuous dispute between the Works, Education and Health.  It is about time that the Executive Committee took a firm stand on this matter and laid down the process by which these monies should be handled and administered.

The report also deals with the subject of the RDP and the Peace Fund.  In so far as the RDP Fund, there was a sum of R158 million that was involved, and great concern has been expressed by the Committee at the failure to have in the process some plan by which this sum of money would be expended.

The second one is the Peace Fund.  In the view of the Committee, inadequate attention has been given to the method by which this should be spent.  While I understand that in the Department there are persons today who are charged with the process of achieving that spending, there has been inadequate information given to the members of this House as to how the process operates.  In a recent meeting which the representatives of the Peace Committee had with the representative of the Province, indications were given that KwaZulu-Natal had been divided into 20 subsections, and portions of the R100 million were being allocated to each of these with a view to the R100 million being used to create what was termed monuments.  Monuments in the better sense of what the people wanted in their particular area which would serve them for a long period of time.  One example was given that a community in the Midlands wished to have a training centre.  One can understand the provision of a training centre provided it has the people to run it, provided it has the funds to operate it, that that could well be used for a satisfactory performance, and the purpose of the Peace Fund.  It is to be hoped that this R100 million which I understand is to be spent over a period of three years, and that our original fears that there would be no carryover has been eliminated.  I think that it is a failure of the Executive to provide this House with a sufficient explanation of what is happening.

The question of the manner in which the Department of Finance handled this, and the media reporting is something also of concern.  The Department of Finance has an unenviable job when it does not have the co-operation of the financial or accounting officers of the departments concerned.  Without the accounting officers and the Department of Finance working together as a team we will inevitably finish in the difficult task which we have.

I want to say this in conclusion, that the Committee decided that the way forward was to have a six monthly review of the budget process.  I think what we have seen to date is a failure of that in this sense.  That by the time that the six month period elapses the opportunity to take adequate remedial measures is lost.  The fact that we had a R2,2 billion shortfall is indicative of the fact that we will no longer be able to save most of that.

I then say to the Legislature that it is necessary, in my view, to have a more regular review by the Portfolio Committee on Finance, on at least a quarterly basis, and ensure that the departments are aware that that is what they are going to be expected to attend.  They should not have to have a whole series of questions prepared for them to give an indication, to give them an opportunity, which was the gentlemanly way of doing it.  They should know their finances in such a way that they can come to any meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Finance and be able to answer any question that any member of the Committee or of the Portfolio Committee wants to ask of them.  

I think this concept needs to be got to the accounting officers very clearly so that as we go into the budget for next year, because the amount of that budget is going to be known within the next month or so, we should know when the budget comes before us that there is a plan to remain within the budget that is allocated, and that we do not proceed next year into the same disaster that we have this year.  Thank you very much.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Haygarth.  Can we now accept to adjourn for lunch.  I will request that members report back and be ready to resume at 2 o'clock.  The business of the House is adjourned until 2 o'clock.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE SUSPENDED AT 13:00
	RESUMED AT 14:14

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  When we adjourned for lunch we were dealing with the debate on the Finance Committee report.  Our next speaker on that one is going to be Mr Aulsebrook for 15 minutes please.

MR J F AULSEBROOK:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will certainly be as brief as possible.  Mr Speaker, this midyear budget review was the first that we have held.  The purpose of us holding it this year was to in fact ensure that budget expenditure was according to budget, that in fact departments were adhering to reprioritisation in the expenditure, and also that the budgets were in fact being expended in terms of policy driven directives.

Unfortunately the whole process was overtaken by our cash flow crisis which emerged.  Then the main focus, of course, was on the cash flow crisis.

Now while this report will enlighten the House on the causes of the crisis, it also, we hope, will indicate a way forward.  One needs to look at the entire budgeting process or the fiscal process for this country.  If one looks at the entire national revenue collected which is in turn top sliced first of all, to repay our foreign debt which is a major slice of our revenue.  Then comes the various Government departments, Defence, Police Services, Justice, etcetera.  Finally what is left is then vertically sliced for the provinces.  That is where we draw or are handed down our lump sum for provincial budgets.

When looking at the national top slicing, one finds that in spite of them having the first bite of the cherry, they in turn also have their own cash flow problems, their own financial crises.  One sees that the Police Services are being curtailed, a lot of the operations are being hampered by budget crises.  This morning we heard from the Gender Commission that they were certainly not receiving the funding they had hoped to receive.  So it is a national problem.

Now certainly as far as the Province is concerned, we receive our budget in a lump sum, and it is up to us to then apportion it to the various departments.  This is where we start with our problems in that traditionally we know what it has cost us to run these various departments.  In the last 18 months we have had various norms and standards imposed on us.

With these norms and standards the budget has proved to be totally inadequate.  This basically is where the unfunded mandates arise from.  Coupled to that we have the voluntary retrenchment packages which may have been, in some cases, indiscriminately given, but departments certainly felt that they were conforming to a national standard here.  These all compounded our problems which the Province faced.

Right at the commencement of our budget process various departments had told us, the Finance Committee, that they were not going to be able to come out on their budgets for this particular year.  These departments were mainly Health, Welfare and Education - the social delivery departments.  In looking at the budgets or the expenditure thus far this year, we established that there would be about a R2,2 billion over-expenditure.  We also looked at ways in which these departments could cut back, engage in a belt tightening exercise, but specifically with those three departments, by far the largest portion of the expenditure goes towards statutory payments and salaries.  With Education, 93% of their budget going to salaries.  There is very little room for belt tightening there.  It is encouraging to know that that figure of R2,2 billion as an overrun, has been reduced to R1,8 billion.  The big question comes is how we handle that R1,8 billion.

While one cannot blame the entire deficit on departments and expenditure patterns there, part of that deficit arises from the draw down system, where in the past the Province was given a lump sum at the commencement of the financial year on which we received interest from the bank.  That amounted to some R300 million.  The current system is that on a fortnightly basis we receive a draw down, and the result is that we no longer receive interest from banks and that certainly contributes towards that R1,8 million.

It is certainly the intention of the Committee to assist departments in how to in fact control that over-expenditure.  That we commit ourselves in that report to assisting them, advising them where we can, but ultimately we are going to end up with a deficit.  That is in fact going to be the problem the Minister of Finance will have to resolve with National, and hopefully it will not end up being top sliced off next year's budget.  Thank you very much.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Aulsebrook.  I now wish to call upon Mr Meer.  The hon member has 12 minutes.

MR I C MEER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker we had a problem in the Finance Committee, and that has been referred to in that we did not have the Minister present when this matter was discussed.  I think it is very important that as many Ministers as possible should attend the Portfolio Committee when the matter is discussed.

What is even more disturbing, is that when this matter is being discussed in this House a number of hon members of the Executive are not present.  The whole purpose of this exercise is the parliamentary pattern of division between the Executive, the Legislature and the judiciary.  The Finance Committee acts as representing this Legislature when this Legislature is not in session, and it is the checks and balances between ourselves and the Executive which is paramount in what happens in that Committee.

Sir, you now that in the United States of America the Executive members do not sit in Parliament.  We have here a different situation where the Executive members are also members of this Legislature.  If they are not present when a searching investigation goes on in respect of how money is spent then there is something which is very irregular.  This House must make it known to every member of the Cabinet that it is their responsibility when there is an investigation on how money is spent, that they are present both when they are required before the Finance Committee and when the matter comes up before this Legislature.

One thing that I want to stress, and I am sorry once again that the Premier is not present.  This morning before the Finance Committee, what he had to say was of sterling value.  He put it in his own words, that he has been too much of a gentleman in dealing with some of the problems when it came to the Executive members, and he was going to stop being that gentleman.  My response was that I am certain he will continue to be a gentleman, but he will be sufficiently hard to get some of the results that should follow.

We have always had this problem.  Who creates the problem and who has to find the solution?  Problem creators are a long distance away from the solution finders and the solution seekers.  If we have an analysis of what happens with the money collected and the money spent, there are a number of fundamental issues that emerge.

First and foremost is this.  Parliament is not the creator of money.  Parliament is the spender of money.  Money is created elsewhere outside the Executive and outside this Parliament.  Very often those who create the problem are not there to solve the problem.  As has been said by the last speaker, R40 billion per year must be found to pay interest alone on all the crimes committed against humanity during the ~Apartheid~ era.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR I C MEER:  Up to R36 million or more each year is being spent from the VAT which the ordinary person pays, some of that money goes towards that.  What is our problem?  Already we find that R2,2 billion is required to put our financial ship on an even keel.  Of that R40 billion, if that money was available, up to R6 billion would come to this Province alone and we would have solved the problem in respect of Education, in respect of the three major departments in which there is more money urgently required.  We must therefore admit that the dark clouds of ~Apartheid~ have not disappeared, that we live under that darkness and it is our task, many of us who suffered under that system, to find even at this stage when we have got political and legal equality, to find the problem of economic inequality which is so deep down in the whole political fabric of this country.

I am not surprised that the question of redistribution was raised.  This is not some ghostly suggestion.  This is the practical thing on which the person who, from the whole of Africa, got the Novel Peace Prize.  He died believing in that there should be some redistribution of the wealth.  He was the founder of the Freedom Charter which said, and spelt it out quite clearly, that the mines shall be nationalised.  It is not the first time the slogan was put, the Nationalist Party put that slogan forward when the Afrikaner without capital became the capitalist also in this country.  Until then they were saying that the mines should be nationalised.  It is not a slogan that came from those people who represented the vast majority in this country, who put that forward.

So we must not jeer at this stage when there is a problem of redistribution, because the fact remains that although ~Apartheid~ is gone for a very long time, the land in this country still belongs to a small section of the population.

Getting down to our practical problem of what to do.  I am pleased that the Premier said it in so many words, we have to be drastically observing certain norms.  We have to see to it that there is efficiency.  We have to see to it that we end the simple problem of learning how to count.  We have not got our figures correctly.  Unless we are properly informed of the factual situation we cannot even begin solving the problem that besets us.

A new factor is emerging, and let us issue a very clear warning on this.  We have suffered for a very long time against race discrimination.  In this era we are suffering from regional discrimination which is also to be deplored as we deplored race discrimination.  On every single child, the Western Cape is spending over R4 000,00 per year when in KwaZulu-Natal we are spending a little over R2 000,00.  A disparity of R2 000,00 per capita expenditure on education alone.  That is totally unacceptable and nobody can condone that.

Collectively all political parties, all seven parties here must unite and find a solution otherwise our children will curse us.  When they grow up they will say that when we had a non-democratic Government their forefathers suffered, but when democracy came they themselves were the victims of democracy, because we allowed a situation in which the Cape was regionally far better off, twice as better off as we are.  In this situation what is our task?  Our task is to act unitedly as we are doing in the Finance Committee.

Come and attend the Finance Committee.  You will find that when a person stands up and speaks there, he does not speak in terms of this is my political party objective.  He takes it that this is our task, this is what has to be done.  We want more facts, we want accurate information.  Then we can come and face this Legislature and save the problem or find a solution to the problem facing us.

The whole question of finding an excuse and saying we are all right, but the National Parliament is not, that is not on the agenda at all.  The practical problem is how we can collectively find consensus when we can make a democratic delivery, different from the delivery under the ~Apartheid~ system.  That is, the buck stops with this Legislature.  This Legislature in the absence of its meeting has got its Finance Committee on which every political party is present, and unless we can collectively work together and not find fault on a party political basis, we will not find a solution.  Tasks are very serious.  We have to get down to solving this problem, and in solving the problem, let us not try and justify what has happened in the past by finding excuses for ~Apartheid~ itself.

Let us realise that under democracy we have a duty, and we have a duty to see that in this country wealth is so distributed that we cannot be condemned for allowing a situation which did not start with us, which started long before us, from 1652 onwards.  In this Province it started in the colonial days, and we will be accused.  The pointing finger will be pointed at this very House, that we failed to find an economic solution, although we have found a legal and political situation.  Thank you indeed.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Meer.  That now leaves me to request, on an amended list, Mr M F Rehman for 10 minutes.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, the rectification of the imbalances of the past was never going to be easy, least of all in KwaZulu-Natal.

AN HON MEMBER:  No reading of speeches.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M F REHMAN:  Mr Speaker, I need your protection.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I heard a voice saying who wrote the speech, and I think that is unparliamentary.  [LAUGHTER]  You are reflecting on the individual ability of this hard working member.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I protect the member.  Mr Rehman, please can you proceed.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  On a point of order.  He cannot say that I said that, I said he cannot read his speech.  There is a rule that says you cannot read speeches.  So do not read it.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  That is fine, but can we allow him to then continue and say his say.  Continue, Mr Rehman.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you Mr Speaker, out of a total budget of R184 billion we pay the sum of, as my colleague Mr Meer has already mentioned, R40 billion on interest alone on our national debt, in the main incurred by the ~Apartheid~ regime in opposing democratic developments in South Africa, and in the adjoining Namibia and Angola.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  There seems to be a point of order.  Can I listen to the point of order?

MR N V E NGIDI: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, I would like the hon member Mr MacKenzie to withdraw his statement that was referred to the hon member Mr Sutcliffe as iqanda lenjelayo.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr MacKenzie?

MR M M MACKENZIE:  I withdraw unreservedly, sir.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Can I bring it to the attention of members that if this is the pace at which we are going to go at...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR M F REHMAN:  Mr Speaker, I hope you will give me extra time for that.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:...we will finish at 12 midnight.  Shall we then allow the member to proceed.  Continue, Mr Rehman.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I hope you will allow me extra time for this.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  No, I will not allow you extra time.  I am acutely aware of how much time has been deprived of you.  Continue.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you.  If this national debt had not been incurred, or had it been written off by our creditors then I say without hesitation that we would have very little difficulty in delivery in respect of such essentials as education, health and housing.  The blame for the lack of delivery must be laid at the doors of the past minority Government.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M F REHMAN:  The slice of the cake that was given to this Province from Central Government was plus/minus R16 billion.  The taxpayers at grass-roots level think, "Well, what a huge amount.  KwaZulu-Natal is incapable of handling this amount".  It is about time the Central Government re-examines its formula for the allocation of funds to provinces.  Whilst the population based distribution is considerably fairer than anything used before, there are shortcomings.

The Western Cape, for instance, inherited a quality infrastructure in education.  It does not have to make up for the inadequacies of KwaZulu-Natal.  A per capita distribution takes no account of backlogs, and favours the better endowed provinces, perpetuating their advantage.  This needs to be rectified not today, but yesterday.

Mr Speaker, it is for this reason we from the IFP, time and again argue that we from the provinces be given more powers so that we could run our own affairs more efficiently.  I personally, out of frustration, feel if this is not forthcoming, then provinces are wasting taxpayers' money by acting as administrators.  We should all join hands, irrespective of our political affiliations, fight aggressively for more powers to our provinces.  The Central Government which controls the purse strings should then directly shoulder all the blame.

There are very disturbing signs that advisors and officials from the National Financial Department are out of touch with the realities of the situation in the provinces.  The quicker they realise their follies, and involve all stakeholders from the provinces, then I am certain we all would not be in this situation that we are today.

I must also mention that since our hon Minister of Finance, Dr Ben Ngubane, initiated the anti-fraud campaign in the Province there have been numerous successes, and many offenders have already appeared in courts.  I would like to make a humble plea with the press present here, not to be too sensational in their reporting.  Whilst we fully accept transparency in our Province, we are proud that KwaZulu-Natal Legislature has made specific provision to hold a media budget review.  I believe this is historic as we are the first amongst the nine provinces to initiate such a move.  We must note that our hon Minister of Finance does not have a magic wand to perform miracles.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rehman.  I now call upon Mr Nel.  Mr Nel, you have 10 minutes, sir.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, the matter under discussion is certainly a matter of urgent public importance.  That is why we introduced a motion for debate as a matter of urgent public importance, even last week, which stood down for discussion at this sitting this week.

Sir, when the newly elected Government took office in 1994 they set about in a very admirable fashion and in a disciplined way to approach monetary and fiscal policy.  Certainly they need to be congratulated on those efforts, and congratulated on the GEAR plan and the GEAR policy which they also are sticking to with great determination.

The Democratic Party believes that those objectives and the policies are not irreconcilable with redistribution and development.  In fact we believe that they are absolutely essential, because without them the growth which we need in order to redistribute, and to make development possible simply will not happen.

However, we are as a party concerned with the lack of reprioritisation, and for those reasons, both at National level and in this House, we opposed the budgets at the beginning of this year.  We believe more could have been done to reprioritise even with the limited funds available.  So, far from opposing upliftment of the disadvantaged, we think more should have and could have been done, even at this stage.

Sir, we have a difficulty when we sit here in this Parliament and legislate over a budget which is simply fiction.  We cannot as the Finance Committee and as Parliament sit by and simply then see for the rest of the year this fiction come to fruition.  In other words, something that cannot be achieved.  So our difficulty with the Committee report, and I do have serious difficulties with the report that was tabled, are not so much with what it says, but more with what it does not say.  It avoids confronting the tough political responsibility that underlies the budget.  After all, all Government money is spent, or shall I say taxpayers' money which the Government spends, is spent in terms of an Act of Parliament, a law, and that is what the budget is.  It is a law of Parliament.  If it is not in the budget it is actually illegal.  So that is why you have adjustment estimates, and later why you authorise unauthorised expenditure.  So in the end, sir, we will have to approve every rand that is spent.

Once the budget is approved obviously, as the hon Mr I C Meer pointed out, it is then the obligation of the Executive to go out and see that this is executed, and for that they use their tools which are their respective departments.  It is not fair for politicians to set unachievable aims and objectives, and then to put the blame on officials, when those are not achieved.

In our case, we said at the beginning of this year that we cannot achieve what we are setting out to do.  We have heard from hon members here this afternoon that in particular the Department of Education and the Department of Health said, "But we cannot do the job with the money that you are allocating to us".  Nevertheless, we went ahead and approved that budget.

Having done that, the first obligation would have been then to immediately take steps to ensure that we come within that budget, and that is the job of the Cabinet.  That has not happened.  We needed to see either that there is a credible plan to get more finance from the Central Government.  Alternatively, that there are moves afoot to curb the expenses, or alternatively a plan to roll over the over-expenditure with a believable schedule for then making it up in the following year.

Now that has not happened.  So our half yearly budget review in the Finance Committee as watchdog or representative of this Legislature, if you will, comes at an opportune time, because in the end, whilst the buck starts with the Cabinet it will stop in this House.  We are the persons who will have to approve the money that has been spent.

So, like the hon Mr I C Meer said, whilst we would applaud the attitude in the Finance Committee, and in Public Accounts where party political differences are generally put aside in the interests of the Province, I must say that even in our role as parliamentarians we have to date not done enough.

To come back to my problem with the report on the table, it is the fact that it is short on definitive recommendations to help Parliament to take pro-active steps so that we can discharge our legislative responsibility in the course of the year, and to authorise the money that is spent.

This is the time that we as Parliament should have been calling on the Executive, individually for each of the departments to actually inform how the budget is to be met.  I would have hoped that the entire Cabinet would have been present at this discussion.

AN HON MEMBER:  On that side.

MR W U NEL:  On both sides, particularly because we all know that we are in crisis.  It is not a secret.  Everybody knows we are in crisis.  The public and this House are owed an explanation of what we are going to do about it.  We do not have the luxury of funding our over-expenditure with a deficit on the budget.  It is in fact illegal.  We can in this Province only spend what we get.

We are not the National Government, so we can only spend at this stage what we get.  We are obliged therefore as this Legislature, this Parliament, to insist on a plan, because if we do not then we are negligent as well.

Sir, the statistics are plain.  The vertical slice that has been allocated to some of the provinces is simply unfair, in particular to our Province and similar provinces like Mpumalanga, Northern Province and the Eastern Cape, where the demographic profiles are such that the social expenditure is heavier than the average per capita throughout the country.  That has not been taken into account.  On top of that, it seems we are grossly underfunded even on a straight per capita basis.  That is not even to speak of the backlogs that had built up over many years.

So again, I refer to comments made by the hon member Mr I C Meer, when he said that posterity will ask us in this Province: where were we when we should have been fighting for an adequate share of the National budget, to uplift our population who had in fact been relatively more disadvantaged than other provinces in the past.  That is our job, sir.

It is a pity that the National Government has in many instances adopted norms and standards which are applaudable and popular, but then left the implementation to provinces knowing full well from the start that they are unable to implement.  When we look at education, and the requirement for teacher/pupil ratios, or we look at welfare and the obligation on the Welfare Department to pay pensions - a statutory obligation to pay pensions - and if you do the multiplication, the number of pensioners by the monthly payment, it simply exceeds the budget.  We cannot proceed on that basis.  It is unacceptable for a National Government to set pension levels, to set norms and standards, and in the case of health again to set targets for free health services knowing that the Province simply cannot perform.  That is setting up the provinces for failure, and that is grossly unfair.  It is a matter to be attended to.

We would have wanted to call, in this session and in this debate, on each of our Cabinet Ministers to actually put forward a brief report on exactly where they stand with their budgets.  How they are going to achieve or not achieve and what we are to do about it.  At the end of the day, sir, now especially that it is a public debate, the public need to be told that this is not a Mickey Mouse affair, that we take the GEAR policy, that we take the Fiscal and Monetary policy of this country seriously and that we do have a plan.  That we are not simply going to blunder on and at the end of the year simply say, "Oh sorry", because that is the time when the international community will judge us and say, "But you knew you were going to fail and you simply ignored the signs.  How can we believe you when you come with the next budget, or how can we believe you when you have policies which sound credible and plausible, but we know in advance that we really cannot set any store by those".

Sir, I would make an urgent appeal at this stage even, that each of the Cabinet Ministers and Cabinet collectively, should come forward with a plan, and in that plan obviously included must be an urgent appeal to the National Government to look at the plight of underfunded provinces, in particular like KwaZulu-Natal.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Nel.  I now wish to call upon Mama Mkhize who has 10 minutes.

PRINCE G L ZULU: (Minister of Social Welfare):  Mr Speaker, please may I just say that the Ministers that are not here are out on important business of this House.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Minister.  Can I request the hon member Mrs Mkhize to address the House please for 10 minutes, madam.

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  It has been brought to our notice that some very important departments in our Province have got financial constraints.  We have also learnt that the Education Department has overspent over R799 million, Health Department over R600 million, Department of Welfare Services over R316 million, and the Department of Transport over R60 million.

It has also been brought to our knowledge that unless some drastic measures are taken by these departments in question, before the end of our financial year there will be emptiness in the financial coffers.

We are also aware of the fact that these departments, most of them, started their budget under very difficult financial constraints, because their prerequisite budgets were not met with from the beginning.  Even then, Mr Speaker, one cannot condone overspending with its resultant empty coffers by the end of our financial year.

When this happens, taxpayers are deprived of their rights.  The children are deprived of their right to education, people are deprived of their right to health services, as put in Chapter 3 of our Constitution.

A joint effort in resolving this issue is very important, but I cannot resist pointing a finger right at the top where the whole problem starts.  The body is controlled through the head.  If the head is healthy it is capable of running a healthy body.  If National Government could stop passing unsustainable policies like severance packages given to all Government servants on request, free hospital and clinic services, even for those who can afford, one can expect such occurrences on the taxpayers' money.

Educators say trial and error is the best teacher.  As this method is usually the one that is used in Governments, I hope lessons are being learnt while these errors occur.  

In the gloomy situation that we find ourselves in, in South Africa, where we find a rise in unemployment, the drop in our Rand, the drop in our gold price with its resultant inflation, we cannot help but say the mode of everybody has to be very thrifty and everybody has to save.  We must save from our households, we must save from our working places, we have got to save in our Legislature, and more so right at the head we have got to learn to be thrifty and try to hold the strings of our budgetary purses.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Point of information, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I have the point.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  I rise on a point of information while the speaker is still on the floor.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Minister, I would love to give you an opportunity to offer any clarification, but I do not have a point of information in terms of the Rules.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  It is a point of order then.  Point of correction.  The hon speaker is saying that the Department of Transport is overspent by R60 million, and that is absolutely not correct.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can we accept that there has been information that the Minister perceives as being incorrect, which he wants to correct.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  It is important to set the record straight.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Yes, that is why I am allowing you to do it now.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.  This House voted an amount of R600 million for the Department of Transport, and further on this Department of Transport was granted an amount of R100 million by Cabinet.  We have not overspent.  We are absolutely within that budget.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Minister.

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will explain that these figures are according to the Treasury report in this Province.

MR A RAJBANSI:  We do not blame you, we blame John Aulsebrook when he wrote it.  [LAUGHTER]

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  I will further say we need a joint effort in trying to solve this problem.  Departments have to get together and under the Premier's leadership we feel, because if these things happen everybody gets affected.  I would really say it is very important that we learn a lesson, but starting right at the top, that is now all these negative policies that are passed by National Parliament.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, madam.  I now wish to call upon none other than the Raj, hon Mr Rajbansi.  You have four minutes, sir.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you Mr Speaker.  The hon Mr I C Meer always reminds us of the legacy of ~Apartheid~.  I think the respect the international community has for our hon State President must result in negotiating with those people to whom we are paying the R40 billion a year debts of ~Apartheid~.  I think we owe it right from the level of our hon Premier to every member of this Legislature the words of Mahatma Gandhi, who said that there are tears and suffering in the eyes of the broad mass of the people.  Like India, most of the tears and suffering are in our rural areas.  He also said that as long as there are tears and suffering our work shall not be over.

There is another important statement I want to refer to.  Every Minister, every head of a department must ask himself or herself a question.  If the decision I am going to take, benefits the poorest of the poor, that is going to be the good decision which I will take.

The hon member Mr Wessel Nel, refers quite correctly, together with the others, that comparatively per capita for education we are still being treated as a stepchild.  There is no sense in indulging with any more rhetorics.  We must take the bull by the horns as one united Province of KwaZulu-Natal and give a message to the Financial and Fiscal Commission that this imbalance, this continuation of ~Apartheid~ in a truly non-racial demographic South Africa is unacceptable.

Mr Speaker, I am always reminded what the leadership of the two main political parties tell us, that we have got political freedom, but the manipulation of our economy of the Province and the country still continues by a minority.  I am castigated for that, and people say I am racist, but they must look at the statement made by the hon Dr M G Buthelezi, quite correctly, truthfully and rightfully, and by the hon State President of this country who controls the economy.  We have changed ~Apartheid~.  Before 1994 we had class caste ~Apartheid~, but we allow ourselves to continue with a different type of ~Apartheid~ called class ~Apartheid~.

~Apartheid~ can be described as an atomic bomb which was dropped over Hiroshima in 1945, but the effects of that atomic bomb, the radiation still remains.  All that we have to do is remove that ill effect, the radiation of the policy of ~Apartheid~.  I think until such time we do not act decisively, and I want to suggest to the hon Premier, that we must not only look at a roll over, we must not only look at juggling our finance, let us look at alternate methods of revenue in this Province.  Let us have an education lotto.  Let us negotiate with the National Ministry that we want a lotto for education.  We want bingo for education, because others want to come in and have the monopoly of bingo.  Let us look at every way and means as to where we can get revenue.

I want to suggest that if you want effective management let us set an example in this Legislature.  The question that I ask, do we need committees with 20 members?  I do not think so.  I think we have a world record of the number of committees in a small Legislature like ours.  We have committees that should not exist.  We should amalgamate committees.  I even want to suggest that those who are opposing the amalgamation or rationalisation is because they do not want to lose their allowances of chairperson at the end of the month.  They can even come to an agreement to give them their allowances until this Parliament dissolves in 1999.

We cannot allow, Mr Speaker, this unacceptable and intolerable situation of our Province being treated as a stepchild to continue any longer, because 400 000 children, mainly in our rural areas, have no water and have no toilets in the schools.  I think we must hang our heads in shame that we are doing very little to redress that great human misery, great human problem.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  I will now ask Mr Mkhwanazi.  You have four minutes, sir.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, on a point of order.  This hon member passed a remark, "Like in India".  I am a South African.  His reference to India, I am a South African of Indian origin.  [LAUGHTER]  If he wants, we can reintroduce the National Party policy of repatriation and give him one man one boat to India.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I have Mr Mkhwanazi please.  You have 10 minutes, sir.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.  How difficult it is to speak immediately after the tiger has spoken.  [LAUGHTER]  Many people would like to have the colours of the tiger.  I am sure they are running for the skin so that they can have their own mabheshus of the tiger skin.

Mr Speaker, this is a very serious matter.  We are, as a Province and as a country, in difficulty.  Some people talked about the national debt.  Yes, there is a national debt, and a lot of our taxpayers' money goes to service the national debt.  I am not very sure why we agreed to pay the ~Apartheid~ debt.  Why did we not resist first of all, resist that we will not pay for the debt, for the money spent on arms and all those things to suppress our people?  Why did we not do that?  Castro did it, and he succeeded.

If we cannot do it along that route, the people we owe money to go around pontifying themselves, saying that they condemn ~Apartheid~.  The United Nations said ~Apartheid~ was a crime against humanity.  Why do those people not write off the monies we owe them?  

AN HON MEMBER:  Volker must pay.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Why can we not ask them to write it off?  I think we should stop flogging a dead horse, which is ~Apartheid~.  ~Apartheid~ is dead.  Ifile i-~Apartheid~ [~Apartheid~ is dead Africans, can you not see we keep jumping up and down on one thing].  It is dead.

Also I think if we look at our problems, we sit down with a sober mind and accept these things as a reality, and stop politicking about it.  For instance, we have some of the sons of this Province coming from National Parliament.  We sent them there.  They were sent by us.  They come back here and they flog us, instead of coming to sit down with us and try to advise us.

Now for instance, there is a story going around repeatedly that there is a lot of money in the Department of Education which has not been spent.  Will the Minister of Finance here, who is the Premier, perhaps clarify that position, because we are told there is money that is rotting in the banks, this Government is not using the money.  Is this fact or fiction?  Could the Minister please explain that to us.

What I think we should do, we should admit there is a shortfall.  What we should do is we should find money ourselves as a Province.  Is it not possible?  Is there anything preventing this Province to raise funds and help the National Government, because the National Government also say they have no money.  Now if they have no money, now are we to do, give us food. [as little fledgling birds do, lifting up our mouths continuously saying, Give us food].  Is anything stopping us?  Really I am asking with true honesty, is there anything stopping us, Mr Minister, trying to raise funds by ourselves?  Yes, we need belt tightening, and we also need to prioritise.  A lot of people have said so.  Let us not just prioritise by word of mouth.  Why do we not sit down and talk about prioritisation?  We have some people here who are very intelligent.  They can help us.  How do we prioritise?  What do we put first, what do we put second instead of just making political capital out of it.  As I said before, we should use every cent that we have.

I am sure if we were honest to ourselves, and honest to the Province, because this is a serious matter.  This is a National and a Provincial tragedy.  I would like us after this debate, Mr Speaker, for us all really to take this as our responsibility, not as the responsibility of the Minister of Finance, or Minister of Education or who else, it is in totality our responsibility.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I will now call upon Mrs Downs.  You also have four minutes.

MRS J M DOWNS:  I think, Mr Speaker, that there has been enough hot air generated in here this afternoon to fly a whole fleet of balloons.  The bottom line is this.  We are all to blame.  Province has not done their job properly in prioritising and in making sure that they spend the money properly, and in controlling it.  The MECs should have much better control over their departments.

On the National side, they have given us an impossible task to fulfil.  How can you stick to a budget when you are stuck with National labour systems, when you do not get enough money in the first place?   It is impossible.

So we have got blame on all sides.  On the side of the Finance Committee which is from this House, I agree with my colleague, the previous speaker, they have not done their job and I include myself in this.  We have not made proper practical workable suggestions on how the budget should be balanced.

What I want to bring to everybody's attention, and Mr Rajbansi just touched on it, is that what we really need to talk about is the people ...

MR A RAJBANSI:  The hon Rajbansi.  [LAUGHTER]

MRS J M DOWNS:  My apologies, the hon Rajbansi.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS J M DOWNS:  Actually, Mr Rajbansi, I was paying you a compliment which is unusual for me.  [LAUGHTER]  If I may continue.  What we have forgotten about is that the people that are really affected are the people of our Province.  I get just jolly well fed up when I know that the Western Cape have got facilities for all of their kids at school, because they have got enough money to do that.  Our kids are going to school with no toilets and no water.  That is just not fair and it is just not acceptable.  We have got the same situation in Welfare.  It is our pensioners, and our disabled people that have a possibility of not being paid.  It is our people who are sick that go to the hospital and may not get the attention that they need, because we are underfunded.  It is unfair that nobody has taken the historical factor into account, that we have been underfunded in this Province for years.  We have got the poorest people living in this Province.

If I can appeal to all of my colleagues on this side of the House and that side of the House, we as KwaZulu-Natalians first, forget our political affiliations, it is our people that are hurting.  We as KwaZulu-Natalians first need to go to National together and say to National, fund us fairly.  We must be fairly funded.  Then we need to go to our Provincial MECs who come from both sides of the House and say, "MECs, please do your work properly and control your departments properly.  Look at your people who control the budget and crack a bit of whip where it needs to be cracked".  It is just a very practical thing.  We need to join together, and we need to sort this situation out, because it is our people.  In the end it is our people that are paying for our mismanagement.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mrs Downs.  I now wish to call upon Dr Sutcliffe for 14 minutes.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I rise in order to support the midyear budget review and support the report that is in front of us.

Indeed I think that most of the speakers today have touched on certain elements.  I want to suggest that there is a problem in the way we are addressing this, because there is a problem of wanting to say let us put the blame somewhere.  I think that that is the wrong approach.  You can indeed sit here and we can sit and say, "Well, the blame is on National Government, they did not give us enough money".  National Government will say, "Well, you got the most money of any other province and after all certain parties claim they want fiscal federalism.  We gave you your money.  You in fact have spent it the wrong way".  The other side might say, "Well, we demand that we in fact should not get 19,5%, which is what the Province got, we should get a bigger amount".

I am afraid that is not really going to get us anywhere.  It is in times of crisis like this that you need to come down and say what are we doing, what should we be doing.  Certainly in the Premier's comments on this issue to the Portfolio Committee and to others, is to say this is the time that we have to take stock of where are at.  We cannot sit and say let us point blame here, point blame there.  Yes, there is a whole complex of factors, and this report enumerates all those factors.  There are difficulties in dealing with the issue of equity.

When we talk about this per capita expenditure issue, that is the decision we had to take.  Unfortunately, given the backlogs that we were faced with, we were faced with a far more difficult situation than those provinces that were historically white or historically favoured areas.  That is the reality we are dealing with.

I want to suggest in my remaining comments today, that we focus on what we need to do as a Province in order to get things right.  Certainly one of those elements is that we need to engage at every level, whether it is the Fiscal and Finance Commission, whether it is National Government, we have to argue that, built into the formula, must be a formula to deal with those areas that historically were disadvantaged.

That it is a case that is equally true of our Province, as it is for the Northern Province, as it is certainly for the Eastern Province.  Those three provinces particularly were provinces that historically were underfunded.  We need to take up that case and say it is unfair that we are going to have to wait 10 or 15 years before there is equity.  We need to build into the formula an element of addressing that equity.  That, we can do jointly, but dealing with it in that way, not dealing with it as an island called KwaZulu-Natal, but as those historically African provinces, because that is why we are underfunded.  We are underfunded because under the National Party Government they gave money to historically non-African areas.  So that is the first thing we must do, and we must do it properly.

The second thing that we must do, is to say, that collectively maybe we need to get away from this line function responsibility, and say that education is not the sole realm of activity of its political head, and of its Deputy Director-General, or in that case the Secretary General.  In fact education is our collective responsibility here, just as Transport, Health and every other portfolio is.  This idea, and maybe this is the opportunity, we need to start saying the line function management is not the way we can actually manage our way out of this crisis.

We need to recommend, and hopefully the Premier will respond to issues like that, of finding ways in which the Cabinet itself begins to focus not just on the line function responsibilities, but what are the ways in which collectively that Cabinet can begin to address the educational difficulties, health difficulties and welfare difficulties.  They are not going away in a year.  They will not go away in two or three years, but certainly there needs to be a collective approach to deal with that.  We have to say there are resources.  Our problem is not just money.

When you look at six point something billion Rand spent on education, there have to be ways in which we can utilise those resources more effectively.  Even the Department of Social Welfare said to us they believe, it could be as high as 20% of the people receiving grants, in fact are fictitious.  There needs to be a concerted effort that we can collectively get out there and see whether that is the case.  20% is probably far too high.  National studies have shown it is around 10%.  Even if it is 10% that is saving us hundreds of millions of Rands.

We have to evaluate every policy that has an implication on finance.  We know in hindsight now, it was historically advantaged individuals and communities that benefited from that pension fund scheme.  At least that is a good lesson to us.  In future before we make those decisions that impact on money, let us see which communities are affected there, because invariably it was historically advantaged schools, historically advantaged individuals that actually benefitted.  The joke around many towns now is, "Well, I got a nice package from the Government of the Province in order to set up my own business".  Individuals who actually could have left the Government and set up that business without that golden handshake that we have given them.

So collectively we need to look at those.  I am saying that it is not just a line function responsibility, otherwise we get into this defending my own turf.  We start saying my problem and my responsibility is not health, my responsibility is not education or social welfare, I am just going to stick to my turf.  We need to change the way in which we are looking at things and think much more collectively.

The next issue I want to focus on, however, is whatever we do we must recognise that budgets are laws.  We passed a law in this Province a few months ago, and we must find mechanisms where we are sticking to those laws.  We do signal the wrong message if we are continually saying well, forget about that law, we are continuing to spend in a particular way.  A law is a law, and we need to say that this is a fundamental law of the Province, every year when we vote in that budget.  It is important that we do at day one begin to ensure that we are taking measures and steps to address the problem.

I have noted before, but certainly on the presentations we got to our Committee, each department came in and said this is how many people were in their budget, that they budgeted for this year, but this is how many people that they are spending on, the personnel of the Province.  There was a huge mismatch between what was planned and what actually was being spent.  That is something that does not take a financial guru to work out that there is something wrong there.  From day one there should have been a recognition that in some departments there are five or six, in some cases 10 000 extra people that were not budgeted for.  We should have started addressing that question way back in May, not to wait till November to address it.

The last issue is, as we need to make up some time, is to really recommend that we must get our information together in this Province.  For too long we have waited on departments in saying how many personnel are there, how many teachers are there, how many this are there.  We cannot expect that any more.  If for nothing else, we must say that by February next year every department must be able to give us a very good assessment, down at a responsibility level what is being costed out.  What personnel there are, what other costs in fact we find.  At least if we have the correct information we can fight a better case nationally.

Mr Speaker, I want to put our party's support for the report that was tabled by the hon Chairperson of the Committee, and indicate that it really reflects the totality of the issues that are before us, and that we collectively need to make sure that we are taking charge of this situation and moving us into the next millennium.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Dr Sutcliffe, especially your consideration for the pressure I am under in terms of time.  I now wish to call upon the Premier, who will address this House, and by so doing close the debate.  Thank you, Mr Premier.

THE PREMIER: (As Minister of Finance):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  First of all, I would like to address the issue of Mr Rudi Redinger who has indicated that this is his last sitting in this House.  Mr Rudi Redinger has had an excellent career in public life.  He was elected to Parliament for the first time in 1987.  Since then he has served the people of KwaZulu-Natal as member of the President's Council, ministerial representative, member of the Executive Committee of this Province, and since 1994 as member of this Provincial Legislature.  He has over the years also served in executive positions in many agricultural, business, religious and cultural institutions.  The hon Rudi Redinger is known for his sincere commitment to serve all the communities in this Province.  He has had good and constructive relations with all in this House, and has always been held in high respect by all in this Province.  It is always a sad occasions when an hon member is to bow out of public service, particularly at a time when we need all the talent and all the expertise available.  We wish you well, hon colleague, in your new semi-retired state of life.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE PREMIER:  (As Minister of Finance):  Mr Speaker, I thank the members of this hon House for a very constructive, perceptive and penetrating debate on our financial crisis.  It has been marked by a singular lack of emotion and point scoring, and I feel very much encouraged by this collective approach to face a problem commonly.  Even before I start, I would like to probably give this House an idea of the meeting we had with the National Minister, Trevor Manuel on the 21st of this month in Durban.  He came to visit us to meet with the Cabinet and the administration over the cash flow problems and the projected over-expenditures in our budget.

After a lengthy meeting of about four hours, we agreed on a draft press statement in which we all agreed that we accept that the allocations are based on a formula, that we need to relook the formula with the Financial and Fiscal Commission.  However, we also accept that because the allocations are formula based they are not subject to discretion.  We accept that some problems flow out of management capacities in provincial departments, in so far as the figures on which our budgeting has been based were not reliable.  We also accepted the fact that we must develop a common purpose in addressing these over-expenditures.  That hard political decisions would have to be made, but that these decisions should not impose further hardship on the people of our Province.

We accepted that National Government is not going to stand back and see provinces sink.  Solutions will have to be found through interactive processes.  We accepted that the Financial and Fiscal Commission, and the Budget Council, which comprises the National Department of Finance, the Department of State Expenditure, Provincial MECs and Provincial Treasuries will together examine the guideline figures for 1998/1999, to ensure that we do not recreate the set of circumstances that have led to this crisis.

We pledged ourselves to tighten further the interaction between the National and Provincial spheres of Government.  It was accepted that this is not just a KwaZulu-Natal problem, but it is a national one.

I am sketching this picture, sir, so that we can see that the issues are being managed in a responsible way.  There is no intention on our part in the Province to try and defend ourselves at the expense of National Government.  That as the members here have stated, this requires collective wisdom, collective effort and in this respect, I applaud the Finance Portfolio Committee for having conducted this media review which is the first among Provincial Governments.

As it has been suggested, we probably need even a quarterly review so that we can track expenditures timeously and be able to find remedies.  The projected over-expenditure is so huge now, although State Expenditure has stated that we must try and limit it to R1,5 billion, it is going to be very difficult even to achieve that objective.

Some members have raised the possibilities of special projects and special ways of finding additional revenue for the Province.  I accept this and appreciate it, because we already in State Expenditure and our Treasury are busy with proposals which will come to the Portfolio Committees on ways and means to make use of our Provincial assets to finance our budget deficit.  This obviously is an exceptional measure.  It is not something that we would normally resort to, but we do have assets that can enable us to breach the chasm between now and 1 April 1998.

We have also decided that we are holding a meeting of Cabinet, heads of department, Chairpersons of Portfolio Committees next Wednesday, to take a look at the patterns of our expenditure.  The historical budget processes that we are engaged in, of seeing line item budgeting are obviously out of date.  They cannot meet the challenges that we face.  We must now be focused on outcomes, and the expenditure in terms of supplies and stores and so on, must be based on those outcomes and targets we want to reach.

There has been a practice in the past that if there is a line item funding which is not used before the end of the financial year, that there is a rush now to use that money, buying extra equipment, computers and so on, yet without the requisite personnel to manage and use that equipment.  This is a mental state, a mind-set of the past.  We have to change it in favour of a far more goal oriented outcomes based targeting of expenditure.  I think there is unanimity in Cabinet about this approach.  My hope is that all levels of our Government, that is the Legislature, the Portfolio Committees, Cabinet and the Administration will next week Wednesday see concrete plans to implement this type of approach.

There are other things that we have to do.  We have to be ruthlessly honest with ourselves, and examine the shortcomings, the capacity shortfalls that have produced this sorry state of affairs.  For this purpose I have appointed a Commission of Inquiry into the causes of the expenditure, which will be headed by a Magistrate and an auditor.  We need to get to the root causes of this in order to be able to formulate strategies and plans to ensure this never recurs.

We are also engaged in other capacity building projects, such as the agreement that we have reached with the University of Warwick in the UK and the University of Zululand, to train core teams from each department to manage transformation, and thereby to create Government efficiencies.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE PREMIER:  (As Minister of Finance):  In 1995 I went to Warwick and spent some time there looking at their programmes, programmes that have been applied in Singapore, in Hong Kong, in Malaysia, in many of the emerging economies.  Programmes that have produced incredible levels of Government efficiency, right-sizing and systems managements, that have produced the Asia Pacific myriad.

This programme has now been adopted by National Government.  Professor Kumar Bhattacharyya, who is head of this programme, came here to KwaZulu-Natal and addressed our Cabinet together with some members from the project in the country.  Of course, the programme was formally launched by the Deputy President, and it will be operated through the Department of Public Enterprises to create these core teams in National Government, just in the same way as we are going to do it here.  I believe that you cannot create efficiency unless people acquire the right type of skills which are only through the cutting edge type of technologies and training.  This is part of our project.

We are going to introduce, early next year, the Performance Measurement Bill which will seek to define goals and measurable targets for each of our departments, that will result in recommendations on promotions or whatever sanctions for those who do not perform properly.

I am also working now on a new Bill.  A Bill that binds departments, members of the Executive, to keep within the budgeted framework of expenditure.  They have this in Australia where if you are a Minister or head of department and you indulge in over-expenditure you end up in gaol.  I think this is the reality we too here have got to face.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE PREMIER:  (As Minister of Finance):  I would also like to point out, Mr Speaker, that we have been undertaking certain exercises which will result in a credible management process for reducing over-expenditure in the coming months and years.  We are abolishing all unfunded vacancies.  We are abolishing funded posts that have been offered for phase one of right-sizing, a process which was undertaken earlier this year.  We are abolishing certain posts that became vacant as a result of natural attrition.  We are providing an updated organigram for each department to the PERSAL component for purposes of reconciling establishment records.  We are abolishing VSPs at the moment which are unfundable in the expectation that a new severance instrument is going to be finalised very soon in the Department of Public Expenditure and Administration.

We have already had a meeting in Cape Town in the past week discussing the outlines and the terms of reference for this new severance instrument.  We believe it will be adequate, and it will induce a lot of people to opt for it.

However, there has to be a component that is involuntary, where a head of department through assessment reports can actually indicate to those people who under-perform that they have to take the package.  This was lacking in the past.  As a result we lost a lot of valuable people, and we are left with some who are not as valuable.  It is a progressive set up.  It is an evolutionary thing.  It is a part of the transition, but I think we are managing it.  Collectively working together I think we are going to achieve standing results in this Province.  We are there grappling with the issues, not just sitting back to look up at National Government, although I do accept that we have got to insist that our equitable share of per capita funding is realised.  Even now, even this year, had that been fully realisable we could have had up to R7 billion, which we do not have.

There were other issues, of course, that were raised, such as what is the situation with RDP funding.  Well, I must say, hon Mr Mkhwanazi, that the Department has already used that money, even overspent it, unless there is another pot of gold lying somewhere that we would be very happy to hear about.

On the issue of what we are going to do with retrenchments which have been a very topical issue, and unfortunately so because it is all premature.  We cannot simply go out and retrench people without a retrenchment tool.  I spoke to Minister Manuel when he was here on the 21st, that we need to create a fund, or a resource out of which we are going to draw for early retrenchment processes.  We cannot actually proceed with this until the instrument is created and the fund is made available.

However, this must not be taken as a statement which says that we shall not retrench.  We cannot cause hardships through retrenchments, so we will need funding for it to be meaningful.  We cannot retrench without adequate agreements in the Bargaining Chamber with the public sector unions, we will need to achieve those agreements.  Above all, we cannot be callous about it, because after all, we are dealing with human beings, people who have feelings, people who have needs just the same as ourselves.  We cannot sit here on the lofty citadel of Government and think we can use power in a callous and unconscionable manner as was experienced in the past.

I thank you colleagues for this very, very constructive debate.  We look forward to meeting you on the 3rd, which will be next week, to look at how we deal with the organisation of functions in our departments, and how we reprioritise our spending.  Thank you very much.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Premier.  That concludes the debate on the Finance Committee report.  I have now in front of me a change of process here.  What we will do, we have finalised 8.3, but it has been observed that 8.5 flows out of 8.3, the debate on the Finance Committee report.  There is now an arrangement that that resolution should be moved now and that we should debate and finalise it now.  The resolution will be moved by Minister Miller and I will then allow a debate on it which should then culminate in us deciding on that resolution.  Minister, please.

MOTION:

	This House, noting the serious budget overruns which are inevitable in the current financial year, and believing that these overruns are largely due to:

		1. unfunded mandates imposed on us by Central Government,

		2. discrepancies in per capita funding between provinces, and

		3. inequitable sharing of the National budget -

	RESOLVES:
		
		That Cabinet uses all means at its disposal to press for a revision of the formula on which provinces are funded.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Mr Speaker, if I might use a few minutes just to explain the background ...

MR A RAJBANSI:  On a point of order, Mr Speaker.  We cannot go to the topic without amending the Order Paper.  I move that precedence be given to 8.5.  It has to be a decision of the House.  I move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, by way of explanation I want to say that this side of the House, the movers of the motion under 8.5 on the Order Paper, realise that in fact virtually all the material that would have been used in the debate on the motion has in fact been covered in the debate on the report of the Financial Committee.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  As such then, sir, in the interests of economy of time, and in the interests of avoiding repetition, we seek to move an amended motion without debate.  We wish this to be put to the House, because it will be a logical flow from what we have heard in the debate that has preceded me standing before you now, and is a logical outflow of the excellent summing up that we have just had from the hon the Premier.

Accordingly then, sir, and I apologise to members that in the haste of trying to organise this rearrangement, we have not been able to circulate members with the motion.  So I will read it carefully.  The motion therefore will read as follows:

MOTION:

		That this House, noting the serious budget overruns which are inevitable in the current financial year, and believing that these overruns are largely due to the factors recorded in the midyear budget report resolves:

		1.	To accept the Finance Committee midyear budget review report;  and

		2.	That Cabinet uses all means at its disposal to press for a revision of the formula on which provinces are funded.

I move accordingly, Mr Speaker.  We believe that it is important that this House actually adopt this resolution in order that it becomes an instruction of this House, so that the Cabinet can therefore act on both the content of the report, and the need for us to seek at all costs a revision to the funding formula for this Province.  I move.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  That motion has been moved.  I will allow parties to indicate support or otherwise for the motion.  Dr Sutcliffe?

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Mr Speaker, I stand to support that motion on behalf of the African National Congress, and to indicate certainly to the Premier our party commits itself to making sure that we will mobilise and organise to ensure that we give effect to those issues.  I know that maybe his party's ability to mobilise and organise is maybe not as powerful as ours, but we certainly commit ourselves there.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mr Volker, can I get your indication?

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, we also support that motion.  I would like to add one aspect.  The solution cannot only be found in a reformulation of budget provisions.  It is also essential that there should be an internal discipline as far as that is concerned.  We have had the situation of a six monthly budget overview.  There have been suggestions of a quarterly overview, but I believe that it is essential that there should be ongoing overall management of our budget expenditure, rather than a quarterly or a yearly review.  In other words, ex post facto.  

That could possibly be handled best by having a Minister and Department of Provincial Expenditure, and the task would be to monitor each department's expenditure on an ongoing basis so as to ensure ongoing financial discipline, and this could be preferable to reviews ex post facto.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Please, I am just asking parties to indicate their support.  I am not restricting any contributions to that effect, but what I am trying to avoid is a debate again.  Please.  Can I get Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The Democratic Party had recorded its unhappiness with the midyear budget review report in the Committee.  We are happy, however, to support the motion as proposed, noting that the views of the Democratic Party, as expressed by my colleague Mr Nel, sets out what we believe should be seen to be additional to the midyear budget report.  We need to say that choices have to be made, and they have to be made now.  It is not a matter of just reprioritisation.  If budgets are to be accepted to be implemented, along the lines of what the hon Dr Sutcliffe is saying, then they have to be realisable and they have to be implementable.  If we have an unrealistic budget, then quite frankly, I think there are many members in this House and most of the public of Natal that will not accept firing 20 000 teachers to save an unrealistic budget figure.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Can I get an indication from Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  We support this because we know 20 000 teacher's services will not be terminated.  We know that as a fact, and everybody here knows that.  We are not going to play public politics.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Rajbansi.  Can I get an indication from Mr Mkhwanazi?

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The PAC supports this motion in toto.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Shamazi.  The next would be ACDP.

MRS J M DOWNS:  The ACDP supports this motion, and takes this opportunity to congratulate the Premier on a well reasoned response.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much from the parties.  I now wish to call upon the Minister Mr Miller to make his closing remarks on this motion which I will then put to the House.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  I have now received in haste a nicely typed out copy which I have signed, which will be brought to you, sir.  May I then just again bring this whole matter to a close by reading the motion once again.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  
		That this House, noting the serious budget overruns which are inevitable in the current financial year, and believing that these overruns are largely due to the factors noted in the midyear budget report of the Finance Committee resolves:

		1.	To accept the Finance Committee midyear budget review report;  and

		2.	Requests Cabinet to use all means at its disposal to press for a revision of the formula on which provinces are funded.

It is formally moved, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Minister Miller.  I now put the question on the motion.

THE MOTION AS PROPOSED BY MR P M MILLER - PASSED

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The motion has been passed unanimously.  That closes 8.5 of our Order Paper.  Having concluded 8.5 I now wish to move to 8.4 on the Order Paper, which will be a debate on the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Management Bill.  To open the debate will be the Minister in charge.  He will introduce the Bill and introduce the debate.  Minister Ngubane.

KWAZULU-NATAL NATURE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT BILL.

~INKOSI~ N J NGUBANE: (Minister of Traditional and Environmental Affairs and Safety and Security):  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.  I rise to introduce a Bill which has historical significance.  Why is it historical, Mr Speaker?
It is because it reverses history.  The unfortunate policies of the past had led to the management of nature conservation in what is now the Province of KwaZulu-Natal being divided and being conducted by two separate entities.  On the one hand, the Natal Parks Board, and then on the other hand the KwaZulu Department of Nature Conservation.

The Bill which we now submit to this hon House for consideration will end that division and will put into place, if enacted by this Parliament, a new Nature Conservation Board and a new nature conservation service operating with that Board.  It will clearly define the duties of the Board and of the Minister, and for the first time will introduce a defined role for this Legislature apart from its general legislative function.  There are distinct duties to be executed by the Environmental Affairs Portfolio Committee.

In furthering the process of involving local communities and bringing in the management of nature conservation protected areas closer to the local communities, it will also introduce the concept of local boards.

Bringing this Bill to Parliament has been a long and hard road, as it was not as easy as that, sir, to bring together a Government department and a parastatal body.  At first, like all departments of this Province, my Department was faced with its own problems of getting established.  Officials of the two Nature Conservation bodies started exploratory discussions long ago in 1994, and made great progress in relation to practical matters in terms of on the ground nature conservation.  The great problem that remained related to the legalities around labour matters, pensions and finances.  The latter, the finances, are comparatively easily accommodated in the annual appropriation Acts of this Parliament.  The labour aspects, and in particular, the protection of the rights of officials posed the major problems.

It was not until Mr D J Joubert, Secretary of the Department of the Premier had completed an investigation and submitted a very worthwhile and comprehensive report, that real progress was made with moving towards the legislation which would bring to pass that which everyone wished to see, an amalgamated nature conservation body.

Last year, Mr Speaker, Mr Joubert, in association with the then newly appointed Secretary of my Department, proceeded with the first early drafts of legislation.  No actual steps had been taken in this regard by the nature conservation bodies themselves, and it was therefore necessary to take forward the process of drafting legislation as a separate exercise from the technical discussions which had gone before and which related to on the ground operations.  I therefore would like to thank Mr Joubert for such contributions.

At this point I want to pay tribute to the officials of my Department who were involved, as well as the officials of the Natal Parks Board and the former Department of Nature Conservation of KwaZulu.  Particular tribute must be paid to the late Mr Nick Steele who joined his voice to that of Dr George Hughes, and many others in supporting the recommendation that the form of the new nature conservation body should be that of a parastatal.  Dr Hughes, Dr Grobbelaar and other staff members of the Natal Parks Board, together with Mr Wayne Elliott, Mr Khulani Mkhize and their colleagues in the Department of Nature Conservation also deserve a special word of appreciation for their contribution to the evolution of this Bill.  A word of thanks also, Mr Speaker and the hon House, is due to my departmental Secretary, Mr Robin Raubenheimer for the facilitating role he played.

The development of this Bill is a singularly fine example of co-operation between the Executive branch of the Government and the Legislature.  I want to pay a very warm tribute to both the present and the past Chairpersons of the Environmental Portfolio Committees.  Mr John Jeffery and Mrs Ina Cronje gave the Department every support, as well as indulging in a lot of quite justifiable prodding to get this Bill to where it is today.  In fact these two hon members should not serve under the ANC, in fact they belong to this side of the House.  [LAUGHTER]  In praising the Chairpersons of the Portfolio Committee, I also extend my warmest thanks to the members of that Committee.  This has been a co-operative exercise over party political lines.  I will not forget the spirit, the togetherness in solving environmental problems, especially with my Portfolio Committee members.

When one brings together two separate bodies which have been functioning under two separate sets of legislation and with one being a parastatal and the other, as I have said, being a Government department, it is in the nature of things that compromises have to be made.  There are indeed compromises in this Bill and I acknowledge that it is not perfect.  There will no doubt be occasions in the near future when this hon House will be called upon to affect amendments as experience teaches us what changes are necessary.  You will remember, Mr Speaker, there is nothing made out of human hands that is perfect.  If we had striven to bring about a perfect document we would never have got it to Parliament.  We must use what has been prepared and improve upon it in the near future.

Mr Speaker, I turn now to some of the history and achievements of nature conservation in this Province, which I believe is appropriate in relation to the introduction of this Bill this afternoon.  

Nowhere on the African continent is wildlife conservation so firmly based as it is in our Province of KwaZulu-Natal.

On 1 December the Natal Parks Board will be celebrating its 50th anniversary, an event which itself is a landmark in the history of nature conservation especially in this Province.  The Board's sister organisation, the Department of Nature Conservation, has been in existence for more than two decades.  Both organisations have been receiving recognition awards for their good performances.

Both these agencies have achieved many significant successes in the wildlife restoration of this Province.  But the strong conservation record these two bodies have given KwaZulu-Natal stems back well before the colonial era of our history to the reign of King Shaka.  It was then that the wise use and protection of nature in this part of South Africa was already in place.

Before the arrival of the white man, Mr Speaker and hon House, King Shaka set aside certain items such as leopard skins, lion claws and crane feathers for exclusive possession by royalty, and he established areas where he alone could give permission to hunt.  We could not just hunt everywhere.  These royal decrees were, in effect, the first conservation laws, the first licenses and permits as we know them today.

Then followed the "Colonial" conservation era, and the first written laws affecting wildlife in Natal and Zululand.  These saw the proclamations of the three oldest game reserves in Africa, Hluhluwe, Umfolozi and St Lucia as long ago as 1895, and marked the beginning of the long battle to save one of Africa's most magnificent wildlife species, the White Rhinoceros from extinction.  This was to become one of the great success stories of conservation on this Continent during the 1960s with the launch of Operation Rhino.  Today it is no secret that the White Rhino has been removed from the World Conservation Union's Endangered Species list.  This was a conservation triumph that took place right here in KwaZulu-Natal.  

There have been many, many more landmarks which have earned KwaZulu-Natal pride of place in its conservation endeavours.

It was here in this Province that the first wilderness areas were formally set aside during the late 1950s.  It was here too that the first wildlife trails were introduced in South Africa.  Today these are among the prime eco-tourism activities throughout the country.  It is from our northern coastline that one of the world's most renowned sea turtle conservation programmes have been running for more than 30 years.

It was here, Mr Speaker and the hon House, in KwaZulu-Natal too, that the first conservancies, and later biosphere reserves were begun in the late 1970s, spreading the message and practice of conservation beyond the boundaries of formally protected areas onto private land.

Of course, Mr Speaker, it was here that one of the largest community development conservation programmes in Africa has been up and running from strength to strength for many years now.  This has been creating jobs, self-employment and self-improvement facilities for many people in rural areas around our game parks.

A new trend in conservation in the 90s has been the emphasis given to the concept of sustainable use of our natural resources.  This has included the ongoing liaison between our conservation agencies and the Province's traditional healing community.

Bio-diversity conservation in this Province has never been more vibrant than it is today.  The formation of local boards will hopefully ensure the full participation of our communities themselves in the management of this Province's wildlife estate.  Already, we have seen the formation of a number of community conservation reserves, (such as Makaza Reserve adjoining Mkuzi Game Reserve in Maputaland).

Over and above this, more and more communities are becoming involved in assisting wildlife research programmes, both marine and terrestrial, in activities such as monitoring of co-operative fisheries and scientific data collection during mussel gathering along the coast.  

It is important to note that nature conservation is not just an end in itself.  It makes a significant contribution to the economy.

Increasingly sophisticated tourist facilities in our protected areas, over the past decade particularly, have done much to enhance our Province's wildlife destinations both via local tourism and on the international market, and they have played a strong role in alleviating reducing Government subsidies.  

All these are developments that can only benefit the revenue earning capacity and thus the quality of life of our people, through tapping into the growing tourism market.

The new legislation before you today, Mr Speaker and the hon House, carries on the tradition of well-considered nature conservation within the boundaries of KwaZulu-Natal.  The amalgamation of the Natal Parks Board and the Department of Nature Conservation has not been an easy process, as I have said before.  It has, however, proved to be a fruitful gestation period, and the Bill, which is now before you will, I feel confident, prove a worthy successor to the tradition I have just sketched for you.

Mr Speaker, I then accordingly table the Bill before you for consideration by your hon House.  I thank you, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MRS F X GASA TAKES THE CHAIR

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, hon Minister.  Can we now call upon the hon member Mr J Jeffery, the Chairperson.  We are giving you 20 minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J H JEFFERY:  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  Madam Speaker, the KwaZulu-Natal Conservation Management Bill was published in the Provincial Gazette on 3 July 1997, and the formal process of the Committee dealing with the Bill commenced at that point.  The Department in its wisdom left the public participation process up to the Committee.

The Committee held six public hearings in the last week of July and the first week of August.  There was an enormous amount of public interest in the Bill.  Some 62 written submissions were received together with some 33 oral submissions.  We would have liked to have had further public participation, in particular from the rural areas, but because of time constraints that was not possible.

The Committee then worked on the Bill intensively for three months, before finalising the Bill and approving it unanimously.  I tabled this morning the set of amendments to the Bill.  Just to point out at this stage that there is one omission, that we had put a definition of the House of Traditional Leaders which is in the clean version of the Bill that you have in front of you, but it is not on the document of amendments agreed to.  In addition, there was also interaction with meetings with field rangers and the Workers Forum of employees at the Parks Board and the DNC.

The Committee got technical advice from Professor Milton from the University of Natal, an environmental law expert, regarding some of the definitions, in particular the definition of nature conservation.  Having considered his advice, the definition of nature conservation was altered and there were consequential amendments made through the Bill.

We received submissions from the KwaZulu Monuments Council, the National Monuments Council and the Natal Museum concerning the apparent omission of the Conservation Service or the Board dealing with cultural heritage areas.  The Committee provided a definition of heritage sites which is taken from the KwaZulu-Natal Heritage Bill, and also provided for representation on the Board by a person with knowledge and experience of the management of heritage sites.  In due course one would imagine that this would be a person from Amafa aKwaZulu-Natali.

Given the role of the Service, the Board, the local boards in promoting eco-tourism, the Committee made amendments to ensure a proper structured relationship between the Board and the Provincial Tourism Authority, and between regional tourism committees and local boards when they are set up.  There is representation from those structures on the conservation structures that I mentioned.

In the amendments that we made to the Bill, we have attempted to clarify the relationship between the Minister, the Board and the Service.  We have attempted to ensure that the Minister has overall political responsibility for the management of nature conservation, and within this framework that the Conservation Board has greater responsibilities.  The Portfolio Committee has political oversight over the whole process.

There is an amendment, it is section 2.2, which gives the Minister the power to suspend a decision taken by the Board, an official of the Service or by a local board after consultation with the Portfolio Committee and the Board, and then in consultation with the Portfolio Committee and after hearing representations from the affected body, to decide whether that decision should continue, whether it should be amended or whether it should be abandoned.  The requirement of in consultation with the Portfolio Committee has been put in to increase the accountability whilst at the same time allowing or giving the Minister the power to intervene where necessary.

As I said, the responsibilities of the Board for the Service have been increased, but these are largely responsibilities that are shared with the Minister.  The Board will be involved with the Minister in deciding on the organisational structure of the Service, the appointment of the staff and the appointment of the local boards.

As far as the oversight by the Portfolio Committee.  We have made amendments regarding the appointment of the Board which provide for the Minister appointing a selection committee after consultation with the Portfolio Committee.  The selection committee will produce a short list after getting comments from the Portfolio Committee.  The Minister then will make his decision as to the composition of the Board.   

Also along the transparency lines, we have provided for meetings of both the Board and the local boards to be open to members of the public, with the limitation, which is the same limitation that applies in this House, that if it is reasonable and justifiable for members of the public to be excluded.  Minutes of meetings of the Board and the local boards will also be accessible to the public.

As far as the composition of the Board, we have made or fine tuned it, as I would put it, and I think made improvements.  We have removed certain categories, such as there is now no longer provision for a serving or a retired Judge.  We have limited the attorney or the advocate to be a person with knowledge and experience of environmental law, but we have also provided, which is new, an open category to compliment those existing persons.  The Minister in a sense has got more space to appoint people who may not fit into those categories.

In addition, one of the areas to highlight in the Bill is the section on protected areas.  The original Bill simply provided for protected areas as being those areas that are proclaimed in terms of the Bill or the Act, and those areas that are already proclaimed.  We decided that it was necessary from the point of view of certainty to list all those areas, and there is a new second schedule to the Bill which provides that list.  There were some problems with the forestry areas, because it appears as though it is not particularly certain exactly which protected forestry areas are assigned to the Province for responsibility.  There is a simple catchall phrase of forest reserves proclaimed in terms of National legislation and assigned to the Province.

One of the things that needs to be picked up on is that work needs to be done on identifying those forestry areas so that we can make sure we do not lose any, even if we may have lost some already.

At the moment the Bill only provides for one category, a proclaimed area.  We would have liked to have seen different categories.  For example, conservancies, biospheres, community conservation areas.  Because of time, we were not able to provide for that in the Bill.  We have put in a clause that the Minister must in consultation with the Board and the Portfolio Committee prescribe, in other words, make regulations for those categories.  The reason, it is only one of the few in consultation clauses, and that if it were in legislation it would have been with the approval of the Portfolio Committee.  We would like, as the Portfolio Committee, in the New Year to start work on, together with the Board, the Service, the Department, in identifying those different categories.  Community conservation areas are still provided for in the KwaZulu Act.  That section is not going to be repealed by this Bill.

The Bill also provides for the amalgamation of the Directorate of Nature Conservation and the Natal Parks Board.  The Committee took advice from Mr Martin Potgieter, a labour lawyer, and from Mr Gitsham from Deloitte and Touche on the pension question.  The principle we followed, and the amendments we have made are largely technical, but the principle we followed is one of continuity.  Employees of both organisations have the choice of whether they are going to go into the new body, but in going in they will be no worse off than they are now.  We sincerely hope that they would be in a better position, but the amendments that have been made have ensured that the status quo remains.

We hope that the Bill will be promulgated as soon as possible.  The Bill provides for the Minister to make regulations regarding the appointment of the Board, and that must be after consultation with the Portfolio Committee.  The Portfolio Committee is looking at those regulations to meet that requirement.  We would hope that the Bill will be promulgated within the next week, that those regulations can then be promulgated immediately thereafter.  We would sincerely hope that advertisement for the Board, for people who wish to be on the Board can go out some time this year so that towards the beginning of next year we can have a new Board in place.

This Bill is the first of a two part set of Bills.  It is providing only for conservation management.  A Bill dealing with nature conservation per se is being worked on by the Department at the moment, and we would hope that that Bill could be passed in the first half of next year.

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank in particular our Minister, ~Inkosi~ Ngubane, and the Secretary of the Department, Mr Raubenheimer, for their assistance and co-operation and support to the Portfolio Committee in its work.  I would like to thank the members of the Portfolio Committee, and in particular the hon Mr MacKenzie, the convenor of the IFP study group, for the co-operative manner in which we have been able to deal with what has been quite a difficult and complex Bill.

I would also like to thank members of the Natal Parks Board, in particular Dr Hughes and Dr Grobbelaar, and members of the Directorate of Nature Conservation, in particular Mr Elliott and Mr Mkhize for their assistance in the process.  Lastly, but not least, to thank the legal advisor to the Committee, Mrs Turnbull, for the enormous amount of work that she has put into the Bill, in particular as regards legal research and drafting.

I hope that through this Bill we can create an efficient and effective conservation management structure in the Province in which the management of the Service, the employees of the Service and the affected communities feel part.

Just to end, as members will notice, there are a number of employees of the Natal Parks Board and the DNC present.  I would like to thank them for attending and hope that we can all contribute to building a better conservation service for the Province.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  We wish to thank you also for the few minutes you have given us.  We now call upon the hon member Mr MacKenzie for 15 minutes.

MR M M MACKENZIE: 

TRANSLATION:  Madam Speaker, MaMsomi, my colleagues, and all the employees who represent Nature.  This Bill which is before us today, you must not be afraid of it and think that your employment will cease, because I want to emphasize something else here to you, without you we would not even be able to preserve a frog.

I also want to emphasize that something which is formed by a person on this earth will not be something that will pass easily when it is weighed up by God, no, sins will be there.  I ask you to be long-suffering.  Where these things have appeared we should bring them to this House and try to rectify things here, because we want to make history, history is made because - it is the first time today that Black people are brought into this House on an issue which regards Nature where in the past only White people used to sit.  T/E

MR M M MACKENZIE:  This Bill which is both a contract of amalgamation and a blue print for the future is a far-reaching piece of legislation.  It signals a fresh start.  For the first time the original occupiers of the land under conservation, the Zulu people, will no longer be subject to anything that is a carryover from the colonial era.  My people were colonialists. [My ancestors were the people who made up this law that you have lived under and the yoke that was heavy on your necks].

The Zulu will no longer be subject to colonial exclusion from the management processes of conservation, and as a logical follow up, from a community involvement. [Perhaps you can hear the hadedah's, they do not refrain from making a noise, they always make a noise in the House].  [LAUGHTER]

About 100 years ago the Zulu was moved off Hluhluwe, St Lucia, eKwabeni, Mkuze, Umfolozi, Ndumo and so on.  The Zulu people were effectively fenced out.  

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR M M MACKENZIE: [Yes, sister, I am insolent indeed]. [LAUGHTER]  Were effectively fenced out from these areas and the colonial machine moved in.  They did not do a bad job at all.  In fact they are deserving of our admiration.  However, with the change in emphasis right through Africa we have got to remember that unless we involve all of the communities in conservation we are heading for a lose-lose situation.

The NPB in particular is known worldwide and admired for the job that they have done, but never again will those Zulu people be excluded from the fruits that flow from natural resources inside these reserves.  We have taken steps to ensure that there be a sharing of the harvest that comes from these areas, which is shared with the immediate community.  This Bill seeks to ensure and safeguard the principles of inclusion, transparency, consultation and full equality, and in doing so recognises that preservation of these natural resources is indispensable to the wellbeing of mankind.


TRANSLATION:  If we are unable to hear these small sounds that one finds in the forests at places such as Dududu, such as the roar of lion, such as the sounds of the idling doves, that will be an indication indeed that we have indeed destroyed our world.

It will indeed be an indication, that bird when it says, "Father is dead, Mother is dead, and all the children are dead, my heart goes do, do, do, do, do".   T/E

MR M M MACKENZIE:  The fact that there are land claims on many of the reserves is not surprising.  When community exclusion has been the order of the day and in this era when the wrongs of the past, the whole exploitation of the vanquished and their land is being rectified.  These land claims are wholly understandable.

However, balance must be created.  On the one side of the balance we have a land hungry, very poor and now politically emancipated people who have seen almost exclusively white senior staff and white visitor tourists enjoying the resources inside the reserve out of their reach, and staying in buildings built inside the reserve, spending their tourist money which they never see or get a smell of, but on land which was communally used by their ancestors.

[The ancestors are crying my friends].  On the other side we have a well managed, at times manicured asset which is preserved by rules and regulations within a fence.  A broad spectrum of bio-diversity in the form of animal and plants is managed by professional conservators.  This is the future source of the security of our conserved areas.  That the revenues which flow from these areas which were mostly channelled back to a far off edifice must now be redirected into the local community so they do not just get the crumbs in the form of thatch grass, [long rush growing in swamps] and carving wood, and sometimes [meat].

No wonder that animosity exists.  No wonder that poaching is rife.  No wonder that labour unions have found fertile ground, and lastly, no wonder that land claims have been tabled.  I tell you, unless we move this way, our game reserves are at risk, [my friends].  The major game reserves of this Province are the main draw card for tourists and their valuable dollars.  Without those dollars we would not be able to finance a quarter of what good work has already been done in our game reserves.  We cannot afford to threaten this resource by ignoring the signs which are evident throughout Africa.  Those signs tell us that community involvement must not be on a piecemeal, crumbs basis, but it must be in a participation, if not whole ownership by the community of all peripheral development thereby ensuring that the local community will see to it that the asset inside which draws the tourist is preserved in its best possible form.

African options can be traded where the tourists from the poorest to the very affluent can be couriered into the reserves.  The reserves should be home for the main inhabitants, the fauna and flora, and their trained and dedicated custodians, the staff.

It is argued that tourists like to hear the noises of the wild at night.  I am wondering who gets wild at night.  But anyway, wild at night and that therefore it is wise to draw them to build inside.  It is also argued, however, that to see these animals in daylight and to also hear them if possible is the real reasons why tourists come, not where you sleep.

If you take Yosemite in the United States of America, which is rapidly gutting out all man made structures and barring all vehicles except electrically driven tourist buses on defined roads, you will see here is a clear movement that people pressure is now killing our conserved areas.  If we do not respond to that we will find in our miniature game reserves, and these are small game reserves in KwaZulu-Natal, in our miniature game reserves that people pressure will very quickly damage this priceless asset that we have got.

We must all of us work towards a user-friendly respectful attitude towards conservation and future staff in the conservation service.  This Bill attempts to secure the future of staff, to make sure that staff who have chosen conservation as a career path do not lose their dedication and calling, because the conditions of employment and the management of staff will effectively reduce and diminish that vital spirit.


TRANSLATION:  We do not want for you who work in the reserves to become irritated, and to go against the people in charge because you feel that because your spirit is being oppressed you are no longer able to continue.  Because you were attracted there by the opportunity to work out in the open, but the way you are treated is now causing hatred, which causes you to want to flee and no longer work there.  We do not want that, we do not want that at all.  T/E

You will find that if we say to staff, without you there is no way that we will succeed in preserving our protected areas for posterity, we are talking the truth.  We will secure your future, we must, particularly the field staff.

I wish to recognise the hard work done by Mrs Turnbull, and my colleague who has been nicknamed Uchakide in the final presentation of this Bill, and that nickname was said incidentally with love, there is nothing derogatory about it at all.  Saying that, we fully support this Bill.  I thank you.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I thank you.  I now call upon the hon member Mrs Ina Cronje for 14 minutes.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  I want to start off by thanking the hon Minister for his kind words, but I think he has got it wrong.  It is not that we belong on that side, it is that he belongs on this side.  [LAUGHTER]  Because of the kind of relationship that we have enjoyed with him and the meeting of minds over conservation issues can only indicate one thing, he thinks like an ANC person.  So welcome, Mr Minister.  [LAUGHTER]

I thought at one stage that never in my lifetime will we reach this moment, where we are actually dealing with the Bill that is amalgamating the Natal Parks Board and the DNC, soon to become obsolete and to be a new conservation service.  Fortunately, I have lived to see this day, and I think we are all very happy and very grateful for it.

AN HON MEMBER:  You are still going to live a lot longer.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Yes, I may see more things.  I want to also thank all the people who have worked hard over many years.  It has not been an easy road to travel, and the Minister again in particular, who often said to me, "My sister, my good sister, be patient".  Now I think that patience on the part of the Minister has paid off, and we have actually got a product I believe that we can all be proud of.

What we are dealing with today is actually a constitutional requirement.  If we look at the Bill of Rights, section 24, the environment section, it says, and I will not read the whole thing, but just lift out the highlights:

		Everyone has the right - 
		to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations, through reasonable legislative and other measures, that inter alia promote conservation; and secure ecologically sustainable development and use of natural resources while promoting justifiable economic and social development.

I think that is what we are hoping to achieve by putting in place a sound management structure, because that is what we are doing today, no more than that, for the management of conservation.

Now I thought I would look at the issue under four headings.  The sort of traditional or proverbial SWAT analysis.  Firstly, what are our strengths in this Province?  I think we have got two major strengths.  The one strength which is a major, major strength is what nature has given us.  We indeed, it has become a cliche, but it remains true nevertheless, have a wonderful and most beautiful Province.  I could become a professional holiday maker simply by visiting our conservation areas in this Province.  So that is a major strength.  It is also a major responsibility for us to protect them as the Constitution requires of us.

Our other major strength is the people of this Province.  I want to first of all look at the people in the two bodies that we are amalgamating.  We have some of the finest conservationists and environmentalists in the world.  There are people of world standing in their midst.  That is a major strength.

That is not where it stops.  We have many, many people, and I am so happy to see that so many of them are here today.  Many of them have become friends or familiar faces through the years.  We have fine men and women in our conservation bodies who form the backbone.  Your rangers on the beat, if that is the correct expression, are the backbone.  They are the backbone of our conservation agencies.  So that is a major strength.  At one stage we were very concerned about the fact that the staff were very uneasy about whether they would lose benefits, whether they would lose rights.  I really and truly believe that we have ensured in this Bill that they will not lose any of their rights and benefits.  I think they can go home relaxed and reassured.  I think that is a major achievement.

When I look at the weaknesses, and I want to carry on with the people, I think the one weakness in our conservation bodies is that it is male dominated.  I am sorry to say it, but it is male dominated.  Now honestly and truly, believe me, you can put us to the test, women do not faint when they see a rhino or an elephant.  In fact they do not even faint if they see political dinosaurs.  So try us.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  We can do the job.  Please promote those women, recruit more women, and not just into the lower echelons.  I seem to have amused my colleagues.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Do not interrupt, I have a lot to say.  Please, I mean this most sincerely, promote women, recruit more women and let it be a representative service.  There is also, and I know that a lot has been done to address that, but not enough, it is male dominated, it is also still, because of the legacy of the past, white male dominated.  Now I know white males are becoming an endangered species and I will do my best to help conserve them, because that is a constitutional duty, but let us also make it representative, especially in the higher echelons.

Another weakness of the past, and Mr MacKenzie spoke about that quite a lot, so I will not repeat what he said.  It was a worldwide trend, I do not think we were very different in that way, that conservation became an end in itself and it was Parks versus people, Parks against people, Parks to the exclusion of people.  You had to remove them, they had to get out, pristine.  Now worldwide that trend has been reversed and I want to believe this, there has been an honest attempt on the part of our conservation agencies to become a service to actually address that issue, but that negative perception is still there.  It is a weakness, we have to address it.  Let us not let that perception get into the new service and into the new body, because your communities, especially your neighbouring communities, your local communities, can be your worst enemies if you have the Parks versus people attitude, but they will be your best allies if it is Parks and people.  I think we have all accepted that, but let us just put it into practice now and make sure that it happens.

There has also been, and I know some are at the level of allegation, I am not going to go into it, I do not want to harp on the past, but let it never again happen that we abuse our conservation areas for unauthorised purposes.  Allegations about para-military training, that kind of thing, it must never happen again.  That is not its intended use.

Then something that we have not quite rid ourselves of, abuse in the past, but it is still carrying on, but it is being addressed by senior Government officials, the select few and the Maputaland Nature Reserve is a prime example, the Kosi Bay issue.  This issue has been aired in the press many times where the police, the army actually abused facilities.  I have no doubt in my mind, the army has agreed to move out of Kosi Bay, we are negotiating with the police, but it has actually added to those negative perceptions that the local communities were chased off the land, in moves privileged officials who may enjoy what the local people could never enjoy.  That was a terrible wrong, and where it still persists let us get rid of it immediately.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  If the hon member could wind up.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Then the exclusion of local communities.  As I said, my colleague Mr MacKenzie has addressed that issue.  I have addressed that in part.  I am always terribly sad when I meet young kids, especially urban township kids, African kids who were born in this country, who have not seen a wild animal.  They have not seen a wild animal.  I think it is an indictment on us, because these are State owned facilities.  So let us put that right.

Then just squandering of money, a legacy of the past, and I want to give a specific example because one cannot pussyfoot too much around these things.  An amount, and I stand to be correct, I will be very happy if I am wrong, I understand that an amount of about R6 or R7 million was spent on staff facilities.  Million I am talking about, and I hope the finance and budget people are listening, was spent on, I am told staff facilities in a game reserve about 10 kilometres from where we are sitting now called Uphathe, but you and I as taxpayers cannot go in there in the normal course.  Who of you even know that every time you come to ~Ulundi~ you drive past Uphathe.

Now why do you want these facilities if the public cannot go there, and if they go there you have to have special permission. I have actually been there, so I must not be a liar, special permission and you go by four wheel drive.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  If the hon member could round up.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Sorry, how much time do I have.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  You have next to nothing.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Oh my goodness.  I have not done everything I wanted to, but anyway.  Now let me look at the opportunities.  The opportunities are almost unlimited.  Tourism the obvious one, an issue that will have to be addressed, and I am summarising now, is to what extent are we going to allow private enterprise into the parks.  It is a tricky issue.  I am going to be a politician and be as vague as possible on my own personal opinion.  I just want to make one appeal, please do not allow anybody to sell candyfloss and helium balloons in the parks, but we will have to face that issue head on.

Now the budget, financing, and I will conclude with this, Madam Speaker, if you will allow me.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  You have half a minute.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  There is a serious problem, we all know that, we have just had the debate on the report.  The Conservation Service will have to start rowing its own boat.  It is a hard fact of life, and we will have to be creative and it will have to be done, because come the budget hearings, and I am looking at my colleague who has just disappeared, the hon Mr Makhaye, he is going to be telling you no money, do your own thing, or next to no money go and do your own thing.  That issue must be top, top, top priority.  I thank you very much for your indulgence, Madam Speaker.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  We now call upon the hon member Mr B Edwards for 14 minutes, sir.

MR B V EDWARDS:  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  It is an historic occasion today.  I would like to record some history.  The Bill before us today has travelled an epic journey.  I think the last leg began during the first democratic election of our country in May 1994, when all the people of our country, after three centuries of colonisation, finally obtained the God-given opportunity to work together for the freedom and success of our country.

The last sprint to the line was not an easy path to follow.  This is what we have been through, with many difficult rivers to cross in finding unity of purpose of all the role-players involved, in controlling and monitoring nature conservation in KwaZulu-Natal.

Indeed there are still differences of opinion.  A number of thorny issues where real unity has not been achieved, and where some seem to have put personal agendas first for far too long, but I think those have been resolved.

The Bill creates the organisational structure of the new unified conservation system which combines the best aspects of the old Natal Parks Board, a statutory body, and the Directorate of Nature Conservation.  Much has been said on that.

There is also to the credit of many who have over the years fought for an ideal to create a third tier of control, whereby the local population and local economy will have a significant say in how the relevant protected areas are to be developed and managed.  That is a major achievement.  The hon Mr MacKenzie has addressed that at length.

Credit too must go to the hon Minister ~Inkosi~ Ngubane, the Boards and management of the two constellations for the draft of the legislation, which was published in the Provincial Gazette in July this year after months, in fact years of protracted negotiation.  This time, I believe, has been very costly to both organisations in that valuable time and energy has been wasted as well as funds expended in countless meetings, and duplication of functions.  I will not hazard a guess to what the cost has been over these years, but those who have been involved will be able to, but certainly it runs into tens of millions.

However, to arrive at a negotiated settlement, at last, to satisfy the vast majority of role-players and staff of both organisations in this marriage is a noteworthy achievement.  The Portfolio Committee, its Chairman and the legal advisor Mrs Natalie Turnbull, I believe, deserve some praise for their hard work and expertise to put the final touches to the legislation.  It was not easy, it was quite a difficult task.  We had many amendments.  I believe the Chairman worked very hard and also the legal advisor.

Of course, the real credit must go to the pioneers of conservation in our Province.  The first written law affecting conservation, in particular wildlife in KwaZulu-Natal or the old Natal, was enacted by the colonial Government in 1866.  Law 10 of 1866 set closed seasons for the hunting of certain species and required that the Governor's permission be obtained for the hunting of royal game.  Now we see this obviously happening again.  Zululand was annexed by the British in 1887, and the first game law for the region was signed in the colony in 1890.  On being questioned on the wisdom of the laws, the Governor stated that the Zulu people were accustomed to hunting restrictions.  This indeed was practised.  They practised their own conservation disciplines under King Shaka - the hon Minister has referred to that.  They certainly were disciplined.

It was only in 1906, eight years later after Zululand and Natal became a single colony, that the game laws for the two areas were consolidated.  In 1907 a new Coast Fisheries Act was passed by the colonial Government after years of pleading by Harry Smith, who worked for the Port Natal Harbour Board from 1884.  So as the hon Mr MacKenzie said, the old colonialists did some good.  In fact they set the scene.  The Act also provided for the creation of the Natal Fisheries Department.

Tribute has been paid to the late Mr Nick Steele for his role in saving the white rhino, along with Dr Ian Player back in the early 60s, and the vital role also played by the Natal Parks Board, and how much they deserve recognition for the enormous legacy to South Africa and KwaZulu-Natal conservation.  There are many areas of conservation.  It was back in February 1895 when Mr C D Guise, a well-known sportsman; euphemistically, rather he was a hunter, prompted by the indiscriminate slaughter of game by European ivory and hide hunters, wrote to the Governor of Zululand, pressing for greater preservation measures for game in general, and the white rhino in particular, asking that the species be protected by law on the royal game list.  He stated the animal is almost extinct.  That was 100 years ago.

Guise also proposed the establishment of a game preserve for the rhinoceros.  The Zululand Government Notice No 12 gazetted in April 1995 proclaimed five game reserves of which three still exist.  One of the oldest existing reserves in Africa, being St Lucia Reserve one, Umfolozi Junction Reserve two, and Hluhluwe Valley Reserve number three.

The act of union gave control of game and fish, and responsibility of the enforcement of laws to the four provinces, in fact to provide for the preservation of nature to become a provincial function, and so it should be.  For the people, by the people.

Over the next 35 years the only legislation of any significance enacted in Natal was that regarding trout; in 1939.  Those trout fisherman will be able to tell you it did something for trout.  The Zululand Game Reserves and Parks Board was constituted in terms of Ordinance 6 of 1939.  This formed a basis for the Ordinance 35 of 1947 which constituted the Natal Parks, Game and Fish Preservation Board and is the basis of much of the legislation before us.  The Ordinance became effective on 1 December 1947, and there has been a congratulation, but I do it to, when the first Board was appointed.  So the unique body which made its mark in many ways and has earned itself an enviable reputation locally and internationally, in striving for the highest ideals in conservation is congratulated on its 50th anniversary which will be on Monday, 1 December 1997.  They have not quite made it.

The amalgamation with the Department of Nature Conservation, after many years of working apart, but mostly in co-operation is also a notable milestone.  The amalgamation is in fact a reunification of conservation functions.  After the separate Directorate of Nature Conservation, then known as the Bureau of Natural Resources, was formed in 1982, not quite two decades ago.  When Dr Buthelezi, then Chief Minister of KwaZulu, a so-called ~Apartheid~ structure of KwaZulu, saw the need to have a conservation organisation in what amounted to almost a third of the Province.  The Natal Parks Board had up to that date performed the conservation function for the KwaZulu region.  No one can say that they had not done outstanding work, but perhaps they did not do enough and give enough attention to the needs and involvement of the disadvantaged communities of the region.  This has been mentioned.

In 1982 their budget was less than R1 million, and a staff of 150.  In the space of 15 years the organisation has grown to a staff of 1 500, with a budget of R46 million controlling over 25 nature and forest reserves of over 96 000 hectares.  We hope all those funds are being well managed, but that is another discussion.

Recognising the poverty of the region, instead of only pursuing a standard line of wildlife management, their thinking was geared towards enhancing the living standards of communities, and certainly noble and the right way to move.  Certainly progress has been made, but while the whole region can be uplifted to encourage, and before it can be uplifted to encourage massive expansion, tourism is going to be needed, and massive expansion tourism.  So progress until then will be slow, I am sure.

The combined synergy, however, of the Natal Parks Board and the Department of Nature Conservation, created by the new conservation body, I will believe, will give the ideals new impetus.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  I ask the hon member to round up.

MR B V EDWARDS:  I have had nine, Madam Chair, if I look at that, and I have 14.  The Natal Parks Board under the wise guidance of its Board and CEOs, John Geddes-Page and now Dr George Hughes, and those before them, deserve the highest praise for their successes in conservation of our natural resources, and the great strides made in enhancing KwaZulu-Natal's eco-tourism industry.

As a comparison, the Board has an annual budget in excess of R150 million, and it does generate its own income as well.  It employs a staff of some 3 300, and controls conservancies covering more than 1,4 million hectares.  The National Party supports this marriage, and I am confident this new body, with the right leadership; the will and commitment is certainly there, can only go from strength to strength.

To return to the Bill itself, I would like to make more specific mention of provisions.  Chapters 2 and 3 it was feared would give excessive powers to the Minister, and sometimes you do not have the right Minister, and that the Board as a statutory body should be given greater powers to manage conservation with greater autonomy.  Amendments introduced by the Portfolio Committee, after hearing public opinion, and we certainly had many hearings and consulted with many people, introduced amendments which is believed creates sufficient consultation in setting up policy, appointments and the effective operation of the Board and its conservation service.

Chapter 4, clause 22 relates to the appointment of the Chief Executive Officer.  The hon Minister in consultation with the Board, after the position has been advertised, must appoint a Chief Executive Officer.  On the face of the provisions this seems to be a reasonable process.  We have in the management cadre of the two conservation bodies some outstanding personnel;  scientists, other highly qualified conservationists and others with many years of conservation management experience.  We have seen recently in national departments regrettably, and other posts, many cases of nepotism which are totally unacceptable.

I must warn the hon Minister, it has been rumoured, and perhaps without real foundation, that there is a lobby group for an appointment which can only be regarded as nepotism.  I trust this is not true, the people in the conservation of our Province in particular will just not accept such action.  It could be a disgrace to our Province.

Clause 24(3) provides for financial accounts auditing by an auditor registered in terms of the Public Accountants and Auditors Act.  This allows for flexibility and autonomy of the Board in choice.  The Auditor-General has questioned this, but has accepted after consultation with the Portfolio Committee that the office of the Auditor-General in addition still has the power to audit and report should it be considered necessary.  So there are belts and braces.

Chapter 7 relates to the implementation arrangements, and in particular contains provisions related to the transfer of officials of departments.  Of concern I think to the officials is the transfer of funds and their pension rights to the new conservation service.  This has been mentioned.  While there may well be disparities in the funding capitalisation of the respective funds, and I will not go into that, after seeking expert advice, and extensive consultation with staff, provisions have been made in the Bill to address most of the problem areas.  Certain staff will have to make a decision, maybe a tough decision on their options, but I believe in the long term most will be happy with a long overdue amalgamation.  The best of both worlds has been preserved in this legislation.  I am sure KwaZulu-Natal will be well served by this new united conservation body.

With that, the National Party supports the legislation with amendments.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  We now call upon the hon member Mr Mike Tarr for 12 minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.  Madam Speaker, one of the problems in taking part in a debate of this nature is that it is an agreed measure, and of necessity a debate does not actually take place across the floor of the House because we are all in agreement.  The real debate has already taken place, and that was in the Portfolio Committee when we were dealing with the Bill.  Also of necessity it means that you will repeat many of the things that have been said by other hon members, and I will try not to take up unnecessary time of the House.

Madam Speaker, there have been many congratulations here today.  I will not go through them all, but from the parliamentary side I think we should make special note and congratulations to the Chairman of our Committee who has been the driving force behind what has happened, and I think we owe him a debt of thanks.  Also then from the parliamentary side, our legal advisor Mrs Turnbull who has done an awful amount of hard work on this Bill and a lot of research.  There are many other people outside of Parliament who are also deserving of congratulations, but that has already been done.

It is common cause that the Parks Board and the Department of Nature Conservation have done an excellent job in their own ways.  Both have done pioneering work in the conservation field and have won international recognition for this, as has been pointed out by the hon Minister.

Today we have brought about a marriage, but marriage, however, is the easy part.  It is what happens after the marriage as to whether it is successful or not.  In the year ahead or few years ahead, while the two new marriage partners are getting together, there is going to have to be an awful amount of give and take.  My impression is from knowing many of the people involved, that there is a willingness to do this, and this indeed will happen.

I would like to have a very brief look at the future, because once this Bill is passed that is only the start.  There are a number of very important steps that then need to be taken.  For example, the first step will be the appointment of the new Board.  The Chairman of our Portfolio Committee, Mr Jeffery, spoke at some length on the constitution of that Board.  There was a lot of debate on how that Board was to be constituted.  I believe that we have reached the right balance.  The Board is firstly, as other speakers have said, going to have to have wide acceptance across the whole community in our Province.  They are going to have to have an insight into conservation issues, and also issues involved in communities that are in conservation areas and elsewhere, and also, let me add, a high level of technical and business expertise.  The responsibility to achieve this is obviously going to lie with the Minister.  I hope that the selection committee will provide him with some assistance in this regard.

The Board itself, once appointed, is going to have to come to grips with a number of important issues.  First of all, it will have to ensure that local communities themselves benefit from and/or are involved in the management of conservation areas through the local boards.  This is going to be no easy task.  It will entail local boards that have the level of acceptance that is necessary.  It will entail a lot of liaison and promotional work with local communities.  I am aware that both bodies are already heavily involved in this, and they will have to carry this process forward.  They will have to look at the development of new conservation areas, as they are at the moment, and also across-border conservation areas.  There are already talks, for example, we know between our Government and Mozambique, and Swaziland, and also between our Government and Lesotho.

Then of course tourism is another issue.  Tourism has been identified as an important growth area in our Province, and of course one of the most important tourist attractions is the wildlife experience which we will be looking to our new Board to promote and facilitate in our Province.

Then, Madam Speaker, there is the question of regulations, setting of norms and standards.  Regulations, setting of norms and standards in many cases can involve as much, if not more work than is involved in drafting this piece of legislation that is before us here today.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, the new Board quite clearly will have to create a new identity for itself, will have to create a new ethos for itself, and create an image of which all of us in this Province can be proud.  I am sure the members of the House will agree with me, many of the people involved in this process are already known to us.  I have no doubt whatsoever that in fact they will achieve this formidable and important, and exciting task which is being set for them here today.  Thank you, Madam Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  We call upon the hon member Mr W Nel, and with an amended time of eight minutes instead of six.

MR W U NEL:  Madam Speaker, I believe it is no accident that the hon Chairman of the Portfolio Committee has been nicknamed Uchakide, because I believe on his last visit to the park he nearly bit a mamba.  [LAUGHTER]  You recorded that I have an amended time slot of eight minutes, and that is thanks to the hon member Mr Rajbansi who had to leave early, and then allowed me two extra minutes on the condition that I put in a very special plea for the conservation of shad.  [LAUGHTER]  I hope that the new service will take note of that.  

Today is indeed a very happy day for our Province.  Yesterday we passed in this House the KwaZulu-Natal Amafa or Heritage Bill which is to look after our cultural heritage.  Today we proceed, as we proudly consider the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Management Bill, to create a nature conservation Board, an amalgamated Board to conserve our natural heritage too.

So whilst we today and in the next few days implement this Act, we really witnessed the death of the old proud Natal Parks Board, and also of the Department of Nature Conservation.  It is not a sad funeral, because we know that the dedicated staff are going to be reincarnated and resurrected in a glorified amalgamated unit, which I think will perform even better than their predecessors.  We certainly know that the challenges are going to be much greater.

This amalgamation is long overdue for administrative reasons, for operational efficiency reasons, and for reasons of better co-ordination of the conservation efforts in our Province.  The challenges, as I said, that face this reincarnated body will be massive.  If conservation staff think that saving the rhino was difficult, if they think that protecting the Eastern shores against excavators was a challenge, if they think that conserving the coastal forest reserve and building community relations thus far was a tall order, you have not seen anything yet.  You must now save us, the people of this Province, from self-destructing, by destroying that asset which really gives us about the only real significant international competitive edge, and competitive advantage really is what it is all about in the global economy nowadays.

We need to make the most of our Drakensberg, of our sea, of our climate, of our wildlife, of our wetlands and of the surroundings, the culture, the colourful surroundings we have in this Province.  Might I remind you that the annual number of visitors to the country of France total about 60 million annually.  If one assumes that each of those would spend only 1 000 Dollars, if my arithmetic that I was taught at high school by the hon member Mr Burrows is correct, that would amount to roughly ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR W U NEL:  That would amount to approximately R300 billion per annum, which is about the equivalent of the total GNP that we currently enjoy in this country.  Now I do not say that is achievable, but what I do know for a fact is that we can do a great deal better than we are doing now.  So this mantle of succession, that falls on the new statutory body, comes with immense responsibility to realise what is potentially the largest unmined diamonds and gold resource that this country has ever had, and still lies unmined namely, our natural resources and our wildlife.

TRANSLATION:  We do not know today who the leader of this Board that we are constructing will be.  We are also happy that this Board that we are creating, that the members work for the DNC and the NPB are present here today.  Because you are the people that are going to protect Nature in this Province of ours, and also be inheritants of this Province of ours.  

I said visitors to France this year brought money which is an excess of the economy of our country, South Africa - more money than all that money put together.  This means that your work is vital if you do it properly in the manner that you always do, our Province would go forward at an amazing speed.
  
Nature conservation in this Province does not mean that we are denying people opportunities, it does not mean that we now hate the neighbours of the reserves.  What it does mean indeed is that we are creating better opportunities for them and we must market what we are doing in that fashion.

We are not animal policemen, we are assisting the community and it is my desire that that is what we should market in the years to come - we are also going to protect people, we are not only protecting animals.  T/E

MR W U NEL:  We are proud of the history of conservation and the achievements of dedicated conservationists over the decades, as many of my colleagues have pointed out.  With respect, however, the new statutory body has come along at a pace which is pedestrian by comparison to the challenges and the speed that it will have to move at in future.  We will have to do a great deal of lateral thinking if we are to save the conservation areas and our natural heritage, from the threats and the competitive pressures that exist.  We will have to do lateral thinking on community benefits and on building community appreciation for our heritage, on resisting and indeed out-performing financially the competition coming from industry, from mining and from agriculture.  Also in sailing a true conservation course and resisting the pseudo conservationist ethics of what I might term the super greens, people who often choose to ignore the fact that lions eat meat, that bulls fight and hurt each other, ignore that over-population of game leads to periodic starvation, and thereby set unrealistic and super sensitive norms which are in fact counterproductive to sustainable resource management and the utilisation of our resources, and the conservation of our heritage.

The service will indeed need to move with haste if it is to face and to win in the face of all of these challenges.  We certainly from this side of the House would wish the new service well in what lies ahead.  We thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you.  We now call upon the hon ~Inkosi~ Mdletshe for 12 minutes.  Ndabezitha.

~INKOSI~ B N MDLETSHE: 

TRANSLATION:  Madam Speaker, let me thank you for this opportunity.  I must also express my thanks on behalf of the hon Minister for taking his time and for taking sufficient time to bring this Bill in front of this Parliament.

I think that that is important because it makes us realise that dithering around causes problems, it causes mistakes, but if you take your time and you do something properly, and you do everything possible, that results in something being done properly and thereby achieve the proper result.

What we see in this Bill is evidence of that.  It is evidence that if you take your time, one normally produces something such as this.

Madam Speaker, I think that it is obvious today that you are always looking forward and seeing the things that are necessary for the nation and that you are giving your time to them.

I was happy when I saw that this Department is being headed by an ~Inkosi~, because I think that the person who thought of that, who thought that this Department should be given to an ~Inkosi~, took proper cognizance of the fact that nature and ubuKhosi is the same thing.

So, those that are in favour and those that are against, should admit the truth, the ~Inkosi~ has shown that.  What this Department has done in building a proper structure in the marriage between the NPB and the DNC.  It is my belief that this marriage will be a success, this marriage will be a happy one, it will produce the desired fruit, they will bear fruit and be fruitful for the nation.

It is important, Madam Speaker, for us to pass the sort of laws that will be able to be acceptable to our people.  This Bill will be acceptable to our people.  That is my belief.  It is my belief that this Bill will be able to improve and protect nature for the next 200 years.  

This is important, it is important because we must be able to gain the hearts and the minds of the people by way of passing laws which are desirable for the times in which we live, just like this Bill that we are talking about today.  

The formation of boards in our areas which are known as local boards, is a first, it has never existed before.  If I am not mistaken, there are no such things in Africa, it will be a first here.  That will give our people an opportunity to play a role as regards the management of reserves.  That was not there before, I want to emphasize that.  

It will cause people's minds to be opened and they will know what is happening in the reserves.  You must not speak while the ~Inkosi~ is speaking.  [LAUGHTER]  The nation is in decay, gentlemen, the nation is in decay indeed, it is in decay.

It will happen, Madam Speaker, that our people will know what is happening as far as nature is concerned in the reserves.  It is a truth that no-one can deny, that for all this time these organisations which deal with nature were closed, one did not know what was happening, one did not even know what they were doing.

But now, one is starting to realise that they were not destroying, they were protecting the inheritance of a nation, that should be protected.  That should not be something which is closed, the nation should know about it.

As far as the Parks Board is concerned, if you remember well, that Board consisted mainly of White people.  That created the impression to the nation that the people that can best protect nature, and know better about nature, are the Whites.

But now, if you look at this Bill that we are dealing with today, it gives an opportunity to those people who were disenfranchised, for them to say something about nature.  We will also now be able to say something about nature, we are free, we are protected by this Bill.
  
So, Madam Speaker, I am grateful for this, I am grateful to the ~Inkosi~ and to the ~Inkosi~'s Department, as an ~Inkosi~, because we must not forget to say as an ~Inkosi~, because it is important.

When you look at section two sub-section two (a) and (b) that is the sub-section which empowers the Minister to look at the decisions that are taken by the local board, together with the decisions that are taken by whichever employee takes them.  I think that that is important.  I am very happy about that.

Because a lot of what was done, we the community, who were neighbours to the reserves, were not aware of it, we were not even able to say anything about it, we did not even know who we could speak to.  That was hurtful to the relationship between the communities and the reserves. 

At the end of the day, the person who suffers for this sin is the Minister and his Department.

So we looked at this thing and it caused the situation where trees and flora and fauna would be imposed on the people and we were not protected.  But because of this sub-section it makes it possible for there to be a relationship, it makes it possible for the people to be protected.  T/E
   
THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:.  [The ~Inkosi~ can start winding up now].

~INKOSI~ B N MDLETSHE: 

TRANSLATION:  Another thing that pleased me, Madam Speaker, is the fact that they have chosen people who love nature, who have a zeal.  This made me very happy, because it is not everybody who has a zeal for nature, it is not everybody that should be included here, so I am supporting this Bill fully, I am supporting it and I am saying that it should go forward.  

I want to touch very briefly on the Community Trust which was controlled by the hon Minister.  That builds relationships.  That is what is going to help in winning over the minds of the people and the hearts of the people.
  
We should build trust between the reserves and the people.  There should be respect, as the hon member Mrs Cronje, has already said, that if we do that, people will support the protection of our reserves.

We must not make past mistakes, Madam Speaker.  I want to say in closing, that your employees, I want to express my appreciation and I am grateful, very grateful, to them, and all the people who work with nature for they have protected our inheritance, and they have preserved for us that which is very dear to us.  

I am asking them to continue and to do this work, that they should not be concerned about - if you look at this Bill it protects them in every way.  It even protects a person who is fired and gives that person the right to see the Minister directly and to put that person's grievance to the Minister.  So their rights and everything that has to do with their rights has been protected by this Bill, they should be free from worry, they should feel at home.  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  We call upon the hon member Mrs Joanne Downs.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order! Order!  We call upon the hon member Mrs J Downs for four minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER 

MRS J M DOWNS:  You know you guys.  If I can just say that I was very privileged as a child, I grew up in a rural area.  I spent my life as a small child barefoot in the bush where I got to learn about nature.  I went to many reserves because I was privileged, and because of that I grew to love nature, wild animals and conservation.  The problem is that many of our children, even now, even today in the new dispensation do not have that privilege.  Many of the children that grow up in the townships, many of the children that even grow up around the reserves do not have the facility to go and visit them, to grow up with animals and wildlife.  

If anything is achieved by this Bill, I would hope that that would be an achievement, that that would be something that the new body would absolutely make a priority, that our children are our future, but our children in this Province are also the future of our conservancy areas.  If they do not grow up with the love of nature, if they do not grow up having the ability to go in and see what is there and to appreciate it, then our reserves are doomed.  I would say that that is the most important thing that we need to do.

This has been a very long engagement, an incredibly long engagement so that this wedding that is going to take place today is almost an anti-climax.  I wish the bride and the groom well, I am not sure who is who.  I am sure that they will take these very important issues into consideration.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MRS J M DOWNS:  Madam Speaker, can I be protected please.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order! Order!  I have been trying to restrain because the speaker is a lady.  So I was just a bit cagey as I only protect ladies.  I really want to say please give her a hearing.  This is one Bill where we have been together and we have been joking and talking well, could we keep that spirit without drowning her contribution.  Continue for one minute.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  I think it makes no difference as to my gender or yours.  Our normal Speaker protects us as well.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS J M DOWNS:  If I can continue, Madam Speaker, to say that something about the Cites Convention really stuck in my mind.  If I can just reiterate it as a caution here today.  The African countries at the Cites Convention made a comment and they said that Europe and the Western World want to keep Africa as a huge game reserve at the expense of the people living in Africa.  I think if we take that away with us, because that is the feeling of the people on the ground that have not benefitted from having reserves in our areas, and if we can take that away with us today and keep it close to our hearts, and remember that the reserves are for all of our people and they have to benefit from them.

The last thing I want to say is that this Province is a winning province.  We have everything.  We have mountains, we have seas, we have reserves, we have everything.  In my opinion it is not being marketed correctly.  We do not have the visitors and the numbers of people that we deserve to have given our natural resources, and given the things that we have.  I know that this may not be regarded as a function of the two bodies that are amalgamated, and it may be regarded as a function of tourism or whatever.  I think that all of us, and these people who are particularly concerned and involved with tourist industries need to be involved in pro-actively selling the benefits of visiting KwaZulu-Natal.  

So many oversees visitors come here to South Africa, they arrive in Cape Town, they hop on to Kruger Park and then they leave without ever visiting us.  We need to really change that, and we need to change it with some innovative marketing, with some very good thinking and with some really good new ideas to bring people here to our Province.  Thank you, and with that we support the Bill with amendments.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  We also have amended the next speaker's minutes from four to six.  We call upon UmAfrica Baba uMkhwanazi to speak for six minutes.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: 

TRANSLATION:  Thank you, Madam Speaker, we the Africans of KwaZulu and in Africa, there is no-one - well all these people who have built their homes and who regard themselves as being people who live here, to me, they are Africans.

We have nothing else which was given to us by Qamatha, except nature.  The Lord, the Creator, nature, the world, the grass, the trees, the animals, water, hills, all this was given to us by the Lord.  We have it, to use the English word, in abundance.  T/E

First of all, I want to say we of the PAC wholly support this Bill.  We appreciate the good work that has been done by my friend, the hon John Jeffery, and the Minister ~Inkosi~ Ngubane and the Portfolio Committee.  I know they have gone a long way to amalgamate the two Portfolio Committees.  I want to also say a word of appreciation to the leaders of the Natal Parks Board, Dr Grobbelaar and Dr Hughes.  I know that at one time they invited me to their office and they showed me a film on the work they have been doing and what they have done.  We appreciate that.


TRANSLATION:  I must come back and say thank you to the employees, these employees of ours who are Africans who work in the forests, trying to protect nature.  Beautiful Africans, I am asking you to take that not as work for which you will be paid money, you must take it as work that has been given to you by the ancestors, by the Lord, so that you can protect our inheritance which was given to us by the Lord and He said, "Here, take it".
I am asking you to continue as this Bill says.  T/E  

I hope and trust that in the new dispensation we will have some of our African men and women ascend to the top positions in the Department.  This can be done through experience and through training.

 [When I am speaking about the animals, Mr Speaker].

THE ACTING SPEAKER: [I find it a problem if you no longer know that I am Madam Speaker, even though I am sir, I am madam].

MR J D MKHWANAZI: 

TRANSLATION:  What bothers me is that I am a member of the Gender Commission that says I must not differentiate between female and male.
  
Madam Speaker, this work which is being done by these people is great, we can laugh about it.  We who grew up in the rural areas, as we were growing up there were still birds which we knew and animals which we knew, which are no longer there.  We are asking that they return.  

Where are the fantail warblers, where are the grey-backed bush warblers, where are the yellow-breasted larks, even when we go courting there are no yellow-breasted larks which show that we are going to have good fortune on our trip, we just go.  [LAUGHTER]  No, I will never stop.

What I am saying is that I am asking mainly those of us who are Africans, the older people who know about birds, and animals which we had, which were part of the heritage of the land of KwaZulu.

I used to be shocked when a person was arrested for kicking a cat, a black cat which brings bad luck.  I am grateful for the formation of this Board, perhaps it will assist to rectify the relationship between the inhabitants and the animal reserves.  Because there is this thing that people have been blamed for, as if those people that have built their houses, they want to eradicate the animals and finish them completely.

It used to be our saying that there was hunting, the ~Amakhosi~ used to protect the animals because hunting was only allowed at certain times of the year.  There was no hunting during the mating season of the hares and the warthogs.

Another thing which I believe is going to be rectified by this Board, at Dalton, there are people that have been there for decades, they live by working on the skins of game.  Now those people are looked upon as if they are rogues.  They go and hunt leopards and other game.  That is not so.

I found people there who had been deprived, my leopards were taken by the police, the leopards belonging to His Excellency were taken by the police.  I believe that this Board is going to fix this thing up properly.  We found out where we had got those leopards from.  I had brought my leopard back from Uganda.  T/E

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:.  [The hon member's time is up].

MR J D MKHWANAZI: 
TRANSLATION:  That needs to be rectified now, we must be given an opportunity to hunt game which will adorn us when we carry out our festivals of KwaZulu.

The people who had baboons as pets should be left so that they can cast spells with them, they should be left to keep their baboons as pets because that is part of tradition.  [LAUGHTER]  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Order.  The hon member's time is up.  Order.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: 
TRANSLATION:  What I am saying is that I am trying to emphasize that I hope that the Board must not respect other things only and not baboons.  The things that are part of our tradition such as game for adorning.  Such as some types of game which we want to kill in order to get certain things from them, in order so that we can smear ourselves with it, and lick it and live our lives.  Thank you.  T/E

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Now we are going to call upon the hon member Mr B Mthembu for 12 minutes.

MR S B MTHEMBU:  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  The ANC wholeheartedly supports the Bill before the House.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR S B MTHEMBU:  Of course we strongly believe that we are here in this Legislature to make sure that the legacy of the past has passed forever, and the people on the ground start to see that the people here in Parliament are doing their best for them to see the real changes in our country.

Firstly, I would like to pay tribute to the nature conservation staff and all the members of the Environmental Affairs Portfolio Committee for their continued devotion to their duties, even during the times of uncertainty.  It was so difficult, the process of putting the two big and proud organisations together, but due to the leaders from both organisations and from the Portfolio Committee, led by the Minister of the Portfolio Committee we say it happened.  Today we have something which we can say people will benefit from.

Madam Speaker, now is the time for us to realise that people on the ground are expecting us to implement what we are talking about here.  Long, long ago the people of South Africa, the black community outside the nature conservation areas had a concern that their existence was being undermined.  They have been taken as the people who would never ever exist and maintain the nature in their areas, because most activities in nature conservation excluded them in toto, excluded their leaders, for example, ~Amakhosi~, excluded whoever, the people who were dealing with nature conservation like the traditional healers, 

TRANSLATION:  With this Bill we believe that the time has arrived when the Department will start to prioritize and to ensure that everybody who are involved with the preservation of nature and those that have lived next to nature, are placed out in the open, that they are placed in a situation where they are able to continue with nature and to continue living in a way that they lived and also in the area in which they used to live in times gone by.

We should admit, without reservation, that in times gone by the beauty that was created by those who preserved nature was turned into poison, and ugliness, to the people who lived next to the reserves where the things of nature were kept.  It was agreed that nature reserves should be, should exist, and that wild life should be kept there.

Because of the way in which the situation has been brought forward and the way it has been presented, that is in regard to nature conservation to the people, I think Madam Speaker, this programme, or this Bill, which we have here today, will not have seen to do justice if it does not understand this particular point.  It will be the first time that this issue has been rectified, this is in order to show that we are now starting our work and we are going forward.

What is very important has already been touched on in the speeches that had been delivered before me.  Both departments of nature conservation had this trend which was not very acceptable to the people and to all the people at large, this created a situation where it looked as if it was the Whites - just now we are talking about nature conservation as if those people who are white have nothing to do with the conservation of nature.
  
That is something that we are going to have to ensure that we see to it.  We will rectify that very speedily, we are giving them an opportunity, all the people, especially those who know how to talk to the people of this race.  It will be very important that as far as things which involve nature are concerned, from today onwards, we must ensure that they play a role and that they are visible to the people as people that have not come to be in control and to be in charge of the people, as was the case in yesteryear.
  
People were removed from their land and it was said they will play a role, and when they had been removed they had been removed and moved to one side, it was said "We will arrest you if you come close to the place where you used to live.  You must never again come close to this place, if you do come close to this place you are going to goal".
  
We see that as far as this Bill is concerned, it will eradicate all that uncertainty, it will eradicate all the confrontation which happened between the workers for the conservation of nature and the people who were members of the community.

It is true to say, brothers and sisters, that work in nature conservation had it very tough for two years.  They were facing a tough situation because they were facing a situation where they had to do their job properly.  They also faced a tough situation because they were looked upon as the enemies of their brothers and their sisters outside in the homes because of the work that they were doing, because it was regarded as something that was unsympathetic to the people and it was something that was unpalatable to the people, that is the people that were outside in the homes and their families.

So, Madam Speaker, I want to express my joy which is unreserved joy, when I see my brothers and sisters, free from that burden.  I also want to ensure that when this Bill was formulated, we had occasion to consult with people that attended the public hearings.

We said that we would ensure that when this Bill was enforced, they themselves, they would not be affected adversely.  So, we are asking the officials and all those who will use this act that our words should not be turned by them into lies and it should be remembered what was said to the workers, that we are doing things this way so that they are protected, the nation is protected, nature is protected.  T/E

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I will ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR S B MTHEMBU:  Sorry, Mr Speaker.  In conclusion, I would like to emphasise that the full and complete transformation in this sector, at all levels, has become a highly crucial issue which is going to be implemented as soon as possible, because where there is no proper transformation, a piece of legislation and whatever good ideas, it is very difficult to implement those.  So transformation should be a priority.  I therefore thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR T W MCHUNU THE DEPUTY SPEAKER TAKES THE CHAIR

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you from the hon Mr Mthembu.  I now have the honour to call upon the Minister to reply to the debate.  ~Inkosi~ Ndabezitha.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

~INKOSI~ N J NGUBANE: (Minister of Traditional and Environmental Affairs and Safety and Security): [That the nation is dead, if the Amabovu could hear you saying that, I do not know].  

Mr Speaker, and the hon House.  First and foremost, sir, let me thank the hon members for the positive way and manner in which they debated this Bill.  The unanimous adoption of the Bill by all parties here, as the hon Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee said, proves the necessary steadiness, dedication and commitment of my Department and the Portfolio Committee in listening to other role-players so as to come with a better document, eventually, as it happened today.

I am also happy, Mr Speaker and your hon House, to see many people coming to witness this great marriage.  I think the couple are going to be active enough so that for the first year we will see the results of good children.

Without wasting your time, when I come to the hon Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee I can say I would like to thank the hon member for the outline as far as the Bill is concerned, the outline that he put across.  There are many amendments which have been included in the Bill in order to get this final document.


TRANSLATION:  Father MacKenzie when he spoke at length, lording the fact that the Bill made it possible for the people who are the masses that they will also be able to play a role in full, which will give them their rightful place as people, that is true.

We have heard that we have we have involved the people for the first time in KwaZulu-Natal, or in South Africa, or in Africa.  T/E

But it is the first time that such a thing has happened in the whole world where grass-root people are being involved to participate in the smooth administration of conservation, especially those who are at grass-root level.


TRANSLATION:  So that our people will know that this coming together was not done because we wanted to do what we liked, it was not put on the Bill because we wanted to force issues, whether we liked it or not.  We put it in there, because it is going to happen.  T/E

I would also like to thank Mrs Cronje who addressed the issue of male dominance, especially in both the NPB and DNC.  In fact I can tell you that, as you said, I used to call you my sister, that something is going to happen.  In fact we have started to address that bad situation.  I think we will be engaging ourselves in a better gear after this amalgamation.  We must improve our performance.  I am happy, because even the senior authorities of both structures here, which are getting married, are here.  They are present here.  Therefore I think they have listened to you.  We must address that problem.


TRANSLATION:  Something else that she said was this issue of using of the areas, those areas that were used by the soldiers, the police and others.  T/E

My hon member you know that we are busy addressing that situation with the Portfolio Committee.  As you have correctly said, the SANDF section of the problem we have already addressed that issue.  Now I am busy talking to the side of SAPS which will be followed by the Health Department, Agriculture and also the Chamber of Mines.  We are busy addressing those issues. 

As I have said, the people should be aware that those structures, even those which are in the National Department, KwaZulu-Natal is part and parcel of the National Government.  Therefore we are one country.  Therefore we must be involved in trying to address that issue.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

~INKOSI~ N J NGUBANE: (Minister of Traditional and Environmental Affairs and Safety and Security):  We cannot just say to them, "Get away, get away, get away".  We belong to South Africa.  Please give me sufficient chance of addressing the issue so that there is sufficient consultation, even with Ministers and departments from National level.


TRANSLATION:  Father Mr Edwards spoke also and lauded the third tier where we are going to work together with our people who are low down so that they feel that they have a role to play.  We also believe that it will be so, as he has already said.  T/E

I would like to thank the hon member for the added information.  He really showed experience and maturity as far as conservation in our Province is concerned.  He had a lot to say in the form of lecturing this House.  Thank you very much, hon member Mr Edwards.

In fact he also mentioned the matter of powers by the Minister, as you often come across in the Bill that the Minister has powers to do that.  In fact I would like to tell each and every one of you here in the House, Mr Speaker, it is not a matter of powers especially, as far as I am concerned.  I know that, and people should know that, I will be working together with them in trying to solve the problems of our Department.  I cannot just do it alone.  In fact if I would do that I would be stupid.  Therefore people should not be too worried about the powers, because nobody will be having or implementing such powers.  It is just a matter of coming together as a Department, as a family to address all those issues, as I have said.


TRANSLATION:  Father Mr Tarr, he spoke about the employment and the new Board.  In fact, it is now finished, if this Bill is passed, you are passing a Bill so that it will be clear that there is a Board, a new Board, which will be chosen.

Others also mentioned it, it is obvious that when the Board is chosen it will be a mixture, it will not be the same as before, it will be a mixture of all different professions, so that it is a Board of the people and that it is a Board where people will know that they are represented.

It was also mentioned about the areas which are new, which will be started up for nature.  I think that in conjunction with the community, where in the masses we will try to do that in conjunction with them.  He also spoke about cross-border conservation areas as is the case in Swaziland and Mozambique.  T/E

I think we are busy addressing those issues.  That is why we are involved in discussions with the SDI along the coast there going to Mozambique and Swaziland.  Even my Department is involved in doing all those things.

 [He spoke and said] we should even create a new identity.  Yes, of course, we are going to do that, including uniforms etcetera.  So many things are going to change to suit the new conservation service.


TRANSLATION:  Mr Nel talked about a marriage and said that he was very happy.  We are very happy about that, Mr Nel, when an hon member makes joyful noises about a wedding.  We are also happy because this has taken a very long time to achieve.  T/E

Since 1994 when I was tasked to do this, as the hon member Mrs Ina Cronje said, I said to the Portfolio Committee, that let us take our time.  It is not as easy as that, as I have said during my presentation, to put together a Government department and a parastatal body.  We must take our time so that when these two couples come together for this marriage it becomes a proper one, though I do not know who is the husband, and who is the wife.  [LAUGHTER]

TRANSLATION:  So I think that such a situation is the way in which we are going to continue.  He also mentioned that the community should ultimately earn something out of it.  Nkosi Mdletshe should be one of those, the hon member said so when the hon ~Inkosi~ was lauding the Community Trust.  T/E

The Community Trust was established with the objective so that people around all these conservation centres do get some benefits, eventually.  Therefore we have created this, we have established this Trust.  People are going to get some benefits.

TRANSLATION:  ~Inkosi~ also said that I had taken my time to do this, I have already explained that.  The ~Inkosi~ also said that the laws that are passed should be laws that the people agree with, as a matter of course, when laws are to be passed, even in as far as this new Board is concerned.  If we pass laws that the community does not agree with, we will be wasting our time.  T/E

I always believe that even Provincial Governments, even National Governments may make laws, regulations and Acts, but if the communities at grass-root level say no to those laws or to those Acts, it is just a waste of time.

We must do something, more than what we have done already.


TRANSLATION:  So, if laws need to be passed, laws should be passed that will be accepted by the people and when that law is put into operation it will be accepted, because if they do not accept those laws, there is anarchy, then the country becomes ungovernable.

So we will try by all means that where people do not agree with the laws, we will take a long time in order to satisfy them and to explain it to them until they agree, because it will be a waste of our time if we try to use a law that the people have not agreed to.

My sister over there, the hon Mrs Downs, spoke about the children.  She was not the first person who said the children of KwaZulu-Natal do not know anything about game reserves.  That is something that I will have to speak to the Board about, that is the new Board which will be formed.  I should speak about it also with the Government because we do not have money, and we will have to see what other way we can use in order to ensure that the children are able to visit the game reserves.

It is indeed a shame, we have elephant in this Province and you find that children do not know anything about elephants.  They have never seen lions, they have never seen buffalo, they have never seen a rhinoceros, that is indeed a shame.  I think that the Department will have to do something in order to make sure that those things happen.

Father Mkhwanazi was very supportive of the Bill, he was very grateful to the people of the Natal Parks Board and also those from DNC and to the Secretary of the Department, together with my brothers and sisters who work for both Departments, we are very grateful, Father Mkhwanazi, for that.

This other thing, I have already spoken about this, regarding being in official positions, that is something which we are going to have to revisit.  That is why I said I am happy because they are here, what we have done, the small things that we have done in the form of promotions is not enough, we must do something more than what we have done already.

So our people should expect that when we meet, we will see what happens.  Regarding the birds that Father Mkhwanazi says are no longer there, there are a lot of birds, Father, there are a lot of birds in the reserves.  Perhaps you just look at the animals, these big animals.  All the birds that you mentioned, including the fan-tailed warblers, and the others that you mentioned, the reserves are full of them.  If people hit them or injure them outside of the reserves, they run into the reserves.

Regarding hunting, there are times set aside for hunting, that is attended to by the Department.  The issue of traditional dress there at Dalton, we have addressed that.  T/E

We had a meeting in Durban with some of the members of the Parks Board, with some of the members of DNC, where we came together with those Dalton people to address this issue [of skins and other things, that they use for tribal dress, now, before the end of the year].  

We will be having a big meeting of all these people who cut these traditional attires so that we tell them [what indeed we are referring to when we talk about protected animals].  What do we mean by saying that.  Ama-endangered species 

TRANSLATION:  We can tell them what indeed we are referring to when we talk about protected animals, what do we mean by saying that such and such - are endangered species, what do we mean, about highly protected animals, what do we mean by that.  We will give them a list of all the animals so that our people know what they are not allowed to have without a permit.

Because our people must know that as we are here we are working for the community.  So, laws that are passed by you, the community, laws are not passed by the Department, laws are passed by the community, and those laws must be respected, our people must respect that law once it has been passed.

So, as far as that is concerned, Father Mkhwanazi, if you want baboons in order to go and cast spells, and you request that from the reserves, then we will see how we can accommodate you, because there are many, many baboons there, but there are no baboons in the reserves with which someone can cast spells.
  
In ending off, I am going to the hon member, Mr Mthembu, we are very happy that he spoke on behalf of ANC as a party and said that they support the Bill.   T/E

That is why I have said, especially to the hon member Mr J J, and then my sister over there, the hon member Mrs Cronje, that in fact they do not belong to that other side.  Then, Mr [has already said that] the whole ANC do not belong to that other side.  The whole party should belong to this side.  Therefore you must start revising what you have done before, so that you eventually become IFP members.  I can see the hon Minister Mkhize nodding when I am saying that.  [LAUGHTER]

[I think that as my brother the hon Mthembu said, we will try indeed].

This is a very great message.  It should not be just a matter of coming together between the two organisations, but what is important will be the implementation.  I think my senior officials are here.  They have noted that.

[We have turned that around, Father Mthembu, that up to now it always appeared that when one spoke about people that were in charge in the game reserves, it was always white people]. 

What I would like to say, since 1994, since I started in the Department, I agree with the hon members, things were worse.  In fact I was shocked when I started going out and visiting the people with my senior members, the rejection that was displayed by the community members towards my senior officials.  The situation I can say has improved a lot.  There is that good relationship between the people at grass-root level and my Department both in the Department of Nature Conservation, and also in the Natal Parks Board.  The situation has improved.  In fact we have even introduced many projects, community projects, which people are enjoying.  If I had a list here I would be mentioning such projects that have been introduced by both the Natal Parks Board and the Department of Nature Conservation.

In short I am really very thankful, Mr Speaker, for the unanimous acceptance of this Bill.  I think I can promise you that as a Department we will work together to promote the interests of the Province as far as conservation is concerned.  I thank you, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  That closes the debate on the KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Management Bill.  We have come to the situation where I now have to put the Bill to the House.

KWAZULU-NATAL NATURE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT BILL, 1997 - PASSED

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The Bill has been passed unanimously.  I will now request the Secretary to read the short title of the Bill.

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Management Bill, 1997.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Secretary.  That matter has now been concluded, that is matter number 8.4 on the Order Paper.  I can see an hon member standing.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, before we proceed, may I take a point of order please.  This morning the press cutting service was distributed which is part of the service that our library renders, and we were all very happy about that.  We have just received a page.  We are not sure what the origin of it is or the status.  I am addressing a principle here.  If any of us can have articles, personal opinions photocopied and distributed in the House, to me it would be a great problem.  I think we need to have it clarified.  I also believe incidentally that one of the comments in the article is defamatory to the ANC, but it is really the principle.  I am addressing a principle.

AN HON MEMBER:  What is the point of order?

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  I am addressing a principle.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  The principle is, and that is why I actually referred the House to the press cutting service which is legitimate ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Is that a point of order?

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  It is a point of order.  Which is legitimate and which we appreciate and we know it comes from our library and information services.  I asked a question about the origin and status of a letter that has just been distributed.  It is not in the same bundle.  The one came quite a while ago and the other one has just arrived.  

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  May I please request the hon member to forward the copy of that circulating document to me I will pronounce an opinion on it very soon.  Thank you.  In the meantime I now wish to proceed with the business of the House, and to proceed to point number 8.6 on the Order Paper.  That is the KwaZulu-Natal Water Services Amendment Bill.  The hon Minister Miller will open the debate.

KWAZULU-NATAL WATER SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL, 1997.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  Mr Speaker, with the co-operation of the House, I think this could be the quickest Bill we have ever passed.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Then sit down.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  I would ask that the House support me.  Very simply, sir, I table the KwaZulu-Natal Water Services Amendment Bill, and it seeks to delete an obsolete provision.  The specific clause in the Ordinance which will be deleted is, I will find it in a minute.

MR W U NEL:  It is so small he cannot find it.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  We seek to delete clause 73 which deals with the exemption from the payment of rates of property formerly owned by the Water Services Corporations which have subsequently become the assets of the Regional Service Councils, and in some instances the Durban Metropolitan Authority.  All public buildings are required to pay rates, all buildings are rateable.  This is an omission which we could not allow to continue.  I move the deletion of the clause concerned and the adoption of the Bill.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  That Bill has been introduced. 

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, the hon Minister did not request that the House suspend the Rules, and in order for us to proceed with this Bill we actually have to agree by two-thirds majority to suspend ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Mrs Cronje, can I ask the hon member please to note that I think when she is raising a point, she should face me and then I will respond.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  I apologise, Mr Speaker.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  But once the hon member starts reacting to other members it will disrupt the process.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  I apologise.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  This Bill has been properly tabled.  It was supported by the Portfolio Committee, and thus it was accepted as the Bill of the House, and it was agreed that it would be discussed at 8.6.  The normal processes that were needed were waived with the unanimous agreement of the House.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Then if it was done this morning, Mr Speaker, then I apologise again.  My understanding was that it had not been done formally, but I will then withdraw that.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Everything has been done.  Can I proceed to say that I have investigated the matter of the document that has been raised in this House.

I have discovered that the clerks at the table have nothing to do with this document.  They never gave the authority to the messengers to distribute this document.  I repeat what we have said in the past.  The matter here does not lie just solely with the messengers, it also lies with the members.  Can the members assist us by not instructing messengers to distribute documents on their behalf, because that is the problem that has been caused.  We have a precedence in this House.  It was discussed, it was agreed in this House that all documentation that will have been distributed here will be done under the authority of the Speaker and the administration.  Please can we accept that that will be what will happen in the future.  That matter is put to rest for now.  Thank you.

I then proceed to call upon Dr Sutcliffe.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will be brief.  This matter was brought to the Committee.  We indicated that we need to suspend those Rules that we have, because of the difficulties encountered.  We do not like doing that.  All parties supported this Bill, and I defy anyone to stand up here and say they are not going to support this Bill.  That is enough said.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  You are standing up.  I did not hear the hon member.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I said it is unanimously supported, but I defy anyone to stand up here and go against the IFP, the ANC, the National Party, the DP, the Minority Front, the PAC and the ACDP.  If they do, I am not too sure where they come from.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Dr Sutcliffe.  I then call upon Mr Haygarth.  Mr Haygarth, you have two minutes, sir.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Mr Speaker, the National Party supports the amendment.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Wessel Nel, you have one minute, sir.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, just to reiterate what I said, whilst we would like to support this Bill, and are going to do so, we would like to caution Dr Sutcliffe, the hon, not to push us too far.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I call upon Mr Rajbansi who has one minute.  In the absence of the hon member I then go across to the hon Mr Mkhwanazi.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I would not mind you bestowing a doctorate on me.  I think I deserve it.  [LAUGHTER]  The PAC wholly supports this Bill, particularly because it deals with the gift of God, the very important one water.  I thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, sir.  Mrs Joanne Downs.

MRS J M DOWNS:  The ACDP supports the Amendment Bill.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  This Amendment Bill has been passed and I now require the Minister to respond to it.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Local Government and Housing):  I thank all parties for their support, sir, and I formally move the adoption.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Minister.  I now put the Bill to the House.

KWAZULU-NATAL WATER SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL, 1997 - PASSED

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  The Bill has been unanimously adopted.  I now call upon the Secretary to read the short title of the Bill.

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Water Services Amendment Bill, 1997.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  That concludes our 8.6 on the Order Paper.  I now go on to 8.7, which is a debate on a Motion.  The debate will be officially opened by Mr Mchunu.  You have 10 minutes, sir.

MOTION:
		That this House commits itself to the promotion of peace, democracy and development for all the people of KwaZulu-Natal in particular and South Africa in general; with priority given to the poor rural communities;

		That all elected officials behave in an exemplary manner in promoting these objectives; and

		That the year 1998 becomes the year of equitable, efficient and effective governance.

MR S E MCHUNU:  Mr Speaker, when the year 1998 begins we should welcome it, and welcome it as a great opportunity for us, not just to govern, but for us to govern effectively and efficiently.  The speech that was made by the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Finance, the hon Mr Makhaye, and similarly that one which was made by the hon member Mr Haygarth, did point effectively to quite a number of serious issues that we have to address in order to improve our record drastically as people, and as the Legislature which is wanting to govern effectively and efficiently.

Of course, one can add a few other issues to those which they raised.  One such issue which we need to look at as a means of trying to ensure that we govern effectively and efficiently is a question of how we conduct our public hearings.  You have got to ask a question.  For instance, a question that asks do we really need to fly people around when we have public hearings.  Say one or two officials, one or two MPs around the Province.  Is there no way we can improve the situation in such a way that it is cost effective.  I have actually seen some of the public hearings where not enough work had been done, and therefore public hearings would turn out to be a failure, after a lot of money had been spent.

Now I think that is one issue that we have to look at, is this body.  I am sure it is not compatible to the whole question of preparedness for proper governing, and governing effectively and efficiently.

The other areas which are areas of concern, of course like the Department of Welfare, and I want to say that the Minister of Welfare is trying by all means.  We know about steps that have been taken to try and combat corruption.  I must say that we should be very far from relaxing in that particular area, because you still hear stories of how the system presently is still being manipulated, and how money which actually belongs to our aged people gets taken by those people that we are putting our trust in, even right now.  I am talking here about hard cash which is taken by officials right at the centres of payment.  We are still very far from unearthing and finishing this thing of corruption.

Of course a similar thing can be said about the Department of Education.  I am not directing this necessarily to the Minister, because I know that as one person he cannot deal with all these issues without our assistance, active assistance and involvement.  Some of this corruption emanates from our relatives, it is conducted by people who we know.  We have got to do something about it.

I must say that even when teams are put together to try and combat these things, you will find that at times even the teams themselves have people who are corruptible.  That is why we have, we as members of Parliament, have to do something about all these things.

The other issue which I want to deal with is the whole question of development, particularly in rural areas, in rural communities.  I want to say that contrary to the popular belief that there is a lack of commitment to a better life for all, when you go to the ground you will find that there is a lot of enthusiasm about the attempts that are being made by the National Government and the Provincial Government to try and improve the lives of people in the rural communities.

I am a little concerned about the fact that most of those things that we are investing in on the ground, particularly in the communities, particularly in rural areas, are still short term projects as opposed to long term, and self-sustainable projects.  We still have to explore the possibility of actually starting in this particular area and getting better ways of investing in those communities.

One such area of concern, in particular, is our lack of commitment when it comes to the realisation of the importance that can be played by agriculture in the rural communities.  I am sure that most of you will agree with me to say that there is still a lot that we can do.  First to educate our people in rural areas, and actually to invest money in those areas, to ensure that people are not just involved in small projects in those areas.  They must actually change and realise that far more than just going to towns and urban areas to look for jobs can be done.  They can actually have a better future right there where they are.  I am convinced that by and large land in the tribal areas is still largely used, but far below the level at which it should be used at the moment.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR S E MCHUNU:  The attitude is not going to change out there if the attitude does not change with us here first.  Let us go to each and every tribal area and see for ourselves what is happening there.  Large tracts of arable land is not being used.  We cannot hope to think that the standard of living of the people is just going to change overnight with the provision of jobs, which are very hard to find.  All these things of crime and problems which are happening in urban areas can drastically be improved if we change our attitude and actually make sure that most of our investments go to those particular areas.

I must point out that I am quite aware that Minister Singh is doing quite a lot, including what is happening in terms of drafting the White Paper.  I know that their terms as well from the Department of the Premier, as mentioned by the hon Mr Haygarth, but what I am saying is that we need to see a flood of commitment and actually change this thing of disregarding land, and underrating it in the rural areas.

Of course the other area which I want to touch on is the State forests.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I am sure the hon member is aware that he is finishing in 13 seconds time.

MR S E MCHUNU:  Okay.  We have to do a lot in terms of State forests.  I know a number of State forests which are now being literally raped.  It is something that we have to do something about.

The last issue which I want to mention has to do with the behaviour.  I am sure my hon colleague Mr Mike Mabuyakhulu will touch on this, the behaviour of some of the elected representatives in terms of promoting democracy and peace in our areas.  There are some MPs who actually deserve more than just investigation.  They deserve punishment, if I can actually use that word, but my hon member Mr Mabuyakhulu will dwell on that.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now call upon Mrs A Mchunu for nine minutes.

MRS A MCHUNU:  Mr Speaker, I feel quite happy that Macingwane has mentioned something which is of great concern, that is land use.  I think this time I will seek proper channels to get a copy made of this, and will seek the permission of the Minister so that we look at how people in the rural areas can use land properly.  What I have discovered with my own research is that it is not easy to get tractors.  Number one, they are expensive.  Number two, they are usually used in cutting sugar-cane.  If women out there can get a plough which is powered either by diesel or petrol, something can be achieved which is quite different from the present scenario.  Perhaps we will get some information, because last week I specially went to Johannesburg to investigate the possibility of getting a plough that can be used by women and youngsters to cultivate the land that we are supposed to use in rural areas.

Mr Speaker, one can not really get an idea of what we are driving to, but I must say that KwaZulu-Natal leaders, political leaders, religious leaders, business and others have worked on this motion of peace promotion, democracy and development for a long time.  We will remember that the Peace Accord was first signed in Empangeni in September 1990, long before the National Peace Accord was signed.  Then there was commitment to work for peace.  In areas where we come from let us work with the peace structures, for peace, reconciliation, democracy and development.

Peace begins with an individual.  As our Lord said, "Peace I give to you".  That peace has to permeate into family members, into communities, into the whole Province and finally into the whole of South Africa and Africa.  All structures have to be respected in order to enhance peace in individuals, in families and communities, be they rural or urban.

The elected officials have to behave in an exemplary manner, as Macingwane has actually put it down on paper, in promoting peace.  Elected officials have to respect people's decisions on the ground at local level.  Riding roughshod over people's decisions does not auger well for us as leaders.  To give an example, if local councils vote for issues, Provincial leaders have to respect those decisions, because they are made on a non-party political basis.  If Provincial MPPs drown local structures with hidden political agendas then local structures doubt the integrity of MPPs.  The same applies to National MPs who meddle in the affairs of local structures when they are not really part of those structures.

People on the ground know their leaders, just as much as sheep know their shepherd.  They also accept advice and change if this advice and changes are introduced properly.

Structures do need transition, but this must be done with respect using the proper channels of communication.  Leaders have to stand for the truth and for what they say.  Honest leaders do not use nom de plumes if they have facts.  Leaders who stand for the truth with no hidden political agendas will not be covered by political duvets as they are needed to serve all people on the ground with no political divisions.  This is what the mover of the motion, Macingwane, is reinforcing.  Peace, respect and integrity starts with you, starts with me and starts with all of us here in this House.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS A MCHUNU:  As Provincial leaders we are role models in our communities.  What we say or do is carefully listened to and observed by the people on the ground at local level.  We cannot afford to speak with forked tongues, calling for peace on the one hand, and condoning the killing of doctors, farmers, businessmen and family members on the other side, simply because we come from a violent society of the ~Apartheid~ era.

We are here to make a difference.  Let us be seen to be involved in peacemaking projects to alleviate the suffering of the poorest of the poor.  Issues which appear to be controversial should be discussed in peace structures if local authorities have failed to deal with them.  For instance, the issue of Mangosuthu Highway which was named in 1984 in Ngwelezane Township.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS A MCHUNU:  And only now is being claimed that it will cause conflict.  In what way?  Goodness knows.  As Provincial leaders let us be involved in real peacemaking, and not mouthing peace only as a political tool or political propaganda, to propagate violence.  Violence is ongoing in our Province despite efforts by peace structures to promote peace, democracy and development.

Recently five IFP members were gunned down with an AK47 at Mandini when they were going to the Women's Conference on the weekend of 25 to 27 October 1997.  Three IFP members were killed at Burlington recently.  Five IFP members were killed in a homestead over the weekend at KwaMaphumulo.  Killing of IFP members is being renewed while engaging in peace propaganda.

As I stated in one of the newspapers, political parties exist to help people make healthy policies, to agree to disagree, to be united in diversity.  This is espoused by our hon leader, Dr Mangosuthu Buthelezi in all his lifetime and he espouses this in all his speeches.  So then as leaders let us serve our constituencies with honesty.  Condemn killings of all members in our constituencies, be they doctors, farmers, businessmen or community members of all political parties, because they need us and we need them.  We need each other.

Political leaders in this House should not be party political animals...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Will the hon member wind up in 30 seconds.

MRS A MCHUNU: ... who are only out to seek votes and to kill opponents.  Let us go out to serve our people, especially the poorest of the poor.  Let us stand together in the service of humanity or devour each other and perish like fools in our Province.  1998 then should be the year of equitable, efficient and effective governance just as KwaZulu-Natal has always stood for this, and is only disturbed by a call to get rid of traditional structures that are familiar to the ordinary people in rural areas.  In rural areas people on the ground understand the language spoken by ~Amakhosi~ and his izinduna.

So the elected structures in rural areas have to work with its izinduna and ~Amakhosi~ as it is happening now.  One induna was killed at Mandini for instance by men wearing women's clothes carrying AK47s.  Residents of rural areas are not warlords nor are they war ladies as they are always framed.  I thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I thank you the hon member.  I thank you hon member although the finishing was at the expense of the Rules.  It was very fast reading.  Can we try and avoid that.  I am just saying that on a lighter note.  Can we go on, and I ask for Mrs Galea.

MRS C E GALEA:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The hon member, Mr Mchunu, asked this House to commit itself to the promotion of peace, democracy and development of all the people of KwaZulu-Natal.  We have debated many motions in this House calling for peace, the elimination of political violence and the need to promote true democracy.  Yet every day we read of elected leaders and public reps of certain parties being involved in human rights abuses, abuses against women and children, and acting against the democratic rights of their fellow citizens.

To achieve the objects of this member's motion, it is absolutely imperative that the leadership of all parties, of all tiers of Government, take action against members who are acting in this manner.

In the recently launched KwaZulu-Natal Cabinet Aids initiative, for which I commend the hon members, it recommends that political parties and Government leaders at all levels must publicly commit themselves to the struggle against Aids.  This must also be done to promote peace and tolerance in our Province.

To ensure that this happens there should be a multi-party type strategy, a plan not owned by one party, but all law-abiding South Africans.  It should deal with crime prevention and crime deterring measures.  Crime must be criminalised.  There can no longer be any excuse for crime.  A healthy family is a healthy society.  There must be appreciation for the fact that the disintegration of family life has been one of the main reasons for the upsurge in crime.  Underlying political causes of crime must be addressed.  The public will have to mobilise itself against crime by an imaginative anti-crime public awareness campaign and also through our community policing forums.

Mr Speaker, some of our hon members attended the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Crime Prevention Summit on Monday and Tuesday.  The Commission in which I participated was violence against women.  To have a peaceful society we have got to respect our women and children.  It is felt that there should be a national audit on victim support services as there are no audits available.  People are not aware of the existing resources or facilities available.  We need more district surgeons or otherwise, someone suggested that the retired doctors should be used in cases where there is rape, because by the time the victim actually gets to the hospital or to the district surgeon many hours have gone past, and when they take smears these are also botched up.  So they need to be well trained.

Accessibility of specially trained police on weekends and after hours is also needed.  There is also need for skills training and education.  A draft report of all the Commissions will be made by 15 December.  A Crime Accord similar to the Peace Accord, where all parties and stakeholders pledge themselves to the fight against crime is needed.  Every person has an obligation towards public safety, and we must all play our part.

This Province has a role to play and it lies in creating an environment in which people can generate and enjoy prosperity.  Governments are established for and by the people in a democratic dispensation to serve their interests, to protect their freedom and to ensure their security.

Mr Speaker, on behalf of the National Party, I support this motion fully.  I would like to just mention that I had made an amendment, because we have passed so many motions about peace, and actually we say fine, we all agree, peace is wonderful.  I wanted to give it some teeth by saying that should members not adhere to this they should be suspended or fired from their party.  Christmas is coming, we have got people coming from the mines.  We are going to have a whole lot of people coming home.  Let us all take hands and really fight for peace in this lovely Province of ours.

In closing, Mr Speaker, as this is the last meeting of this sitting, I wish all my colleagues and all the staff and everyone a blessed and peaceful Christmas.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Galea.  I now call upon Mr Mabuyakhulu for 10 minutes.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I must say from the outset that I am a democrat.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

AN HON MEMBER:  You could have fooled me.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  I am a product of an organisation that has got a rich history of democracy.  The very fact that we are here where we are today, is because the ANC stood firm when times were hard, when others ran away from the heat and we were there to ensure that democracy survived.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

AN HON MEMBER:  You did not go overseas, did you?  [LAUGHTER]

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  For that reason, Mr Speaker, we now have this Constitution.  This Constitution has become the supreme law of the land.  There is no individual, and there is no group, and there is no single person no matter who he may be or she may be that is above this Constitution.

AN HON MEMBER:  Not even Mandela.

AN HON MEMBER:  Or Winnie.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  And this Constitution, Mr Speaker, deals with certain pertinent issues that protect the nature of democracy, and whoever so acts ultra vires of this Constitution is in fact an enemy of democracy.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I wish that the Chief Whip has noticed that the order is for him to restrain from what he is doing.  Actually I was just indicating that I wish the Chief Whip knew that the order was in fact against his own move on crossing the line.  Thank you.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I apologise, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Mr Speaker, I do not know whether it is a calculated risk.  What I am saying is that it is absolutely imperative that we remind ourselves that South Africa is a constitutional State.  This simply means that there is no individual or group that is above the Constitution.  Secondly, that the important factor that we all should remember is that we now have a multi-party democracy, whether we like it or not.  I am making reference to these important foundations of democracy.  They are important and from time to time we must refer to them and we must respect them.  In particular here I want to refer to section 19(1)(a), (b) and (c) which confers political rights to every citizen of this country.

The hon member Mr Mchunu who is the mover of this motion, a gallant son of Africa and the one who loves democracy, has made an important assertion in the motion, that it is important for us as elected officials or public representatives to understand that we cannot violate the Constitution, and therefore we must always uphold the Constitution.

At a time when the ANC and the IFP in this Province is seriously grappling with the issues of making lasting peace it is unfortunate, or rather it is ironic that there are still individuals within our midst who are still fuelling the flames of fire, instead of being on the side of peaceful coexistence.

AN HON MEMBER:  Where do you stand?

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  This brings me to the matter that I find very disheartening.  I find it very disheartening indeed, because a National member of Parliament belonging to the member sitting opposite, by the name of Mr Alfred Mpontshane has gone to the constituent offices of the hon member Miss Nahara sitting here in this House.  Firstly, on 1 October, when he went there his visit was not a courteous one.  His visit was a very discourteous one and a very threatening one.  He threatened members who were in that office.  He demanded that the office belonging to this hon member should be closed down, because he alleged that that office is used for ANC purposes, by the ANC people.  It did not end there.  He went on to say that the ANC is not allowed to operate in the area.

I am saying, Mr Speaker, one must take strong exception that members of Parliament, whose responsibility is to uphold the Constitution, and to respect the rights that are enshrined in that Constitution, that they should behave as if they do not know about it.  I clearly know that senior leaders of the members sitting opposite may not be aware of this.  It did not end there.  Again on 11 November, almost four weeks later, he went back to that office.  He actually came to the office accompanied by a group of men and once again threatened the staff in that office.  When he threatened the staff in that office he asked why that office had not closed down.  I think no one would accept conduct of that nature from a member of Parliament, because members of Parliament are honourable people, and by the very essence that they are honourable people, we expect them to be people of integrity.  We expect them to be people who understand the Constitution.  We expect them to be people who are supposed to be assisting the leaders in this Province, who are actually trying to fight against the question of violence in this Province.  It is not for them to go and find ways of how to actually create confusion and conflicts amongst communities.

I am saying therefore Mr Speaker, that one is strongly urging the members sitting opposite, and in particular urging that the senior leaders of the IFP should really assist in resolving this matter.  We are not raising this matter for political gain, but it is a matter that has been raised with the member.  Unfortunately he is persisting with his conduct.  For that reason we think more than just speaking to him is required in this matter.

I therefore rest my case, Mr Speaker.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much from the hon member.  Mr Nel, you have got two minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, the proposer of the motion, the hon member Mr Mchunu, and now again the hon member Mr Mabuyakhulu said that there are members of this House who deserve more than an investigation.  In fact they deserve severe punishment for their contribution to sabotaging peace and democracy.

Now, sir, that is an immense indictment on the behaviour of hon members of this House.  It is futile that we complain about crime; it is futile that we commiserate with victims of violence, but at the same time in our midst we tolerate this kind of behaviour.  Might I say, it sounded to me like the pot calling the kettle black, because I also remember that there are places like Shallcross and Richmond where we might ask the same kind of questions.  

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Ask what questions?

MR W U NEL:  About violence and no-go zones.  Ja, and maybe the hon member Dr Sutcliffe's memory is very short, but just last year they were still conferring the freedom of Richmond on one of their members who was operating a no-go zone. 

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  But now he has gone to gaol.

MR W U NEL:  Not at your hands.  Not thanks to you.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  We put him in gaol.

MR W U NEL:  You did not.  The hon member says he put him in gaol or they put him in gaol which is a lie.

MR R M BURROWS:  They still conceal a report on him.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, I think that the time has come that there be an honest commitment by all of us to lead by example.  If we do not do that then we battle in vain to try and have an election in 1999 in peaceful surroundings.

1998 which the proposer of the motion stipulated should be the year of equitable, efficient and effective Government must also mark a year where we can really honestly say that everybody is operating with an honourable code of conduct.  It surprises me that we need to still draft codes of conduct when I thought it was quite simple, that we should all just simply behave in a civilised fashion, respecting the human dignity and the rights of others.

I would just make a plea today that this be the last day that we keep on making these endless calls for peace, yet not do anything about it on the ground.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Nel.  I am trying to look for Mr Rajbansi and I cannot see him.

MR G HAYGARTH:  On a point of order.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I hear what your point of order is.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Mr Speaker, the word was used by the speaker who was just talking, and he used the word, "lie".  I think he should have used the word "terminological inexactitude", is the correct parliamentary expression.  [LAUGHTER]

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, Mr Haygarth.  In the absence of Mr Rajbansi, I wish to call upon Mr Mkhwanazi who has one minute.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The PAC is on record, particularly in this chamber, condemning political intolerance.  We are on record that the PAC, no one can count one life that has been taken away by the PAC because of political intolerance.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Be that as it may, we are not trying to be holier than the Pope, I am talking about the internecine violence.  I am clear about that.  I am not talking about when people were fighting.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  I am not talking in this chamber.  Mr Speaker, if the hon members will allow me to continue.  We in the PAC want first of all, to applaud the efforts made by the leadership of the IFP and the ANC to make peace.  It is a great comfort to us, because we saw that it was coming.  At the same time we are disheartened to see things happening, if it is true what has been said by the hon Mabuyakhulu, definitely that attitude and that action should be condemned.  If it is true.

What has happened in Shallcross also deserves condemnation, and what is happening at Umlazi, and what has been reported is happening at Mandini and other places.  I mean let us condemn these things.  Let us have no fear to condemn these things.  I was very happy to listen to the hon Bheki Cele.  Well, I should not say it was for the first time he said it, but it was for the first time I heard him saying straightforward that those, if they are members of the ANC, those who were involved in the killings of the IFP members in Shallcross, will be dealt with severely by the ANC.  I hope he will practice what he preached that day.

I think the leadership of our bigger parties, if they talk like that and they practice like that, this is going to help us, because there can be no development.  Hon Mchunu's motion is very good and we support it, but how can there be development when we still kill other people because we have a difference in politics.

Mr Speaker, in one minute I think I have made my point.  We are sick and tired of this posturing and doing other things on the side.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you from the hon member, although I am not sure whether he made his point in one minute.  I am not sure about that.  Mrs Downs, for one minute.

MRS J M DOWNS:  Mr Speaker, I hope that my minute will be as long as Mr Mkhwanazi's.

AN HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS J M DOWNS:  If I had more than a minute, Mr Speaker, I would have spoken about Shallcross and Richmond and those things.  I would have also spoken about good governance and the strides that we have made, and the further things that we need to do, but seeing as I only have one minute I will just end off with a plea.  Please do not spoil the level of multi-party democracy that has been practised in this Parliament by muzzling the small parties.  One minute is not enough time for us to make a proper point.  Thank you.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Downs.  I hope the Whips have heard that.  I now call upon the hon member Mr Powell for nine minutes.

MR P POWELL:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I would like to first of all respond to the points made by the hon member Mr Mabuyakhulu.  I think that if Mr Mpontshane, the hon member of the National Assembly had been here himself, he would have probably likened the attack on him in the same way that a former British Foreign Minister was described as being attacked by a dead sheep.

On a more serious note, I think that what we saw here today was a particularly unprincipled attack on a member of another House of Parliament in the absence of that member.

AN HON MEMBER:  What was he doing in the office?

MR P POWELL:  Mr Speaker, I think that in this issue it is only fair that the person who stands accused, in fact calls have been made for action against him, that his side of the story be heard.  In the short time available to me, I have established that one of the sources of this problem is a misunderstanding which has arisen in this particular community.

The source of the misunderstanding, and here I am going on the information at my disposal, is that the office opened was presented as a welfare office, and that the impression was given in the community that this office was an official extension of the Department of Welfare in this Province.  There is considerable anger about this.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I have order please.  Order! Order!


MR P POWELL:  Mr Speaker, I think that this highlights a peculiar problem in this Province.  It highlights the fact that despite the fact that we have gone so far in creating peace in this Province, that we have gone to considerable lengths to establish forums to discuss problems like this.  The hon colleague in the opposite benches chooses to come here and indulge in cheap rhetoric.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is not cheap.  How can you say cheap?

MR P POWELL:  Rather than taking this issue up through the appropriate peace channels which exist between our two parties.  That there in itself is a highly questionable action on his part.

Mr Speaker, the motion which was moved by the hon member is the stuff that dreams are made of.  These ideas of peace, democracy, poverty in rural areas are the things which have become the currency of rhetoric, and they too glibly come from our mouths.  The reality unfortunately is somewhat different.

There is an unfortunate tendency in the politics of our country.  To a greater and lesser extent perhaps all of us are guilty of this, that we prioritise problems according to what is the issue of the day.  The latest atrocity, the latest assassination grabs our attention.  We get in cars accompanied by the police and we rush to the scene of the atrocity.  We stay there for two hours, we get back in our cars and we leave, thinking perhaps mistakenly that by our mere presence we have made a difference.  I think sadly the reality is somewhat different.

At the basis of the understanding between the IFP and the ANC is a common understanding, that the root causes of the violence are much deeper than that.  To deal with them we need a systematic and concerted effort at all levels of Government to go into these communities and deal with the problem.

Mr Speaker, in the time allotted to me, I wish to look at a few examples of perhaps where we can be introspective, and leave here today with a new focus as to how we can take the peace process forward in this Province.

MR S E MCHUNU:  Mr Speaker, on a point of order.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I hear what the point of order is.

MR S E MCHUNU:  The problem here is that we cannot subject the House to statements which are untrue.  Those offices were properly introduced by the hon members ...

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I rule the hon member out.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Can I please rule the member out.  That is not a point of order.  Please resume your seat.  Can the member continue.

MR P POWELL:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I will continue.  On 16 November three IFP members were shot and wounded, and then hacked and stabbed to death at the Burlington informal settlement.  This happened despite the fact that Provincial peace structures had been timeously notified, and that the Durban Metropolitan Council had been officially informed in terms of the Gathering Act.  Both of these structures failed to convene the required meetings in terms of the said Act, to ensure that both parties were able to talk about venues, routes and that there would be preparatory planning to make sure that there were no killings.

The deployment of monitors into that area took place after the people had been killed.  It is quite clear that the peace structures that we have put in place failed to prevent this tragic loss of life.

In Umlazi we received reports of a shopkeeper in C-Section who in the last few days has been unable to open his shop simply because he comes from Nongoma, and is therefore supposed to be an IFP supporter.

In Tintown, Inchanga, people of the area have been without public transport for four months.  Their fundamental human rights, their right to health care, to education have been denied because of a politically motivated taxi boycott.  Members of this House, members of the National Government have repeatedly visited the area to try and solve this problem.  The sad reality is that we have failed.  These people are being denied the most elementary human rights.  If we look at what is happening there, I would like to put it to this House that if this was happening in Westville, Chatsworth or even in Chesterville this House would be in an uproar.

Political intolerance continues despite the presence of large numbers of security forces.  There is a leader of the ANC who previously appeared before a subcommittee of this House protesting against political intolerance in Richmond, who this very weekend had to prevent an IFP meeting from taking place in Richmond.  From Mapumulo we hear about a father and his four children who were shot and burnt to death.

Now, Mr Speaker, I have tried to highlight these problems not to score cheap political points, but for us to ask ourselves a question.  When we leave here today, we are coming to the end of a year where we have made enormous strides, and I do not wish to retract from the efforts of anybody in this House.  People as individuals have worked hard, but we must remember that we have a long way to go, and that complacency is going to be the greatest enemy of peace in this Province.  There have been previous attempts to bring peace and they have failed, because they have failed to go that extra mile.

My plea to everybody here, when we leave here today and we go into recess, people have highlighted the fact that the Christmas season is a time when both of our parties have been victims of massacres.  We have a duty to go out and make sure that we do not have another Shobashobane, we do not have another massacre at Tintown, like what happened last year.

Really that is my plea, let us not be complacent.  Let us go away from here, let us make sure that the peace structures work.  Let us stop the kind of rhetoric which we heard.  We have got open channels between our parties.  Let us resolve those problems between them.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Powell.  I now call upon Mr Cele.  Mr Cele, you have 10 minutes.

MR B H CELE:  One of my heroes produced by Africa is Amilear Cabral.

AN HON MEMBER:  Not Powell.

MR B H CELE:  Who says tell no lies and claim no easy victories.  The problem is this.  We come here and really do that instead of looking beyond ourselves.  I doubt if we are really doing that, we are beginning to look beyond ourselves.  Most of us are quite safe here.  We go back to our places, we have got bodyguards and then out of that we do not do the best to make sure that people at the end of the day, that we claim to be talking on their behalf, that they are safe.

The other problem is when we get information, and people do wrong things, we begin to defend them rather than dealing with them and to be open to say this cannot happen, especially this era of democracy.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR B H CELE:  Members, if they are wrong, they could be ordinary members of organisations, they could be members of this House, even the members of the other Houses, if they do wrong things we will have to be clear and say that cannot be done.  Should we find that it is so, and make sure that they have committed those kinds of activities, then they must be punished.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR B H CELE:  There can be all forms of punishment.  Sort of internally, and if it is beyond that, they should be sent to the police if they have committed crimes and all those kind of things.

I fully agree that in the past few weeks there has been an upsurge in violence, starting with Umkomaas.  Fortunately the Minister of Safety and Security of the Province, together with some members of the Committee visited the place where eight people were killed.  The tendency is that people rush to say are they not members of the ANC, if those people belong to the ANC, and we shout too much if the other people, the IFP die.

Maybe we need to move these colours from the faces of the people, whether they are ANC or IFP, and begin to deal with people of KwaZulu-Natal that are dying.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR B H CELE:  That will help us to look at them as people and human beings that have lost their lives, and the relatives that have lost their relatives, their fathers, their mothers, sons and daughters.  We push back this sort of membership, because they become some points, they become some goals, how many have scored.  We should begin to thoroughly deal with these people as human beings.

As I have said, there have been problems, there is no doubt about that, starting from Umkomaas, moving to Burlington where sometimes it is three members of the IFP who died, and sometimes two members of the IFP died.  It does not matter how many, but those are the people and that should be condemned fully in the strongest terms.  The people who committed that should be hunted by the police and be put where they belong, whether they are ANC, whether they are IFP. 

Another thing that I did not hear here when people spoke about the Burlington incident, is that the police surrounded that place and found seven illegal guns on a high official of the IFP.

AN HON MEMBER:  There were nine.

MR B H CELE:  Whether it was nine or what, but that number, seven or nine illegal guns were found there.  Nobody spoke about that.  Whether it was done by ANC or IFP, nobody should keep seven guns and half a bucket full of bullets that were found by the police there.  It would be nice to hear, one day, who really brought them there, because it looks like they just came.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  They were brought to the Treasurer of the IFP in the place.  So those are the things, that from this House, we cannot defend.  Those things should be condemned and we should try to find answers and stop them.  We cannot be brave to come and defend such activities here. 

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  I recognise that the member is standing.  That could indicate a point of order.

MR P POWELL:  Mr Speaker, I wanted to merely ask whether the hon member would take a question.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Will the hon member take a question?

MR P POWELL:  If he is asked a question.

MR B H CELE:  No, no.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  He is not going to take it.

MR P POWELL:  He is afraid.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  So proceed.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR B H CELE:  So as we have said that we will check what has happened there, we have checked.  We have had meetings jointly and separately with the leadership of the IFP trying to find what happened and all that, we still stand by those words.

Should the leadership of the ANC discover that the members of the ANC did do wrong things there they will be punished according to the internal discipline of the ANC.  Hence we have already held two meetings with the leadership of the IFP trying to find out what had happened in the area after the incidents.  We are having another meeting, the third one, to find out what has happened there.

So when we deal with these matters make sure you put aside the colours, you put aside the membership, tear it out of them, and we deal with the violence, and we should be hard on that form, that we deal with the violence on that score.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Again when members make statements, it could be political statements, but it becomes worse when the so-called peace workers like Lukhele goes on radio and says there will not be peace.  This person is a field worker for a peace structure, he says that there will not be peace, he represents the IFP in the peace structure.  That is what he said.  He said there will not be peace.

How do you keep a person in the peace structure that says there will not be peace?  Why do we keep that person there?  Why is he there if there will not be peace in that particular area?  He is supposed to be the peace worker.

I will urge the IFP leadership, not for the first time, he has misused the offices of peace at Empangeni, to go and issue the statements on behalf of the SPUs, on behalf of the party from the offices.  It is time that we act and cut off those things so that we come here when we talk about peace.  Such things should be eliminated so that we can look forward to dealing with peace.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Finally, usually when there are problems, as there are, people threaten to withdraw from peace talks.  If you look at one highly respected international figure, Comrade Arafat, when he says ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

AN HON MEMBER:  Respected by whom?

MR B H CELE:  I make peace with my opponents, and make business with my friends.  Indeed you cannot go around with your colleagues, with your friends making peace with them, they will think you are mad upstairs.  You make peace with your enemies, with your opponents and you make peace where there is a problem.  Nobody makes peace on a picnic.  You make peace on the battlefields.  So people must not keep on threatening that they will withdraw from peace where there is a problem.  It is where peace is needed most, where there is a problem, and that is the way to follow.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR B H CELE:  And finally, to quote Comrade Mtshali of Mozambique when he says, "I can choose my friends, but I cannot choose my neighbours".  We are here as neighbours and you did not choose to be our neighbours, we did not choose to be your neighbours, but coexistence comes exactly from that.  We must know that we will remain, no matter whether we like it, we will remain neighbours.  It is up to us to choose to be friends or not.  We may not stay friends, but we will be neighbours and we must respect that.  I thank you so much, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Cele.  That closes that item of the Order Paper, item 8.7.  Fortunately it also closes the business of the day.  We have come to the conclusion of today's business, and before I make any further announcements, I will just allow the Premier to make announcements as he pleases.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I would like to thank the hon members for a very productive two days session of Parliament.  I think we have made good progress within our Legislative task.  I would like to congratulate ~Inkosi~ Ngubane, as Minister for the Environment, for this very huge step in the amalgamation of the two conservation bodies, creating a new Board.  This is a huge step on our harnessing eco-tourism as the growth potential for this Province, and also the fact that communities will be participating, is another giant leap forward.  I hope the officials who will be put in these jobs will carry through the spirit and intent of the legislation that we passed today.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE PREMIER:  I would like to of course address an issue which is not very pleasant.  I understand that there are a number of public announcements that are being made by officials of the Department of Education, about cuts in the number of books that will be supplied to schools, about all sorts of things which may still be proposals to deal with the over-expenditure in education, but they are not yet Government policy in this Province.  The Cabinet has not agreed to any process as far as cutting of books or teachers and so on.

Now when officials announce these things prematurely they just create a problem for the Minister, and for the Cabinet.  I wish that this message is carried forward, that we will supply books to all the pupils of this Province, and to all schools in this Province.  That is the Government's position.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE PREMIER:  And then of course I would like to wish my colleagues, all of you, a very happy Christmas, and until we meet again next year, God bless, and goodwill to all men and women.  Thank you.  

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Premier.  I take this opportunity to announce that we are still proceeding with the dinner to which all members have been invited at the ~Ulundi~ Holiday Inn.  I hope all members have received their invitations.

I also take the opportunity to, on behalf of the Speaker, myself, the Chairpersons, and the Deputy Chairperson thank you in this House for the co-operation that you have given us and the headaches that you have obviously afforded us during the whole of this year.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  It is our pleasure.

THE DEPUTY SPEAKER:  If we were to sit here and not marvel at the manner in which you give us problems, it would not be Parliament.  We would slip and we would eventually end up not being presiding officers.  I hope that all of you will obviously have a good festive season and that we all come back next year, those of us who did not leave this Parliament and resign this year.  Thank you very much.  I now declare the House adjourned sine die.  The House stands adjourned sine die.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED SINE DIE AT 19:15


