


FIFTH SESSION / 





SECOND SITTING		:	NORMAL	:	1, 2 AND 3 JUNE 1998
								




 								
								

	VOLUME 6 / 
	1998







SPINE:	VOLUME 6 1998
















HANS\COV698

	DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FIFTH SESSION
	SECOND SITTING - FOURTEENTH SITTING DAY
	MONDAY, 1 JUNE 1998

THE HOUSE MET AT 10:30 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, PIETERMARITZBURG.  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 no announcements to make.

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

The hon the Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  We have learnt with great sadness that once again there have been a number of deaths in this Province.  11 people in a bus died near Richmond.  Motor vehicles and all those forms of transport have become a part of our culture, a part of daily usage in our lives.  The items that we use on a daily basis should not lead to peoples deaths.  If people were being electrocuted daily we would have to do something about Eskom and the electricity distribution companies.  I think if people are dying so often from something that is part and parcel of our daily lives, there is something wrong.  I would just request, with your permission, that we observe a minute of silence just to register our concern.

THE SPEAKER:  All stand.

MINUTE OF SILENCE IS OBSERVED

THE SPEAKER:  May their souls rest in peace.  Amen.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hon Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Could I table two documents.  The first is the memorandum on the proposed Planning and Development Act.  Secondly, could I table the report from the Local Government Portfolio Committee on amendments to the Bill which will be before this House as soon as the power supply has been restored in the administration section.  But I do have a copy of it to table.  It will be here I believe in the next 15 to 20 minutes.  Thank you, hon Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  No further tabling of reports.  May on behalf of the House take this opportunity of congratulating the hon the Premier, Dr B S Ngubane, on having an honourary doctorate conferred on him by the University of Zululand.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  I am sure there is no opposition.  No opposition to that motion.  I accept that.  Now we proceed on to No 8.

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

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Sorry, I had not realised, under item 7, I have a notice of motion.

THE SPEAKER:  Notice of Bills.

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS 

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I would like to move in terms of Rule 104(g):

		THIS HOUSE NOTING THAT:

		1.	In terms of Section 196(7)(b) of the Constitution, the Premier of each province is required to nominate a person for appointment to the Public Service Commission;  and

		2.	In terms of Section 196(8)(b)(i) and (ii), the commissioner nominated by the Premier must be recommended by a committee of the Legislature that is proportionately composed of members of all parties represented in the Legislature, and supported by a majority of members in the Legislature.

		HEREBY RESOLVES:

		To instruct the KZN Parliamentary Executive Board to proceed with the above matter in accordance with the Constitution.

Mr Speaker, I would like to move that in terms of Rule 104(g), which is the Rule dealing for a notice without motion.

THE SPEAKER:  That is all right now.  Yes.

THE MOTION AS MOVED BY MR TARR - PASSED (See proceedings hereunder)

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you.  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of this hon House I shall move:

	Noting that in view of the proposed strike by SADTU demanding that a centrally determined teacher/pupil ratio and a moratorium on teacher retrenchments prevail.  Furthermore, they are also proposing limited hours of tuition from 9 June and a full strike from 12 June.  Hon members of this House and as concerned parents we need to condemn such action in the most severe terms as our children are going to be the losers.

	This hon House also calls for sanity to prevail so that our children, who are the future leaders of tomorrow continue with their studies without any interference from teacher unions who lack transparency.

Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Meer.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Sorry, Mr Speaker, on a point of order.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, there appears to be someone talking rather loudly behind in the lobby.  I do not think it is acceptable behaviour.

THE SPEAKER:  Behind the lobby.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  It appears to be out there, because it is quite unusually loud.  I am not sure what it is.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Edwards, for that.  Can the Secretary look into that please.  I am given to understand, Mr Edwards, that those are the interpreters.  It just so happens that their voices are heard, and that is what is disturbing you.  Sorry about that.  I will therefore call upon Mr Meer.

MR I C MEER:  Thank you, sir.  I will move the following motion on Tuesday, 2 June 1998:

	Noting that when the ~Apartheid~ regime assumed power, 50 years ago, the only organised opposition in the country was the 1946-1948 passive resistance against the unjust law, the 1946 Act denying equal voting and land rights to people in South Africa; and

	Noting that in that liberation struggle over 2 000 resisters went to prison from the resistance site, now declared a National Monument, the Garden of Remembrance at the corner of Gale Street and Umbilo Road in Durban;

	This House welcomes the two functions organised by the Liberation History Foundation in Durban at the Liberation Tower, the site of the Durban Central Prison, at the corner of Commercial Road and Walnut Road and at the Garden of Remembrance on Sunday, 14 June 1998 and calls upon all the people of the Province to pay tribute to those resisters who laid the foundation for a non-racial democracy now achieved in our country.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move tomorrow in this hon House as follows:

	That this House resolves to request the hon Premier-in-Cabinet to take all steps that are necessary to:

	1.	accelerate the pace of promotion of economic activity in the informal sector; and

	2.	to ensure that the King Shaka Airport is built within the declared time period; and

	3.	to persuade the central government to make Durban a duty free port.

Thank you.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hear! Hear!  Yousuf, the NP killer.

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that at the next sitting of this House I shall move the following motion:

	Noting:

	1.	That the NP is objecting to legally entitled voters who used their democratic right to vote for the party of their choice in Ward 7;

	Believing:

	1.	that the NP registered non-residents of Ward 7, living in Durban and greater Northdale;

	2.	that this practice of illegal registration of voters has exaggerated the support for the NP in Ward 7;

	3.	that, given the NP's history of undemocratic practices of the past they do not understand democracy.

	This House resolves and calls on:

	(1)	the NP to accept defeat gracefully, for the more it objects to the ANC's victory in Ward 7, the more the Nationalist Party demonstrates that it is politically bankrupt and is now like the Titanic sinking.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Sorry.  No, Mr Bhamjee, I am sorry I did not put my microphone on.  I said, while I thank you for that motion, a great part of what you said should have been said in the debate. Be that as it may.  Mrs Cronje.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I wish to move a motion in terms of Rule 104(g), and I apologise to the other parties that I did not show this to them earlier.  It has unfortunately only come to my notice in the House.

MOTION:

	Noting that today is the Commencement of Child Protection Week;

	This House resolves to observe a Minute's Silence at 12  today as will be done in the rest of the country to observe the beginning of this important event.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, there have been two motions moved in this House this morning, motions without notice.  I have listened to what Mrs Cronje had to say in terms of Child Week, and I am fairly confident that nobody in the IFP would object to that, and we would support that, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  I am rather concerned about the first motion moved by the Chief Whip.  Should that be put to the House, regarding the appointment of an official.  That should not be put to the House.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Yes, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Sorry, the ANC will support that.

THE SPEAKER:  I am going to put the matter to the House, although it was only the ANC and the IFP that have supported that motion.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, the National Party will support both those motions without notice.

THE SPEAKER:  There we are.  The DP?

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, the Democratic Party will also support both motions.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  And the Minority Front?

MR A RAJBANSI:  We will support both motions, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Well, I will therefore put the motion knowing that it has unanimous support.  I therefore put the motion to the House.

	Noting that today is the Commencement of Child Protection Week;

	This House resolves to observe a minute's silence today as will be done in the rest of the country to observe the beginning of this important event.

THE MOTION AS PROPOSED BY MRS CRONJE - PASSED

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

8.1	KWAZULU-NATAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BILL

THE SPEAKER:  The first person to address the House will of course be the Minister of Finance, the hon Mr Miller.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Mr Speaker, I address you today in my capacity as the Minister of Local Government and Planning, but I am indeed honoured that you recognised me as the Minister of Finance.

Mr Speaker, today, the 1 June 1998, and it will be remembered as a very historic day in the field of development planning for more reasons than one.  In the first place, it marks the day on which the Development Facilitation Act comes into effect in this Province in practical terms, because from today the Development Tribunal will start receiving applications submitted in terms of the Act.  The official opening of the doors for Development Facilitation applications is a truly significant event in that it will facilitate and accelerate development, especially housing development, in areas where progress has been retarded by land- legal problems.

1 June too, sir, is also very significant because today we place before this House our Planning and Development Bill to seek the support of the House for it to become law.  It is the first major piece of new legislation on planning and development in the last 50 years, because in terms of this Bill, should it receive the support of the House today, which I believe it will, we will also be repealing the Town and Regional Planning Ordinance of 1949.  We are only a year short of 50 years since that legislation came into force and effect, although of course it was amended from time to time in those years.

It is my honour today to introduce the KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Bill to the House.  It is seldom that I can recall, Mr Speaker, in my political career anyway, when I have tabled a more important piece of legislation.  The KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Bill will, if passed, result in the repeal of all the old order planning legislation in the Province.  As I have already indicated, some of this dates back to 1949.

The need for this legislation will become apparent to hon members when I explain that in the old dispensation planning and development in the Province was fragmented, and was applied through national legislation in areas which were previously administered by departments at national level, and through separate legislation in the former KwaZulu self-governing territory, and in that part of the present day KwaZulu-Natal which was under the jurisdiction of the old Natal Provincial Administration.  In the new constitutional dispensation, the legislation applicable to the former KwaZulu Administration has been withdrawn from provincial competency, and is now regarded as national legislation.  The remaining planning and development legislation, which was assigned to the Province, was in desperate need of revision, as it did not adequately address the new constitutional dispensation, or the new legislative framework for development planning at a national level.

The process which ultimately placed this Bill before us here today, Mr Speaker, started way back in 1994 when, in July of that year, in terms of Cabinet Resolution 72, all departments were instructed as follows:

1.	Firstly, they were instructed to review and where necessary, update or repeal any ordinances, laws or provisions in such ordinances which are no longer relevant or no longer of practical application.

2.	They were also instructed to consolidate those ordinances of the former Province of Natal and those laws of the former KwaZulu Legislative Assembly, which relate to the same or similar subjects, into one concise Provincial Act.

The following three objectives were then added to the two above:

1.	That the legislation should fully endorse the new found relationship between national, provincial and local government in terms of the Constitution;

2.	That legislation should clearly spell out relationships with other provincial and national legislation, so as to provide a consolidated legislative framework for ensuring sound planning and speedy access to land for developmental purposes; and 

3.	Finally, the legislation should introduce new concepts where necessary to facilitate planning and development whilst simultaneously protecting valuable resources.

It was precisely with these five objectives in mind that my Department initiated the drafting of unitary planning and development legislation for the Province, which is now tabled for approval in this House.

I want at this juncture, Mr Speaker, to pay particular tribute to the Town and Regional Planning Commission who were requested by the Department to manage and facilitate the process which gave birth to the Bill we have before us today.  The contribution they made to the process will only really be appreciated when we see and put into practice the new legislation which we have before us.

The Bill has been the product, Mr Speaker, of an extensive consultation process and interaction with all relevant stakeholders.  The formulation of the legislation was from the outset managed by a representative Steering Committee, which included both the public and private sectors.  I can confidently inform this House today that as a result of this approach the Bill enjoys a high level of consensus and general support.  I can also proudly tell you that we in KwaZulu-Natal can hold our heads high as this legislation has been very favourably commented upon by the forum for Economic Development and Planning, and in fact on more than one occasion we as a Province, both the Ministry and its officials have been asked to give presentations of this Bill to visiting delegations from other provinces in an effort to assist them develop their own planning legislation.

When the Bill becomes an Act, Mr Speaker, the principles in the Act will bind all organs of State, and will be applied in the preparation and administration of development plans.  These principles also fully incorporate all the principles of the Development Facilitation Act and are therefore fully aligned with national legislation.  I want to emphasise this point, that in fact we have here a Bill before us today which under no circumstances will be found to be in conflict with the DFA, yet in many instances has expanded upon fundamental principles in the DFA and so we have complimentary legislation, not legislation which, will be in conflict at any time.

There will be considerable overlap in the statutory functions and responsibilities of the bodies envisaged in terms of this Bill, and those envisaged by the DFA.  Thus it has for this reason been decided in the case of the Planning and Development Commission, and the Appeal Tribunal, to form single statutory bodies which will serve the purposes of both sets of legislation.  Further details on the establishment and responsibilities of these statutory bodies are provided in the explanatory memorandum which I hope by now all members have, if not, it seems as if they are about to be handed out.

I want to make mention of the fact that as from today, Mr Speaker, in this Province we have a parallel process which developers can follow in submitting development plans.  As at today they can still do so in terms of existing legislation, the 1949 Ordinance, as amended, or they can choose the DFA route, if that is the route they prefer.  During the process itself, a developer may switch once and only once from the one route to the other.  When our Development Bill becomes an Act then the two routes will be determined either by our own Development Planning Act or by the Development Facilitation Act.

One might think why we have these two parallel routes to follow.  Will it not be cumbersome and difficult?  I want to assure members of the House that this will not be so, because there are certain situations where there are very difficult land-legal problems that the powers in terms of the DFA will in fact be necessary.  There are many other situations, however, where there are no such problems where it will in fact be more simple to follow the route that is prescribed in our own legislation.  In fact we have the best of both worlds in terms of the choices that are available to a developer.  We believe that with the training we have given to the members of the Development Tribunal, and to all the other officials that will serve the Development Tribunal and will be preparing development applications for placing before the tribunal, that the development professions will soon learn very quickly how to recognise which particular route will best suite the circumstances of a particular application.  So I do not envisage any problems arising.

However, nothing is ever totally cast in stone, and if, with experience over the years, we pick up problems then of course a House such as this is there specifically for the purpose of bringing about appropriate amendments to legislation.  That of course will be dealt with by those who follow us in this House.

To conclude, Mr Speaker, I reiterate that the need for a consolidated planning mechanism for KwaZulu-Natal, as envisaged in the Bill before us, must surely be self-evident.  A unitary and common planning system and legislation will save time and money, and eliminate the confusion and duplication created by the plethora of different pieces of planning legislation which were applicable in this Province in the past, and were our inheritance from all the different levels of Government that used to play a role in planning legislation in the Province.

The Planning and Development Bill has been specifically devised to meet the planning and development challenges that are unique to KwaZulu-Natal.  I am indeed convinced that this Bill, for which I seek the support of this Provincial Parliament, will help to facilitate much needed development and growth in all sectors of the economy, and as such will make a significant and lasting contribution to the upliftment of all communities in the Province.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I want to pay tribute to the Portfolio Committee for Local Government who have steered this Bill that appears before us through the parliamentary process.

I want to thank them for their co-operation, for the many sensible, albeit minor amendments that they suggested, I think it is indeed a singular honour today when I look across and I see the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee, to see him dressed in a smart suit and having had a nice haircut especially for today.  [LAUGHTER]  Thank you very much.

THE SPEAKER:  I will now call upon the hon Dr Sutcliffe, for 15 minutes.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Thank you, hon Speaker.  I rise in my usually distinguished way to address the hon MEC over there.  On behalf of the Committee, I would really concur with his words that today is an historic day.  Planning is one of those matters that invariably to most people appears to be quite technical.  This Bill is, I believe, a watershed not just for this Province, but probably for our country.  Two other provinces have passed similar legislation.  I will not mention them, but one of them is probably taking us back a step or two, in time to ~Apartheid~ days.  The other legislation is not quite as advanced as this.  So certainly, we as a Province are taking the whole issue of planning and development quite seriously.

There are three issues that this Bill tries to address.  The first is, the fragmentation in planning legislation.  Planning up to now has really been a preserve of primarily white areas, if I could put it that way.  It has not been a matter that has affected the Province as a whole.  This Bill tries to replace that fragmentation with an integrated approach.  Some of our colleagues will reflect on the fact that we require an enormous amount of education, to put into place institutions, particularly in the rural areas, to address the under-development and certainly the fact that very little planning has gone into non-urban areas.

A second aspect that this Bill addresses is the fact that at the moment we have planning legislation that is partial in orientation, it tends to have been fairly ad hoc in the way it was developed, and as the hon MEC indicated, since 1949, you have a plethora of regulations that have emerged.  For anyone to look at that in a holistic way is quite difficult.

The third issue which is quite important, and I am surprised the hon MEC did not reflect on it, probably because it is ANC policy and maybe not IFP policy, is the fact that this Bill really takes the responsibility for planning away from a fairly centralised provincial level, and vests it in local authorities that have the competence to manage their own affairs, and in that sense that is extremely good.  It takes us beyond the notion that Provincial Government is there to dictate to Local Governments.  If Local Governments have the capacity to deal with planning matters, they must deal with those matters.

In that sense it is an extremely important piece of legislation.  It is simply saying that the Premier and/or the responsible Minister should intervene only when necessary, when a local authority has certainly not obeyed the law, or in fact they do not have the competence to deal with that.

This piece of legislation is addressing this fragmentation through an integrated approach, addressing the fact that the legislation is partial through providing a holistic body, and repealing basically much of the ordinance, and thirdly, that a more centralised approach within an approach that is devolving authority to the correct level.

In our deliberations as a Committee, there were four or five areas that we focused on.  The first very important principle that is embodied in this legislation, I am sure the hon Haygarth will talk about that, is the notion of deemed approval.  It is a philosophy that says that Government should be responsible.  Government is providing a service to our people.  Government should not stand there and simply take 18 months for a decision to in fact come out supporting or not supporting a development application.  What we are saying in this legislation is that once applicants have got their act together, they have made their submission and it is a correct submission, within approximately 30 days they should get a response as to whether or not that development can go ahead or not.  This is going to change the whole way in which Government works, whether it is Local Government, Provincial Government or indeed we hope even National Government, that they will begin to respond to issues timeously.

One important principle that we as a Committee focused on was the principle of deemed approvals.  You deem something to have been approved if there is no response from Government saying it has not been approved within a reasonable time.  That principle must be central to the legislation.

The second important aspect of this legislation is that it allows that parallel process as the MEC reflected on.  You can go the DFA route, the national legislation route as it were, which allows big developments, primarily housing developments, allows them quick and easy access.  They can get over their difficulties for planning very quickly.  This legislation allows the small developers to choose a much less costly route if they wish to, and also get decisions quite quickly.

A third important point that we raised in this legislation was to say that we must divorce political authority from the authority given to essentially administrative vehicles for implementing that policy.  Even bodies like the Town and Regional Planning Commission quite often end up taking political decisions.  We believe that we should be vested with the responsible MEC, or where there are conflicts between departments with the Premier-in-Executive taking those decisions.  We should not allow political decisions to actually be taken outside of political bodies.  That is the third principle in this legislation that we contributed towards.

Fourthly, the whole issue of compensation, which is a very difficult issue, where Government needs to build roads or put in roads.  It can be a costly mechanism when you are dealing with private property.  We are not taking away private property rights, but we are saying that there are certain limits that can be placed on those.

Hon Speaker, as a Committee, we held a number of hearings across the Province, and a subcommittee of the Portfolio Committee met with a technical team to draft a set of amendments.  Those amendments, and part of the reason for the delay in getting them to you, is that they number some 35 pages.  Many of those are minor and technical amendments.  The others tend to focus on the areas that I have touched on in my introductory comments.  I must commend the Committee for that, it was members of the Committee who really stuck to their task of reading this Bill thoroughly, of making the suggested amendments, and ensuring that we debated those in the Committee itself.

We need to commend Nerusha Naidoo in particular.  I believe she worked the whole weekend, until midnight last night to try and get these memoranda and the like before this House today.

Finally, hon Speaker, if I could just indicate, in the list of speakers we have today, because it is an inclusive Committee that we have, while it represents political parties, we have operated really in the interests of planning as a whole, and I must just report that because of that inclusivity we have included two speakers not wearing their political party hats.  The hon Alex Hamilton will be representing the ardent developers' interests, and the green party will be represented by the hon John Jeffery. 

AN HON MEMBER:  And what about you?

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I am fair.  The speakers today will touch on the issues.  This was a multi-party effort.  There really were not points of ideological or other difference in the Committee. I really have a lot of pleasure on behalf of the Committee, requesting this House to support the legislation.  Thank you, hon Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Dr Sutcliffe.  I will now call upon Mr Hamilton, to address the House for 10 minutes.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I do not know what it is about KwaZulu-Natal, but we have always enjoyed a dubious reputation as being one of the most difficult provinces to invest in.  Whenever I meet developers, friends of mine, or developers up in the Transvaal, they sit in their offices and they say, "God, we can never ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Where is the Transvaal?

MR A J HAMILTON:  Gauteng.  They can never get a development off the ground here.  It is part of the culture.

AN HON MEMBER:  Where is the Transvaal?

MR A J HAMILTON:  Sorry, Gauteng.  I corrected myself, Mr Speaker.  We have this kind of suspicious attitude here.  Sort of look at both sides of a tickey, back side and front side before we spend it, and by the time we have decided it is a good tickey the opportunity has flown out the door.  So a thrupenny bit for those youngsters that did not know what tickey means, Mr Speaker.  I suspect that the hon Mike Sutcliffe is well aware of what a tickey is.  He is not young enough not to know.  [LAUGHTER]

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, can I rise on a point of information.  In Durban when you refer to Tikkie, you refer to clowns.

MR A J HAMILTON:  To what?

AN HON MEMBER:  Clouds in the sky.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Mr Speaker, on a serious note.  I suspect that that was actually not a point of order, but anyway.  

THE SPEAKER:  He has got a yellow card. 

MR A J HAMILTON:  On a serious note, the important thing of this legislation, sir, is that it actually eliminates the bits and pieces of legislation which was often passed on an ad hoc basis, or as it was needed, or in a crisis situation.  It will result in much more decision-making devolvement to local authorities, allowing a quick answer philosophy to develop, helping to smooth the way for developers who come to our Province, or to our cities or one of our development areas and they want to know quickly whether they can do something.  They do not want to wait for three months or six months to find out whether they can proceed. 

Mr Speaker, what is also fantastic here is the deemed approval concept in the regulations.  It is a fantastic and wonderful innovation, and will go a long way towards preventing long delays, which are often unnecessary, and frankly stifle development in our Province.

Before I conclude, Mr Speaker, I think that high compliments are due to the Minister and his Department for this ground breaking initiative.  It would be remiss for me to allow the role played by the hon Sutcliffe and the Portfolio Committee in being so co-operative, pass by.  The meeting that I attended, I think I saved them from not having a quorum.  What I was going to say, I would like to backup the hon Sutcliffe's comments that the Committee was not acting in a party political way, but in the very best interests of the Province, and the hon Sutcliffe actually indulged me in a few queries I had.  So compliments to them, and compliments to this Parliament, and the Minister in having a Bill in front of it, as important as this.  I certainly support it.  Thank you, sir.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Hamilton.  Now of course as fate will have it, I do have to call upon the hon Mr J Jeffery.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I am going to touch on some of the environmental aspects that this legislation deals with, and talk about some concerns regarding that.

Consideration for the environment is obviously a key area of planning.  Developments need to be planned to have as minimal an impact on the environment as possible.  This legislation does incorporate some of those concerns.  In the principles at the back of the legislation, there is reference to procedures for adequate assessment of the impact of proposed policies and land uses on the environment, and also a principle that of environmental ethic of sustainable use must be promoted etcetera.  The legislation itself has a specific section, Section 31 which is titled Environmental Management, and gives the Minister the power to prescribe matters relating to the assessment of environmental impacts of proposed developments, and to prescribe areas and features as special case areas or features.  It then goes on to amplify those powers enjoyed by the Minister regarding the environment.

Whilst it is good that environmental planning is considered as part of overall planning for the Province, I do want to raise some concerns.  The first is that the environmental section is a relatively new one in the history of the Bill, and it is only the more recent draft of the Bill that has beefed up the Minister's powers as far as the environment is concerned.

I understand that this is in line with discussions that one has heard about at the level of the Executive regarding rationalisation, and the question of the place of the environmental Chief Directorate.  But of concern, and just to highlight it as a concern, is the need that if there is going to be restructuring, if the MEC for planning, in addition to planning and finance, and Local Government is also going to become the MEC for environment, there should be broader discussions around that, both within this House and within the affected departments.  The effect of the provisions is to make the MEC for planning primarily responsible for the environment as well.

The second concern is that, the heading section is entitled Environmental Management.  Environmental management is however a lot more than simply what is contained here, and this heading is a bit deceptive.  Environmental management is also related to issues such as waste management, environmental education and so on.  So one hopes that although these components have been included in the Bill fairly late, that attention will be given to seeing the environment in its proper context.

The third concern, Mr Speaker, is as the law stands at the moment, we have the national law, the Environment Conservation Act.  Section 21 of that Act gives the National Minister of Environment and Tourism, the power to identify certain activities that may have a detrimental effect on the environment, and to prohibit certain activities from taking place.  The Minister is then given the power to make regulations in this regard.  The Minister made such regulations on 5 September 1997 in which he identified a whole string of activities that would have a potential detrimental effect on the environment.  He then prescribed procedures to be followed for the approval of developments that fall into those categories.  That basically meant that scoping reports and environment impact assessments were to be undertaken where necessary.

Those regulations were devolved to the provinces, and at this stage they are devolved to the MEC for Traditional and Environmental Affairs.  There are certain areas of potential conflict.  I think as the Bill stands at the moment there are not, but when it comes to the drafting of regulations in terms of the Planning and Development Bill, one is going to have to be careful to ensure that there are not conflicts.

Areas where there could be conflict is that in terms of the National Environment Impact Assessment Regulations, where there is a certain category of developments that have to be decided on, at national level.  Those relate to where the activity concerned has direct implications for the national environment policy; where the environment under threat is demarcated as an area of national or international importance, and also quite importantly, when a National Government department, the relevant provincial authority or a statutory body is the applicant.  Developments that fall into those categories have to be referred to the National Minister.  There is no reference of that at all in the legislation.  The legislation before us basically gives the MEC responsible the power to make approvals or delegate this power to various people.

The second area is that the regulations do prescribe an environment impact process.  This legislation gives the MEC responsible the power to set out that process.

The last one regards appeals.  Where there is conflict or dissatisfaction with the decision according to the Provincial Bill, an appeal is made to the Appeal Tribunal.  As far as the EIA Regulations are concerned, where there is conflict, an appeal can be made to the National Minister.

Mr Speaker, those are some of the areas.  There is not an inherent conflict as the Bill is at present, but there is the potential for conflict when the regulations are drafted.  I really appeal to the Minister to give special attention to ensuring that there is consistency.

The one point to highlight as well is that in the Development Facilitation Act and the hon Minister has referred to it, makes provision for environmental procedures as well, but when the Development Facilitation Act was worded the specific reference to environmental evaluation was "an evaluation of the environmental impact in accordance with the integrated environmental management guidelines which are, from time to time, issued or amended by the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism".  So from the DFA's side, there was agreement that the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, the National Department, would be the body which sets out the environmental guidelines.

There is no such reference in terms of the Provincial Planning Bill.  Ostensibly the Minister can decide to start implementing his own provisions and his own policies.  I would really appeal to the Minister to ensure that the environmental component of planning is in accordance with the national norms and standards set by the National Department.  We have a National White Paper on environment.  We have a new National Environment Management Bill about to be tabled.

Mr Speaker, those are just some of the concerns to be raised.  In conclusion the environment is a sensitive issue.  One would hope that there will be ongoing discussions regarding the implementation of environment policy in the Province.  I thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Jeffery.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Haygarth to address the House for 12 minutes.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Thank you very much, hon Speaker.  First of all, I would like to say to the hon Minister that this proposed Bill is certainly a tremendous advance.  It keeps KwaZulu-Natal in the front row, I believe, of development which it has been since the earliest town planning legislation of 1934, followed by the 1949 legislation to which he referred.

I would particularly like to thank the Minister on both his and his staff's efforts to communicate the efforts which they had made to drill us, if you like, in the consequences of the Bill, and the benefits which will flow from it.  That was also conveyed to the public and the stakeholders involved in development.  A tremendous effort by means of slides and public relations documents were issued.  I think the Minister and his staff must be particularly commended on their efforts over a long period of time, more than six months, probably nearly a year to get the message over to the development public.

Dealing briefly with some of the clauses in the Bill, I would like to make reference on page 34, to Section 31(4) which says basically:

	Any regulation must be respected by the responsible authorities, the Development Tribunal and the State subject to the Constitution.

And later on in the Bill it provides:

	That the State shall be subject to the provisions of this Act.

To Local Government in particular, those provisions will be welcomed most.  They have suffered for years from Government departments, in particularly the Post Office, who have failed to meet the stringent parking requirements in any development project when they build a new Post Office.  The congestion and the utter difficulties that the public then has in using the facilities is beyond one's comprehension.  That one small aspect alone is making a tremendous contribution to the enforcement of planning conditions on all the role-players in a local authority area, in particular.

On page 36, and reference has been made to the provisions of Section 34(5), the requirement for decisions to be made within prescribed periods, and failure to do so being followed by deemed approval.  There will be, and there has been reaction to that, particularly from the larger local authorities who find perhaps that the time limits which will be fixed in the regulations will be very difficult for them to comply with.

I really think it is a matter of organisation.  How they handle the prospective development applications in their departments, and the philosophy which they adopt to those development applications.  To a developer time is money.  I saw a story the other day.  Dave Richardson, now a lawyer, was in his office in Port Elizabeth.  He had three trays, one was in, one was out, and the other was LBW.  That in polite terms was, "Let the so-and-so's wait".  That sort of attitude simply cannot be adopted for a development application, and one needs to go out of one's way to endeavour to compromise if necessary with the developer, and to come to something which will ensure progress.  The Point development is perhaps a good example of how developments can sit for whatever reason over a long period of time, and fail to get off the ground.

I hope that the Minister will continue his efforts, and ensure that the regulations are a realistic compromise between the needs of the developers and the reasonable requirements of those who have to give their approval.

In regard to page 41, on Section 42, there is provision for the removal of servitudes and restrictive conditions in respect of section 39 applications for the subdivision of land.  This has important implications for housing development in particular.  Under previous conditions those sort of things had to be removed by the President of the country himself.  This is now given to the Premier, and one can get on with these things which will make development easier.

Section 47 deals with prohibition orders and the failure to comply.  There are many, many people out there who are continually complaining about the failure of certain people to comply with the necessary regulations, but to get a prohibition order and effectively implement it is an extremely difficult and costly task.  In the interim those people who are affected by the flagrant disregard of the regulations are required to suffer.

Then on page 46, Section 51, there is the provision for compensation for financial loss for any development proposals that are put forward.  In particular, the recommendation that private land be zoned for public use.  A good example of this which has created problems over many years is the right of development authorities to zone private land, for example, public parks and open space.  Yet often they never had the money to implement those schemes, and so you had an owner sitting in a home zoned for open space, and nobody willing to buy a home.  This in particular had a poor impact on people like pensioners and those who could not find alternative accommodation.

This provision while it makes sense of giving compensation, it also gives the approving authority the right to resile, if you like, from the proposal and revert to what was necessary.  I think that is very good.  It also provides that the development authority may make the compensation payable by the applicant.  We can think of our colleague who sits across on the other side here who is wanting to develop the La Mercy Airport, the noise zone, of course the noise zone will have an important bearing on the residential areas and potential conflict.  What this Section 51 does is to say it can be that the compensation will be the responsibility, in that case of my colleague Mr Hamilton as Chairman of the La Mercy Airport development.  I think that is an important issue for the little individual who is affected by major developments in this regard, that they can seek recompense from the developer himself, and not the local authority.

Finally, I wanted to say, Mr Speaker, Section 53, the delegation of powers.  This is a very broad power given to the Premier to delegate any power to a suitable body to undertake this.  If you want things to happen I believe that delegation is the way forward.  It is important that the Minister has seen fit to take a broad view in this regard and to make sure that the facility is there for this sort of thing to take place in a proper way.

Lastly to my colleague on my right-hand side, I cannot miss the opportunity, when he refers to delegation, and I hope that he does recognise that the IFP and the NP are both supporters of that in a big way, and have been for many, many years.  Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Haygarth.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Ngidi, for 10 minutes.

MR N V E NGIDI: (Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  The advent of democracy in our country ushered in a new era.  An era where those amongst us who were excluded from development planning had opportunities opened for them.

However, one challenge still remained.  The ~Apartheid~ regime had created a plethora of laws by which they sought to legalise and institutionalise our exclusion.  It therefore became one of the first major objectives of the new Government to legally remove these offensive pieces of legislation.

The removal of these laws is not just a matter of choice for the Government, but a duty placed upon it by history.  If this Government is to be credible in the eyes of the people of this country, it has to be seen as a veritable instrument to give practical meaning to democracy in this country.  We have to ensure that our people see democracy, not as a tool of the rich and privileged to create for them opportunities to amass more wealth, but as a vehicle to express their aspirations long suppressed by the ~Apartheid~ regime.

It its practices, the ~Apartheid~ had economic planning instruments, which were meant to entrench minority rule in this country.  Development of black areas were linked to the development of white areas, and white business and trade.  Townships were built, not to resolve the housing problem for blacks, but was the development of glorified dormitories for the black labour force in industrial areas.  The classic example in this case being hostels that we have in this country.  This was coupled with the fact that because of the educational system the blacks, particularly the Africans had little hope of having developers among them.  Planning was conducted by white developers whose brief was to entrench the ~Apartheid~ rule.

Rural areas were totally ignored.  The only time there was development in rural areas was when there was going to be forced removal.  One cannot talk of development, where communities were removed to areas with no infrastructure and with no hope that the Government of the day was going to address this issue.  The urban areas were high on the priority list, with rural areas only considered when this was deemed expedient for further expansion of the urban areas or white business.  One has in mind the development and implementation of the concept of border industries.

A bye-product of this process was the fact that many Acts, Ordinances and bylaws were promulgated to deal with one aspect of development or the other.  There was little co-ordination in this regard and as a result confusion reigned.  The reply was not to integrate planning, as this would begin in a sense to undermine ~Apartheid~, but to create more unco-ordinated legislation leading to more confusion.  Integrated planning was an unknown.

The notion of sustainable development was non-existent.  The major objective for any development was how far did it go to entrench the ~Apartheid~ rule.  As a result there were a number of projects left unfinished, because as they were being developed it would be discovered that it would no longer serve in the interests of the powers that be.  That resulted in a lot of wastage, financially speaking.  Furthermore, there were no structures created to streamline development planning.  Matters were left with the individual local authority to do as they deemed fit.

The KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Bill can be viewed as an attempt by this Government to deal with the inequities of the past and begin in a real sense to address the historical imbalances.  The Bill addresses, inter alia, the situation of the disjointed legal framework for development and creates a piece of coherent legislation to apply not just to certain parts of our Province, but throughout.  It also ensures that development follows a particular plan and is not done to satisfy any myopic vision.  This kind of planning is cost-effective and prevents financial wastage.

One of the major innovations of the present Bill is the creation of a Planning Development Commission.  This Commission will have to ensure that the transformation that this Bill sets the stage for is really carried to its logical conclusion.  The soul of the Commission is to be found in clause 11(1)(a)(i) which provides as follows:

	To advise the Minister on the planning and development matters generally, and conduct research and assist in the formulation of policies, standards and guidelines on provincial, regional and local planning development.

The task of the Commission is quite wide, thus creating for the first time a body that is going to provide concrete and informed guidelines to development planning.

For the Committee to function properly, the Commission is given powers to set up special committees which will then consider specific and specialised subjects, and advise the Commission through report backs.  Furthermore, the Commission is given powers to demand information from any organ of the State which is then obliged by law to supply whatever information is required.  This means that the State cannot refuse to implement a developmental plan for some obscure reason, but will have to come out in the open.  This implies that transparency is  inherent to this Bill.

We will have to take great care in setting up this Commission.  We will have to ensure that the men and women who are chosen to work in the Commission are people we have confidence in and that they will really put to the fore the programme of transformation.  It is gratifying therefore to note that this House, through the relevant Portfolio Committee will be part of the process of nominating members.

The notion of integrated planning is now going to be part and parcel of developmental planning.  For instance, this Bill provides that development plans must take environmental issues into account.  This will put a stop to unscrupulous developers who are driven by the quest to make a profit and a fast buck.  They often want to implement development without considering the effects this development will have on our natural heritage.  The Bill therefore provides for a situation that while we do everything in our power to effect economic development, we must not forget the environmental development.

One of the most important innovations of the present era has been the participation of communities in development.  The basic tenant of the Reconstruction and Development Programme is that communities should be seen as partners in development.  In fact, communities must be provided with opportunities and platforms to determine the line of march as far as development is concerned.  This Bill appears to promote this notion through the provision of community participation.  This is a welcome development, particularly in the rural areas, where there are no developers of note, and where development must take into account certain peculiarities, especially in the tribal society.

Earlier I noted that the past Government ignored the concept of integrated development.  Sustainable development was never a primary consideration for development.  The Bill changes this.  Sustainable and integrated development have become the cornerstone of development planning.  The positive impact that this will have on our development cannot be overemphasised.  Any developer will be obliged to meet specific requirements for his developmental plan to be approved.  A developmental plan must promote, "health, safety, order, amenity, convenience and general welfare, as well as efficiency, economy and participation in the planning and developmental process".  The days of haphazard development are over.

Mr Speaker, while the provisions of this Bill are commendable, it has, however, some weaknesses.  One weakness is that it is urban in orientation.

THE SPEAKER:  The hon member has one minute.

MR N V E NGIDI: (Whip):  Due to the fact that most of the developers are in the urban areas, it will therefore not be easily accessible to rural areas.  Communities who have no experience in developmental planning will not be equipped with the knowledge on how to use the provisions of this Bill.  This means that even in urban areas, unless the Commission advises in that direction, communities in informal settlements will continue to be disadvantaged.  One hopes that the Department of Local Government will find a way of addressing these shortcomings.

Finally, one would like to say that this Bill deserves our support.  In a manner this is a ground breaking Bill.  It begins to address some of the fundamentals for transformation in our Province.

THE SPEAKER:  The hon member should take his seat.

MR N V E NGIDI: (Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  I will now call upon the hon Mr Nel for six minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  This is indeed an extremely important piece of legislation, and it is heartening to read the very first principle in Schedule 1, the principles underpinning the proposed Act, which reads:

	That planning legislation and the policies and procedures created thereby should be enabling and development orientated, rather than prescriptive or control orientated.

If that attitude pervades the implementation of this Bill, then certainly we can look forward to a period where development will be stimulated in this Province, and it is something we so dearly need.

Mr Speaker, the only regret that we would have about this Bill is the fact that it has been so long in coming to this Legislature.  I am sure that all parties share this, and the Minister himself would share this regret.  In the end I suppose that this rather long confinement, painful as it was in many respects, has actually produced legislation which is exemplary, and perhaps ahead of, as the Minister also indicated, not only of most provinces which do not have one, but even of some of the provinces which already have such legislation.

At this time of general transition and transformation in our country, it has been a difficult time for development.  Amongst other things, due to of the plethora of inherited legislation, many conflicting authorities that operated and had to be amalgamated, the loss of experienced staff in the process of transformation and the need to rethink development and the parameters of development in its entirety.  Then of course, perhaps more than anything, the uncertainty that all of this brought to those officials that remained in office, trying to administer development and development applications, who simply did not know what changes were in the offing and who were in some senses scared to take decisions because of the uncertainty around it.  All of this has had devastating effects on developers.

The hon Mr Hamilton, and the hon Mr Haygarth have referred to the fact that time is money, and that we in this Province in many instances, perhaps even lagged other provinces.  There are many projects that have failed because of delays.  Businesses have literally gone insolvent because of delays.

Recently I heard of a civil engineer, who was part of a consortium who coincidentally I spoke to about something else, and he told me that he was emigrating.  He said his syndicate had been awarded a development contract for some 600 low cost houses.  They had to wait for more than a year for the necessary final decisions to be made for them to actually start developing.  By that time they had literally gone insolvent.  He had sold up and finally in frustration decided to emigrate.  I am not suggesting that that is a desirable alternative for anybody to consider, but it indicates the level of frustration that people involved in the construction industry have to cope with.  It is something we dare not tolerate.

It is not unusual for applications for normal developments to take a year and a half to two and a half years, or even more.  The hon member is interjecting saying four years.  That is unconscionable, and as the hon Mr Hamilton has said, opportunities just simply slip by and go elsewhere.  The Point development, and it is not necessarily a fault only of the legislation in place or not in place at this stage, but that is one such opportunity which perhaps because of confusion, eventually just simply collapsed.

So, sir, it is a happy day when we can now finally stand here and approve this legislation which will set in motion a logical and streamlined route for development applications in this Province.  Of course there are going to be teething problems, and problems of implementation which have to be sorted out.  There are many potential conflicts, especially between different levels and departments in Government, and also of course the uncertainty and clashes between development applications and their impact on environmental matters, which also are handled by other departments.

The hon Mr Jeffery referred to the environmental regulations which were promulgated in September last year, which also poses certain problems for the implementation of this Bill.  But those will simply have to be addressed as we proceed.  The challenge is an extremely urgent one.  The major short term challenge is going to be that of capacity building.  The hon Mr Ngidi referred to the capacity which is so often lacking in rural areas.  We have seen also that in the departments the capacity is also lacking.  Whether they are understaffed, undertrained, or whatever it is, a whole combination of issues have to be addressed as a matter of urgency.

We have spoken, in other respects, often about the Department of Environmental Affairs which is charged with overseeing the implementation of the environmental regulations and certainly that Department has not got the capacity.

THE SPEAKER:  The hon member has 30 seconds.

MR W U NEL:  Thankfully the situation in the Department of Local Government is a much happier one.  But even there, a lot of work remains to be done to build this capacity.

The deeming provisions will be welcomed by developers, but it also is one of the tools that will force Government to respond and get their house in order.  I will conclude by saying that we hope this legislation will be implemented effectively with all due haste, and make this Province a leader instead of a laggard, will stimulate growth, will stimulate transformation in planning, and importantly will also make it possible for poorer communities and small developers to access the system quickly.

THE SPEAKER:  The hon member may now take his seat.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I will now call upon the hon Mr V V Mvelase, who will address the House for 15 minutes.

MR V V MVELASE:  Mr Speaker, hon Ministers, and hon members.  In response to the proposed Planning and Development Act introduced by the Minister this morning, I wish to congratulate the hon Minister who has vast experience in running Local Government.

This legislation will assist our people to be fully involved in their development.  People will choose the type of development they require.

For decades our people have been deprived of having the development of their choice.  Our small building contractors will benefit a lot.  I hope they will be empowered to receive loans from the banks to uplift themselves.

We black people, have been exposed to horrible things, which were referred to as development.  It was the settlement which created the so-called separate development.  We have seen settlements like Ekuvukeni, Nondweni and Waaihoek where our people were forcefully removed and settled in areas where they had to live in tents for years.  Until this day those places have not been developed.

The legislation will assist us in improving our areas like Clermont, Edendale, Machibisa, Driefontein and many other areas which were neglected by the former regime, because they refused to go to the so-called separate development areas.

AN HON MEMBER:  Do not forget that word, ~Apartheid~ regime.

MR V V MVELASE: 

TRANSLATION:  Mr Speaker, when I went over there, such as in Section 25 (d), I find what a lot of people sometimes think, particularly when it comes to nature, when they are against the building of game reserves.  

When one talks about development, people in rural areas think that now here it comes, they are saying they are going to develop us, they will establish townships in our areas.  As I have been talking about Nondweni and all other such areas.

Honestly, in fact, our people, especially in KwaZulu - I have never been anywhere else - they have always been fond of nature because when we grew up, a growing tree was not supposed to be chopped off and people were supposed to chop off only dry wood.  Why, because in chopping off this green wood, you are destroying trees that could be helpful to people, who may use the bark of a tree, like some of us, such as traditional healers.  Maybe even Mr Magubane, as he is just looking at me, a gentleman from our area, maybe he knows that from it we can get a magic medicine that induces vomiting.

Therefore sir, I am saying that this notion that says, look at those people, they do not want development, they do not want to move, such as in our area, for instance.  Now the hon ~Inkosi~ Ngubane. to whom I would have been able to explain the reason that causes people to oppose the building of game reserves is not here.

Those Afrikaners who were in charge before, were not explaining to the people.  The people did not get the chance for an explanation on how this would benefit them.  They would just say, "We are putting up a fence here.  You must move away, and game will go in here".  And then people would say, "Game will go in our place.  Here is a bad omen for us.  How can we move away because of game", instead of explaining clearly to the people that no, you see, this will benefit you in this way, therefore you can see there are now even committees of experts, who will be able to explain to the people.  

Honestly, this law will help us enormously, because a lot of things seem as if they do not work out.  It is because of the approach.  People are not approached appropriately and given opportunities of fully understanding this thing.

Therefore, Mr Speaker, with all my heart, I support this Bill very much because it will enormously help us.  Thank you, sir.  T/E

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you.  I will now call upon the hon Mr Rajbansi to address the House.

MRS C E GALEA:  Sorry, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Rajbansi.

MRS C E GALEA:  Mr Speaker, I just want to say it is about time for that moment of silence, just as a reminder.

THE SPEAKER:  I did not quite hear that.

MRS C E GALEA:  In this morning's motion, Mr Speaker, we said we would have a minute silence at 12, and I think we are almost there.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you for reminding me about that.  Now that you have pointed it out, the House will rise and observe this silence.

ONE MINUTE SILENCE OBSERVED

THE SPEAKER:  May their souls rest in peace.  Amen.

SINGING

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you for that.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Somlomo Baba.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Rajbansi.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Somlomo Baba.

THE SPEAKER:  On a point of order.  Yes.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA: [Mr Speaker, while you were standing up here, I saw the hon member, my sister, Happy Blose, sitting down.  Does she not go along with what you were saying]?

THE SPEAKER: Who is that]?

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA: [Happy Blose, the hon member was sitting down].

THE SPEAKER: [May ~Inkosi~ repeat, I did not hear because of this, I had not turned it off].

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA: [I was saying, Mr Speaker, I wish to hear from the hon member, Happy Blose, while we were observing the moment of silence, she was sitting down while all the members were standing].

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you for pointing that out.  The matter will be referred to the Whip and the caucus will deal with the matter.  We will now proceed.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I want to join the other hon members in congratulating the hon Minister, his Department, the team of consultants, technical experts and our legal advisors for having produced an excellent piece of legislation.  This Province is once again making history.  We have led the country in many respects, and today is another day that we are setting an excellent example under a very able Minister, ably assisted by the Chairperson and the members of the Portfolio Committee. 

I want to say to the hon Minister that as a former pairs division professional soccer referee, that setting excellent rules is not enough.  It is those who are going to apply the rules that are important.  I heard the hon Mr George Bartlett comment, that in some cases it was the bureaucrats who delayed the approval of applications for development for as long as four years.

Last night I was drafting a memorandum to the Land Affairs Committee of Durban, bringing to their attention the issue of outdated officials.  I know one of them has been selected to be a registrar in Durban.  But because of his negative outdated attitude, he delayed a development proposal for 36 months.  His superior approved it in 10 minutes.  I have, Mr Speaker, pointed out to the Chief Executive Officer of Durban two sets of applications made in similar situations.  One in Chatsworth, an applicant happened to be an Indian South African and the other application was made by a building society in Phoenix, and the same official recommended to his executive director that the Phoenix application be granted, and the Chatsworth application be refused.

The hon Minister indicated that an applicant can follow two routes.  You can also choose the DFA route.  My argument is why should it be necessary for a developer in this day and age when you have a development facilitation legislation, and there is tremendous emphasis on development, for officials at the ground floor level to still have negative attitudes.

To the credit of the political arm of Durban, and to the credit of the ANC and the IFP, I have seen the Land Affairs Committee, the Town Planning and Development Committee of the City of Durban, the political arm taking decisions.  Not political decisions but decisions of a professional nature to be user friendly, customer friendly and development friendly.  I have seen reports from the Real Estate Department and from the Town Planning Department suggesting that development be impeded.

I want to suggest to my hon colleagues to take note of the comments made by a United States citizen, the managing director of Mcdonald Burgers on the night when Mcdonald Burgers officially opened in Durban.  He said that in all parts of the country wherever he went to investigate the possibility of creating job opportunities, he found the coastal city areas to be the most backward, and most negative.  I want to refer to a particular portion of the hon Minister's speech which is on page 4.  He says, and I am going to quote him:

	Since it will take some time, after promulgation of the Act, for responsible authorities to convert their existing schemes and plans into development plans, section 27 provides that those schemes and plans will continue to be of full force and effect, and the laws under which they were approved, that is the Ordinance or the applicable KwaZulu legislation, will continue to apply in regard to any amendments to those schemes and the plans or applications in conflict with the plans, until conversion of the plans or until a date specified by the Minister.

I do not know whether this legislation deals with the removal of unfair town planning regulations within the same municipal area.  For example, in the urban areas of Durban there were double standards.  There were two different sets of regulations relating to the provision of outbuildings, in the former white areas of Durban and the former Indian, coloured and African areas.  Those regulations have not been amended.  We must not only emphasise speedy development or accelerate the pace of development, we need economic development.  We must not only look at the Pavilion or the great buildings that are rising in Durban.  You can have one Pavilion worth R1 billion, Mr Speaker, but you can also have about 100 mini Pavilions worth R5 to R10 million.

Recently, as a result of the negative attitude, a major developer from Cape Town wanted land to put up a building worth R35 million in South Central Council.  Because of the negative attitude of officials, at a time we are promoting and facilitating development, the developer went to another municipality.  Times are difficult.  We are levelling the playing field.  Economic development is linked to land development.  It cannot be separated.

Therefore I want to say to the hon Minister.  We should ensure that at a conspicuous space on the office wall of all these outdated officials, we should inform them that this legislation now exists, and that there should be no need for a developer to say: "I have now an appeal mechanism.  I have another route which I can choose".  There should be no need for a developer to choose another route in order for development to take place because officials and bureaucrats have been negative. 

THE SPEAKER:  The hon member has one minute.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I want to appeal to municipalities, that if they find people who are negative in the handling of applications for development, rather than force developers to take another route they should force these officials to take the easiest exit out of the municipal service.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  I now have the pleasure to call upon the hon J D Mkhwanazi.  I see he is not in the House.  I will therefore proceed.  Neither is Mrs Downs in the House.  I therefore call upon Miss Barrett to address the House for 10 minutes.

MISS B BARRETT:  Mr Speaker, hon members of the House.  I would like to begin by thanking the hon Minister, and the Planning Division headed by Mr Frikkie Brookes.  These officials have worked extremely hard to produce the Bill before us today, and have assisted the Portfolio Committee through the public hearings and the finalisation of recommended amendments.  We have ended up with a product accepted by all parties, which augers well for future development in this Province.

There was common agreement by all that the framework for planning and development needed to change in order to meet the demands of the new South Africa, especially in the areas of land tenure and low cost housing development.  Existing legislation could not meet the challenges of rapid delivery amongst the poorest of our poor.  This set the scene for the introduction of new laws and regulations at both national and provincial level.

The Planning and Development Bill follows the enactment of the Development Facilitation Act on 22 December 1995 and its regulations which were promulgated on 30 August 1996.  A year and a half ago, in November 1996, the Province of KwaZulu-Natal adopted the DFA, and during the interim period recognised the Town and Regional Planning Commission as the DFA Commission, and the Town Planning Appeals Board as the foundation of the Appeals Tribunal.

The main aim of the DFA, a piece of national legislation, was to introduce extraordinary measures to streamline and accelerate the implementation of the RDP in relation to land, by cutting through the bureaucracy and fast-tracking development applications.  This legislation contained a set of general principles for land development which would apply uniformly throughout South Africa to, inter alia, promote the integration of all aspects of land development - social, economic, institutional and physical; promote the availability of residential and employment opportunities in close proximity to each other; promote a diverse combination of land uses; discourage the phenomenon of "urban sprawl"; correct historically spatial patterns of settlement; and encourage environmentally sustainable land development practices.  In this regard, the DFA provided for the establishment of a Development Tribunal and an Appeals Tribunal in each province.  The Development Tribunal will have the power to grant total planning approval for a project within a very short period of time, including registration arrangements and the removal of all restrictive conditions.  In addition, with the DFA's system of initial ownership and special deeds of transfer, people in new housing developments can obtain much quicker access to grants and loans than is normally the case.

The DFA does not replace all existing legislation in this Province, and provides an alternate, quicker route to fast-track development, with uniform norms and standards.  However, KwaZulu-Natal was left with a proliferation of planning and development legislation from the former KwaZulu Government and the Natal Provincial Administration.  Hence, the aim of the Provincial Planning and Development Bill was to rationalise and consolidate the laws relating to planning and development, and provide for a simplified development application system and procedure that can be dealt with at the lowest level of government.

The next step for the designated Minister, the hon Mr Peter Miller, is the establishment of the Planning and Development Commission responsible for co-ordination and development in the Province.  The Development Tribunal and Appeals Tribunal have already been established.  The Development Tribunal has the authority, through the DFA, to make decisions and resolve conflicts in respect of land development projects; while the Appeals Tribunal has the authority to decide appeals arising under this Act and the DFA.  At all costs these bodies must consist of professionals representative of all interests in KwaZulu-Natal, because it is going to take decades for this Province to mend the results of discriminatory planning practices of the ~Apartheid~ Government, which served to marginalise the majority and the disadvantaged.

In paragraph 3.3.2 of the White Paper on Housing, recognition was given to constraints on planning and housing delivery imposed through past ~Apartheid~ policies that need to be overcome.  This paragraph read as follows:

	Inefficient and inequitable cities defined as: the geographic segmentation of living areas according to race and class, urban sprawl, and disparate levels of service provision and access to amenities in different areas make South Africa's cities very inequitable; inefficient and relatively expensive to maintain and manage.

Therefore, future planning and housing legislation must deal with the restructuring of ~Apartheid~ cities on a fair and equitable basis, and any new policies, strategies and legislative actions by the State should be particularly sensitive to the removal of entrenched discriminatory mechanisms and conventions.  Related thereto, the appointees to the Provincial Commission must be chosen on the basis of their sensitivity to these crucial issues.

The Planning and Development Bill also prescribes procedures relating to the assessment of environmental impacts on proposed development.  I know there are members in this House who are of the view that compulsory EIAs are going to hold up development in this Province, and that environmental requirements are too stringent.  This can be understood given the history of South Africa, and its flagrant disregard for environmental consequences, the conservation of sensitive areas, and the sustainable utilisation of natural resources.

But to answer my colleagues, South Africa has entered a new era where development by any individual or body, including organs of State, will be subject to environmental law.  By far the single, greatest violations of our natural heritage has been with the approval of the former Government.  Take a drive through the Mondi and Sappi forests in the high reaches of the Drakensberg, or look at the poor soil management along the catchment rivers to Lake St Lucia, which has caused silting at the mouth.  Take the RBM mining saga and their devastation of primary dunes along the pristine coastal areas of the North Coast.  These approvals were granted in the absence of a holistic planning framework and with no consideration whatsoever of the devastating environmental impacts these developments would have for decades to come.

Environmental planning concerns are not limited to sensitive conservation areas.  It is a process that must begin in the urban areas and with the planning of low cost housing developments.  All new housing projects must make provision for a public open space, so communities are in close proximity to a park or recreational area.  A successful project embarked upon in Cato Manor is the tree project, to plant fruit trees on housing sites within the project.  Not only will this project greatly enhance the aesthetics of the housing environment, but provide the residents with an additional source of free food.

In my opinion the term "integrated environmental management" is another term for "sustainable development", because it implies a development process that meets the needs of the present generation, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.  And it is going to be the role of this Parliament to ensure that fast track delivery, envisaged by this legislation, does not in any way compromise environmental concerns.  I fully support the view that development must proceed without the hinderance of excessively prescriptive or control- orientated mechanisms.  But development must be appropriate and sustainable, and promote a safe and healthy environment for its occupants.

In conclusion, development is set to move into higher gear with the enactment of the Provincial Planning and Development Bill, taken together with the DFA.  It is a Bill that places decision-making in the hands of the people.  Local Government will be able to make their own decisions and set their own priorities with respect to town planning and development.  Hence, Local Government must be actively encouraged to make full use of this development tool, in the quest to develop this Province to its full potential.

This Bill has my full support.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  It is now my pleasure once again to call upon Dr Sutcliffe.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I will be very brief, hon Speaker.  You have heard it all this morning from the environmentalists, to the developers, to the rural advocates, to the National Party.  I do not know what we would call them there.  Clearly this is a Bill that I think is going to impact on our Province in a very real way.  If I could echo my words before, thanks very much to our legal help, Nerusha Naidoo in particular, and thanks to the Committee itself.  I would therefore like to put this Bill before the House after the MEC has spoken.  Thank you, hon Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I now call the hon Minister Miller.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I am filled with admiration for the efficiency and determination and focus of Dr Sutcliffe this morning.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Point of order.  Yes.

MR W U NEL:  No, not a point of order, Mr Speaker.  Would the hon Minister take a brief question?

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Yes, I will, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, could the hon Minister please explain whether there is any significance in the physical resemblance between the MEC Dr Sutcliffe, and Mr Haygarth?  [LAUGHTER]

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I will answer that question for him, hon Speaker.  

THE SPEAKER:  Will the hon Minister please proceed.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Mr Speaker, I can only think that they jointly share a high level of testosterone, sir.  [LAUGHTER]

I have been particularly polite and nice to the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee on Local Government this morning, and perhaps this is one occasion where he thoroughly deserves that.  However, I do want to say that he really is a Johnny-come-lately when it comes to empowering lower levels of Government.  I want to assure him that those features of this Bill which empower Local Government have been part of my approach and psyche, and that of the IFP, and that of previous Governments that I have served for a very long time.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  I am glad we have found common cause at last.

Sir, in reference to the contribution from the hon Mr Hamilton, I am a little bit worried that many of the people that he has met from the Transvaal, and then he corrected himself and said Gauteng, have actually been the very type of developer that have been trying to get away with murder, and disobey the rules totally.  Generally speaking, when you really get complaints about delays, and about inability to develop, you actually first have to look at the quality of the application and whether the people concerned did not try and get away with murder right from the start.  I am not saying that there are not many situations where development could have been expedited, but with long experience I can tell you that generally speaking the majority of the reason for delays lies with the developer himself.

Sir, I want to hasten to reassure the hon Mr Jeffery concerning environmental issues.  May I first deal with the concern as to whether provincial regulation will perhaps conflict with national regulation.  When we draw the provincial regulations I am happy to confirm, as the legislation in fact makes pre-emptory, that those regulations will be drawn after consultation, thorough consultation, with the Portfolio Committee.  I therefore in a sense issue a challenge today to the Portfolio Committee to assist us and make sure that Mr Jeffery's concerns are addressed.  We have no intention certainly of, through regulation, causing conflict in the whole matter of environmental legislation.

I also want to draw attention to the fact that we have both a broad and a narrow definition of the word "environment", and in this Bill we are dealing not with the environment holistically, we are not dealing here with sites for the disposal of municipal waste, or with air pollution, with oil spills and that kind of aspect of environment.  We are dealing here with the effect of development applications and spatial planning on environmental issues.

Although we have in our new Government for KwaZulu-Natal separate planning and environmental competencies, and these are split between departments, the reality is that by far the bulk of the environmental competency, when it came to spatial planning, has always resorted under planning.  In fact, environmental issues have played a major role in the adjudication of spatial planning applications, and development applications for a very long time.  What we are really trying to do in our discussions about reorganising competencies is merely to place then where they logically belong.  But likewise I wish to assure the hon member that his concerns will be taken on board.

Interestingly enough, but I do not propose to go into it in any great detail, I obtained a legal opinion after our discussions last week on the whole question of the relevant sections in the Bill concerning the environment, and I am assured by senior counsel's opinion that in fact we are competent to legislate as we have, and that a situation can in fact arise under concurrent legislation, and subject to the Constitution where provincial regulations will in fact be superior in their application to national regulations.

However, having said that, I am not trying to signal the fact that we are heading for a period of conflict.  We will work together.  The environment interestingly enough never pays attention to political differences.  The environment, if you abuse it, will abuse mankind irrespective of political affiliation.  So strictly speaking, on environmental issues we really should try and find a consensus point of view across all parties in this House.  Particularly in regard to the issue of potential conflict in the case of an appeal mechanism, an appeal being made between the Appeal Tribunal versus the National Minister.  I in actual fact believe that it is preferable that appeals should be adjudicated by the Appeal Tribunal rather than a Minister individually, and wherever possible in our Province, particularly since the Appeal Tribunal carries the confidence of all political parties in this House.  I think it would be desirable for the Appeal Tribunal to handle these matters.

The hon Mr Haygarth, in a manner particular and peculiar to him, again made an excellent contribution on many of the technical aspects of the Bill, and I thank him for that.  He said the Bill is an advance, and I too share that sentiment.  But particularly I thank him for his recognition of the fact that the Department and its officials, even the Ministry if I might be so humble as to say that, went out of our way to communicate with the  Legislature.  I think that the dividend has been paid today in the sense that we have such a broad support, such a broad consensus on the Bill.

The hon Mr Ngidi said, amongst other things, that he was a little concerned at the urban bias of the Bill.  I want to put his mind at rest straight away, and to tell him that we have already workshopped this Bill very extensively in the rural areas, and in particular with those rural Local Government structures that we have at the present time, the regional councils.  We have, as a Department, provided funding, and technical and professional support to the regional councils in preparation for the production of their regional development plans.  These are specifically designed to empower rural Local Government to implement this legislation to the benefit of rural communities.  These rural communities themselves are fully involved in the preparation of sub-regional development plans where the specific needs of the communities will be addressed.

Interestingly enough, one of the points made by the hon Mr Ngidi were the fact that this Bill takes us away from ~Apartheid~ based planning legislation.  I do agree with him, but I want to tell the House about a supreme irony which has arisen in the presentation of this Bill to the House today, and that is that we were unable to repeal all the legislation that we would have liked to have repealed, because in fact a lot of legislation which affects planning in this country has been retained as a national competence.

Members might recollect that in my opening address today I said that legislation which had been applicable in the former KwaZulu self-governing territory, and which had been passed by the former KwaZulu Legislative Assembly has not been given to us as a provincial competency, but is regarded to this day as national legislation.  There are certain aspects of that legislation which in fact perpetuate ~Apartheid~ planning, and yet it is the present  Government which is totally opposed to ~Apartheid~ legislation which in an administrative way is perpetuating ~Apartheid~ legislation by not making it possible for us to repeal that legislation.  It is said again here that the reason for the delay is they want a uniform repeal of similar legislation nationally.

This quest for uniformity, Mr Speaker, is often a major problem.  The reality is, and I cannot see why it could not have been done, that if the necessary legislation had been assigned to us so that we could go about repealing it now, it would not have brought the house of cards tumbling down.  But because it in a sense would have been a recognition of an asymmetric approach towards provinces we were not allowed to do it.

I therefore say to the hon members on the other side of the House, we dearly need your support to stop this sensitivity about an asymmetric approach to things on some occasions.  For example, we are ready in this Province to upgrade all deeds of grant to full title.  Other provinces are not ready.  We are prohibited from doing so until they are ready.  So what is in fact happening is that we are choosing the lowest common denominator on every occasion.  The pace at which we can reform is driven by the province that moves the slowest.  I do not think that that is wise.  I do not think that is sensible, and I ask this entire House to support our approach when we try and change that approach to these matters.

I thank the hon Mr Nel, and I share with him the regret that it took so long to address the whole question of businesses which go insolvent because of delays.  That might or might not be the case, but I also join Mr Nel with the comments I made to the hon Mr Hamilton.  Many of those must look at themselves.  My hon friend, the former Minister Mr Bartlett, did interject during that little debate, and he said he had or he knew of a development where it took four years.  If it is the one which he shared with me, and the one where I have gone out of my way to help him, I think he, because he is intrinsically a fair man, would agree that if you change the goal posts as you go along in a development application, then it does tend to have a delaying effect.

MR G S BARTLETT:  It has got nothing to do with that at all.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Well, then it is not the one that you have discussed with me.

MR G S BARTLETT:  That is correct.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  I thank the hon Mr Rajbansi for his kind words, and I agree that good rules do not make for a good game.  I will not continue commenting.  He is not in the House to hear the rest I have to say in regard to his contribution.

I thank the hon Miss Barrett for her appreciation of the work done by the officials, and for her recognition of the fact that rapid delivery for the poorest of the poor will be one of the benefits we get from this legislation.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  I just want to reassure her that the Ministry and the Department support the idea of compulsory EIAs.  But I also want to remind those that say that this will cause a delay, that it is in the hands of the developer himself how quickly the EIA is done.  They know what the rules are for an EIA.  They will be paying the people that are going to produce the EIA.  They therefore have control over any slovenly or sluggardly approach, and it is their job so to do.

Finally, Mr Speaker, as the Minister responsible for placing this Bill before the House today, I unashamedly solicit the support of the House in passing this Bill into law so that we can bring it into force and effect as soon as possible.  Thank you very much.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  I take this opportunity of thanking all the members here for such profundity of thought that one has heard in this House for a long, long time.  I just hope that this level of debate will be maintained.  My only concern is that most of us tend to read our speeches.  A lot of us do that, but for those who find it absolutely impossible but to read their speeches, I will request them to acquaint themselves with their speeches or to have notes on which to speak, and not just read the speech.  Nevertheless, I am very happy with the level of debate, and I can only hope it is going to continue.

Lastly, I think it was the Whip of the ANC who requested that we should all at 12 o'clock stand in honour of her motion.  I wish to draw the attention of the House to the fact that I withdraw my remarks that I referred to these children as being dead, because I said, "May their souls rest in peace".  It was an incorrect manner of doing it.  I want to apologise to the House and record it as such.

We have come to the end of the debate, and I will take this opportunity to put this Bill before the House.  I put the question.

KWAZULU-NATAL DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING BILL - PASSED

THE SPEAKER:  That is the end of this session.  I will request that the House adjourns until 2:00 p.m. 

AN HON MEMBER:  Just one technical issue, Mr Speaker.  That the Secretary must read the short title into the record.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you for that.  Will the Secretary please read the title.  Please oblige the House.

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Planning and Development Act, 1998.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The House therefore will adjourn until 2:00 p.m. this afternoon.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE SUSPENDED AT 12:42
	RESUMED AT 14:04

THE SPEAKER:  We have just completed 8.1.

8.2	COMMITTEE STAGE : VOTE 14 (DEPARTMENT OF WORKS)

Is the Minister of Works available.  I propose that I will now leave the chair.

THE HOUSE RESOLVED INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE. 

MRS F X GASA THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES TAKES THE CHAIR.

KWAZULU-NATAL APPROPRIATION BILL, 1998.

VOTE 14: DEPARTMENT OF WORKS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  May the members take their seats.  Thank you.  The House has been converted into a Committee of Supply.  We now call upon the hon Minister to lead us through vote 14, Department of Works, the Reverend C J Mtetwa.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Madam Chair, before you commence.  It would appear that the House has not been given a speakers list as yet.  I think we could find ourselves in a bit of difficulty.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Could I ask the Whips to assist me there.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Madam Chairperson, the Whips have prepared the speakers list.  I suppose it simply has not been distributed.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Madam.  Could I have the list submitted quickly.  If there are any changes I will depend on the Whips to assist me.  Thank you.  Do I have the permission of the House to proceed?

HON MEMBERS:  Yes.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I now call upon the hon Minister.  Thank you, sir.

REV C J MTETWA: (Minister of Public Works):  Madam Chair, and the House, in my preamble last year I emphasised the point that the Department of Works was a service department.  It is quite clear that this point was not well driven home for the mere fact that my Department's budget is still scrutinized in isolation, and not together with those of its client departments who are expected to suspend capital and sometimes maintenance funds to my vote.  It is a serious misrepresentation sent to the taxpayers that the Department of Works had spent R3 on every R1 of capital investment in the 1997/1998 financial year.

It was not my intention, Madam Chair, and the House, to highlight the budget related matters at this early stage of my speech, but because of the damage these vibrating reverberations will have on the already concerned society, allow me to resort to mathematical computations, as we all strongly believe that the figures never lie.  In the 1997/1998 financial year, my Department spent R477 million on capital investment or projects, plus R311 million on maintenance and other services, while expending R179 million on the entire administration of the Department.  Carrying out simple mathematical computations it gives us the following ratios: Works had spent R1 on every R2,7 of capital investment plus R1,7 on maintenance and other service in the same fiscal year giving a final ratio of 1 to 4,4.  I will not give details of the expenditure, but for those who are doubting Thomases, I would like to refer them to our "1997 Annual Report", and I would further urge them to visit all the sites quoted in the Annual Report to satisfy themselves as to whether a particular project was actually constructed, or is still under construction.

The Finance Portfolio Committee has recommended that the Department of Works be investigated.  As there are no terms of reference yet, one wonders whether they intend to investigate the underfunding, or understaffing or the efficiency of the Department.

I request this hon House, through you Madam Chair, to examine all the financial statements and records in my Department, and thereafter undertake a journey to all sites where we say that work has been performed.  This will set the record straight and the minds of the taxpaying public will be at rest.

I am proud to say that the ratio previously mentioned excludes 174 projects undertaken under the Reconstruction and Development Programme involving R33 million.  These were community based programmes driven by my Department.  The funds came from the National Department of Public Works, but salaries of employees and support structures came from my Department.  If this is not sufficient to satisfy the appetite of the House, I would like to remind the Provincial Parliament that last year in my budget speech, I mentioned that the Department had embarked on a training programme for students to qualify as engineers, architects, quantity surveyors etcetera, in order to eliminate the every day cry: "There are not enough engineers or architects in the Province".  These students are offered bursaries by the Department.  We see the development programme as one of the best alternatives to capacity building in the Province and empowering the previously disadvantaged individuals.  Where does the money come from to finance this noble undertaking?

The funds come from the Department of Public Works' Administration allocation.

Madam Chair, if there had been no derogatory report on the Department of Works, my opening remarks would have been based on the performance of the Department.  In the past, my biggest concern was the under-expenditure experienced by my Department.  The ball game has now completely changed.  I am now concerned about a possible over-expenditure, ie creating assets and providing services with no funds.

In most cases we find ourselves in this predicament because of unhonoured promises made by some client departments.  The norm is for a client department to forward a request for a service, stating that funds would, on demand, be suspended to my vote for the creation of assets to the client's specification.  In good faith the Department would commence planning and execution of the project, not suspecting that the funds would not follow.  Nevertheless most departments transfer funds as agreed.

Madam Chair, it is obvious a new budget format will have to be instituted, and that format should ensure that all funds, to be suspended to the Department, appear in the Department of Works' printers proof.  A further requirement would be to suspend funds solely per service on a multi year cash flow basis.  Should a service be delayed, funds must be rolled over to the next financial year.  These roll-over funds must however be guaranteed in order to balance the books for that specific service.  In this way, all the funds will have been timeously suspended to the Department of Works and commencement with planning and design of projects can take place in a simultaneous systematic manner.  At the same time, this will improve service delivery in the Administration and admirable support given to the Good Governance programme.  My Department is committed to customer service, speedy service delivery and above all an increase in productivity and efficiency.

I will now discuss the programmes within the Department.  Madam Chair, my Department would like to highlight the following achievements.

I reported in my previous budget speech that my Department was experiencing countless problems in the filling of management posts.  My Department has been able to fill most of these posts, except for three Director posts, and will enable my Department to provide a better service to its clients.  The filling of posts at lower ranks is still a problem because of the budgetary restrictions, and this impacts adversely on the functioning of my Department.  The Department will not fill all the lower ranked posts but will only fill key posts.

In order to reduce cases of fraud and to provide an acceptable level of administration the Department employed private sector auditing consultants over the last financial year.  Irregularities to the value of R7,456 million were identified.  An amount of R1,196 million was recovered and disciplinary action against 51 staff members was recommended.  Most of the remainder of the irregularities is in the process of being administratively rectified.  A number of ghost workers were found through the head count.  I must, Madam Chair, mention that some of the "ghost workers" were not actually ghosts, but employees who were transferred to other provincial departments during amalgamation and still remained on the Department of Works payroll.  They have since been removed from my Department's payroll.  Out of the salaries that were changed to hand cheque payments in respect of employees who were not identified during head counts, 44 cheques have not been collected.

The Department also discovered cases of former employees of the Department who had passed away, but their salaries continued to be paid into banking accounts.  My Department is busy following up these cases in order to effect the reversals.  In all cases PERSAL payments have been terminated.

Madam Chair, my Department is keen to fight and eliminate fraud.  The common irregularities are double payments which are being made to suppliers or contractors, and payment for work that was not carried out.  My Department is now investigating these cases.  There are nine officers who have been suspended for being involved in irregular payment to contractors.  The misconduct hearings are now being conducted, and the appropriate punitive measures will be applied in terms of the Public Service Act, should they be found guilty.

After a long process of negotiation between my Department and the Department of Education and Culture, an agreement was reached to transfer and absorb the staff attached to the various Works components of the former own affairs departments in the approved establishment of the Department with effect from 1 April 1998.  I am aware that this will not be a smooth transition.  Already there are problems being experienced in the areas of merit awards and personal profiles.

The line function of my Department is to provide a service to client departments.  However, the administrative support within the Department must be strengthened and control measures put in place in order to stay within the budget.  I will therefore briefly explain what my Department will do to stay within the budget.

The Department will stay within its budget for Programme 1.

56 employees who will reach the retirement age of 65 during this year have been identified.  The saving that will be created will, to a large extent, be absorbed by the payment of leave gratuities.  The Department will not fill all the posts, but consideration will be given to filling of key posts only.

There will be a reduction which will be achieved by implementing the following:

The lack of funds to perform all the Department's line functions will result in less travelling which will in turn reduce the costs for both officials and subsidised vehicles.  No new vehicles will be purchased in this financial year.  The anticipated saving on the budget will be made available to partially fund cleaning services for which no funds were allocated.

There will be restrictions on the purchase of uniforms and protective clothing and stationery.  Shooting practices for security guards will also be restricted to the minimum, and therefore less ammunition will be required to be purchased.

Although an amount of R1 million has been placed on the budget, the purchase of computer equipment and the repair of furniture and machines will be delayed.  The anticipated saving will be made available to partially fund cleaning services.

The Department will terminate certain security service contracts amounting to R600 000.  Consideration is being given to the provision of security services to shared office accommodation and to premises belonging to Works only.  Other provincial departments will have to provide security services to premises solely occupied by them as individual departments.

There is no funding for Programme 2, and the budget for the line function of the Department lies in Programme 3.  This is where allowance is made to provide services to client departments.  The amount shown is R70 million against R425 million in the previous year.

Sufficient funding is provided for hirings that were entered into before the 1997/1998 financial year and according to budget principles, the funds for new hirings since then will be provided by the clients.  Similarly, municipal costs for shared buildings are also paid by this Department and subject to municipal increases, funds are expected to be sufficient.  However, this is the end of the good news.

It will be noticed that no funds are allocated for cleaning services.  The Department tried to negotiate with client departments to contribute towards the cost of cleaning their accommodation amounting to R7 million, but could not get agreement on this.  Under these circumstances, every cent was re-investigated, but it seems that the major cost will have to be deducted from the amount set aside for maintenance.  After reduction of other services, an amount of R5 million will have to be found, thus reducing the funds for maintenance to R12 million.

Further, the reduced amount of R12 million is insufficient to pay for existing contracts and material required for the maintenance of buildings, lifts, airconditioning, etcetera, as in the past.  Over many years, service contracts for lifts were entered into with the suppliers of lifts to keep them operational in compliance with the Occupational Health and Safety Act.  The Department has to continue to pay as it does not have a single expert on its staff that can certify the safety of the lifts.  It therefore stands to reason that if the lifts cannot be certified safe, they must be taken out of service.  A similar situation exists with airconditioning, and in both cases, the parts that are needed for repairs are additional costs.

It can be argued that these contracts can be cancelled, but it can only done at a premium of fruitless expenditure due to cancellation costs.  However, what do we do with a high rise building with no lifts or no airconditioning?

The Department has over the past eight months delayed certain repairs to cut costs, and it has happened that staff had to be sent home from Natalia Building because the main plant, as well as the standby plant for the airconditioning failed.  The building, with no opening windows, heated up to such an extent that the staff could no longer bear the heat.   

Madam Chair, and the hon House, under the present situation, the Department is obliged to regard an emergency as only when a life is threatened and I will give you a few examples.

If a lift stops due to some or other failure and somebody is trapped inside, then the emergency is to get the person out.  Once the person is out of the lift, it can be taken out of commission and the situation is then no longer life threatening.  The fact that an invalid needs the lift to reach his destination, other than in a hospital, is not life threatening and can under present circumstances not be regarded as an emergency.

If the airconditioning does not cool down in summer or heat up in winter, it is not life threatening, but the supply of fresh air at outside temperature will be maintained.  Should the fresh air supply also fail, then one will have to consider the closure of the building either temporarily or permanently.

Madam Chair, the Department will do its utmost to do emergency repairs as explained, to buildings with its own staff where we have the expertise in order to comply with the Occupational Health and Safety Act and Building Regulations.  My Department has no control over emergencies and cannot say exactly how much will be needed.  What I can only say however, is that the Department had 22 000 requests for urgent repairs over the last year, amounting to R45 million.  On this basis, it is estimated that approximately 6 000 requests will be met during this financial year.  This is a reduction of 82% in the Department's ability to act on requests.  All endeavours will be made to protect lives, but the Department cannot guarantee comfortable accommodation.  All efforts will be made to keep buildings operational within the funding provided.

Madam Chair, the funding is not what the Department wants, it is what the Department will be given by this House.  It also means that if a function is not sufficiently funded, it must be scaled down and services will have to be stopped just like a clinic or part of a hospital or school is closed due to lack of funds.

As part of the effort to balance the provincial books, the decision was taken that no new funds will be given for capital works, and no new projects will be started unless the client departments provide the funds for them.  It is however, not clear what will happen to existing building contracts that were entered into on the request of client departments in previous years, but have not yet been completed.

Madam Chair, my Department is a service department.  It commits itself on behalf of client departments with the hope that they will suspend funds to it.  Problems have been experienced where the client departments do not suspend funds because their budgets have been exhausted, and my Department has paid the contractor.  The Department of Works has on occasion been blamed for overspending due to this situation.  Once more, I would like to make a passionate plea to Treasury, through my colleague, the hon Minister of Finance, for funds from client departments to be credited to my Department's allocation.

As you can see from the budget, no funds were transferred to my Department for this purpose.  During the previous year an additional amount of R228 million was transferred effectively increasing the original voted budget by 38%.  To meet contractual obligations on existing major works only, it is estimated that an amount of R373 million or 153% of the current budget will have to be transferred to the budget of this Department from client departments.  It also means that cash flows are going to be in excess of the Department's budget in order to meet these contractual commitments.

The influence of cuts on this budget on the private sector must be fully realised, and I must again state that we fully understand the situation.  The influence of the cuts will be felt right through the building industry, from the small one-man contractor to the big contractors employing many workers.  Without sufficient funds, which we as Province do not have, many of these contractors will have to close down or retrench staff.  In the Department's effort to survive on the budget, we will use the little funds that are available for material for our own staff firstly, before we use contractors.  Very little money will therefore go for contracts with SMMEs, and this in turn will defeat the effort that was made to promote SMMEs in the past.

Funding for the promotion of SMMEs will now rest with the private sector with their funds which again is less because the Province as a whole is spending less.

I am a preacher who became a politician and do not pretend to be a building economist, but it is clear from this budget that very little funding will flow to the private sector directly in the form of the employment for contractors and support to SMMEs.  I recommend that the Department of Economic Affairs addresses this situation with the private sector, in order to ensure continued promotion of SMMEs.

Allow me now, Madam Chair, to apologise to all the members of this Provincial Parliament, as well as the provincial personnel out there in the offices.  I, as well as the personnel of my Department of Works apologise beforehand for the discomfort you will have in your accommodation.  We will, however, do our best within the means given to us, but the cut in the budget is very severe, and is beyond our control.  The road back to normal will be a long one, and due to the backlog that existed and an additional backlog which will now be generated, is going to take many years to rectify.  The Department of Works is, however, committed and together with this House, dedicated to make a success of the intentions of the budget cuts in the Province.  That is to make the provincial books balance.

In conclusion, I wish to present the allocated budget of my Department which is:

Programme 1 for Personnel and Administration, a budget of R165,029 million.

Programme 2 for Acquisition of land and disposal.  No funds have been allocated and any expenditure that will be required will have to be recovered from client departments.

Programme 3 for Buildings, Structures and Equipment, which includes maintenance and hiring, only R70,056 million.  It is expected that a further R373 million will be expended on capital works which will be recovered from client departments.

Programme 4, Auxiliary and Associated Services, R7,853 million.  These funds include R7,842 million for personnel and maintenance of buildings in support services to His Majesty the King.

I hereby put the total amount of R242,938 million for the budget of the Department to the vote of this Parliament.  It is demoralising for us to see our Province joining the rest of Africa as far as looking after immovable assets.  It is very important though to realise that whoever performs the maintenance function, be it the Department of the Premier, or Education and Culture, or Health, or any other department or it is entirely privatised, funds will be required.  In the First World, we hear people talking of buildings which are centuries old, but in Africa buildings and structures begin crumbling within 30 years simply because preventative maintenance programmes are totally ignored.  The future generation, Madam Chair, stands no chance to marvel at our efforts.

In conclusion, I appeal to my colleagues in Cabinet and Treasury to regard the maintenance programme as a top priority otherwise the three social priorities we regard as very essential will not be carried out effectively, because the support structures will have collapsed.

Madam Chair, and the House, I now propose that vote 14 be a part of the budget.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  The next speaker on the list is the hon V V Mvelase for 15 minutes. 

MR V V MVELASE:  Madam Chair, I rise to report about the progress and difficulties faced by the Public Works Portfolio Committee from January 1997 to March 1998.

There was a great deal of co-operation between the Public Works Portfolio Committee, the Ministry and the Department officials, with the latter attending almost all the meetings.  There were no meetings cancelled due to lack of quorum, however, we experienced some difficulties with the members needing to leave early to catch their fights to ~Ulundi~ and Pietermaritzburg. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon member, can you speak closer to your microphone, because of the recording.  Thank you.

MR V V MVELASE:  That was addressed and resolved by the Secretariat who arranged for the meetings to commence earlier to allow members to finish their meetings timeously.

First and foremost, may I thank the hon Minister, Reverend C J Mtetwa, who co-operated positively with me, sharing with me all his knowledge and giving us political guidance.  His experience and ability created unity and good relations between the Ministry and the Portfolio Committee.

I regret to inform this House that, there is a problem of lack of communication between the management and the Ministry in this Department.  During the budget meetings, the Minister complained that he was not involved in the budget process, and blamed the Directorate for not discussing some of the matters with him.  The top management could not answer some questions put by the Finance Portfolio Committee regarding the financial management plan, and as a result the meeting was adjourned for another day.  Even on that day the Finance Portfolio Committee was not satisfied with some of the issues in the Department's budget.  The entire management found itself confused about the mistakes that had been discovered by the Finance Portfolio Committee members.  The hon Minister requested that the meeting be adjourned in order to sort out these problems that had been detected by the Finance Portfolio Committee.

Unless there is an improvement in the communication in this Department, the entire KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Legislation will never be in order.  The management and its client departments must co-operate in order to share ideas and ways and means of avoiding overspending in the Department of Public Works.  The Department of Public Works always finds itself facing overspending due to the departments who are not transferring the funds in time.  The Department of Works is a service department.  The client departments must empower it with funds in order to perform satisfactory work.

The Public Works Portfolio Committee recommends the intervention of the Director-General to co-ordinate the Directorate of the major client departments, ie the Departments of Health, Welfare and Education and Culture.

We also recommend that the offices of the Minister, Deputy Director General, Chief Director and Financial Director be situated in one location so that they may contact one another on a daily basis.  This must be done as soon as possible.

Mr B K Khanyile, Director of Community Based Public Works Programmes, and his staff performed their duties very well, and the allocation of funds to the various projects in the Province was well distributed.  There were not sufficient funds to cover the entire Province.

The Portfolio Committee complained about the new allocation of R24 million which will be allocated by the National Ministry, because they do know the disadvantaged areas which need the assistance of the funds.  The allocation of the funds must be left with the Provincial Directorate of Community Based Public Works Programmes to proceed with the good work they performed previously.

The Public Works Portfolio Committee consists of 10 members from the following parties.  Five IFP members, three ANC members, one National Party member, one MF member.  Mr Roger Burrows, who is an alternate member, must be commended for attending regularly and for the constructive contribution he has made towards the Portfolio Committee meetings.

The Committee managed to hold 13 meetings, and dealt with the following important matters:

We dealt with the issues of purchasing Truro House.  The Committee made a recommendation to the Department of Works that Truro House building be purchased in order to save money.  This was decided because we discovered that Truro House is leased and rented at a cost of R12 million per annum.

Investigations and enquiries conducted by our member, Mr Hamilton, revealed the possibility of purchasing the building at an estimated price of R70 million.

In response to this, the Department of Works informed the Committee that there were no funds in the financial year budget to purchase Truro House.  The Portfolio Committee resolved that the matter be referred to the Cabinet.

Regarding the Premier's flats at Addington Hospital, it was discovered that there these were flats which were used by the former Provincial Administrator and Chief Director in the hospital and were now used by the Premier, but maintained by the Department of Health, as these are situated on the premises of the Department of Health.  The flats have now been returned to the Department of Health. 

The building of the new administrative complex at ~Ulundi~ has been suspended due to lack of funds in the current financial year.

The Capital Works undertaking construction on commitment for the year 1998/1999 is R1 796 706 530 for various departmental projects.  The management plan for 1998/1999 is R165,415 million.

Regarding the stealing of furniture from the Ministerial residences at ~Ulundi~, the security guard Mr Zondo's case has not been finalised.  With the help of the legal advisor, the case has been put on track, to effect the disciplinary action.  The Committee, MEC and the Department feel that Mr Zondo should be held responsible and accountable as he was on duty that night.  We are grateful to Miss Naidoo, the legal advisor.

An asset register for the Department of Works was tabled before the Committee.  A complete asset register was due to be tabled with the Committee before the end of February 1998.  Such an asset register was not forthcoming and the Committee instructed the legal advisor to subpoena the Managing Director of the consultant firm instructed to provide the asset register to appear before the Committee.  This was done.

The Portfolio Committee instructed the Department of Works to provide the Committee with the number of all the vehicles in the Department.  The Department informed the Committee of a number of vehicles which needed minor repairs and have been standing unrepaired for six months.

The Committee advised the Department to have these vehicles repaired instead of buying new vehicles, as there was a financial crisis in the Province.

The transfer of funds from the Department of Education to Works has been resolved after long discussions.

The issue of St Anne's Hospital was discussed, resulting in a letter being written to the Provincial Minister of Safety and Security regarding St Anne's buildings, which accommodate SAPS members.

In the letter, the Committee stated that these buildings require renovation and requested the Provincial Minister of Safety and Security to find alterative accommodation for SAPS members accommodated in the buildings.

A letter was received from the Provincial Minister of Safety and Security stating that the matter was receiving attention at  National level.

There has been no further correspondence between the Portfolio Committee and the Minister of Safety and Security regarding this issue.  The Portfolio Committee resolved that this matter be dealt with this year.

THE COMMUNITY-BASED PUBLIC WORKS

The projects are part of the Reconstruction and Development Programme.  During the year, the Public Works Portfolio Committee visited some of these projects at Indaleni and Mpumalanga.  The CBPWP funded 175 projects in 46 districts at a cost of R32 693 606.  More than 150 projects have been completed and handed over to the community by the hon Provincial Minister of Public Works, Reverend C J Mtetwa.

FRAUD CASES UNDER INVESTIGATION

The Department's Secretary, Mr J M Ngwenya, reported some fraud cases which have been investigated.  The perpetrators have been suspended and charged, and the Department is in the process of holding disciplinary hearings relating to these activities.  The Committee has been overseeing and monitoring this process and are pleased with the direction that the Department is now taking in bringing employees who are guilty of misconduct to book.

The Committee will see to it that such culprits are dealt with.  The Committee has also taken a decision to subpoena contractors to whom the Department has out-sourced work and who are not performing in terms of the contract, to appear before the Committee and provide reasons for their failure to act in accordance with the contract.

DOUBLE PAYMENT TO TULLIS

The Portfolio Committee invited the representative of Tullis firm, on 9 March 1998, who received a double payment for work undertaken by the company.  Mr Munn explained that the original invoice of 10 January 1996 had mistakes on it and another invoice was issued to the Department of Works on 15 January 1996.  The first invoice was processed and an amount of R194 280 was paid.  The second invoice was also issued, and an amount of R195 034,62 was paid.

Mr Munn also said that due to a lack of experience on the side of their bookkeeper, and the different amounts in cheques issued by the Department of Works, they were unable to pick up the mistake in time.  The Portfolio Committee was not happy with Mr Munn's report and his firm's poor financial management.  The Department requested that the interest on the money in question be paid back to the Department.  Mr Munn apologised for the error and promised to pay the interest back to the Department.

The Portfolio Committee resolved to:

1.	Suspend the services of the firm until it has cleared this matter.

2.	Report the matter to the Auditor-General and have the Department investigated.

The Portfolio Committee resolved to subpoena all nine employees on suspension, builders and all companies who were double paid by the Department.  The Portfolio Committee requested Ms Naidoo to compile a report on the builders and other companies paid by the Department.

The Portfolio Committee further requested information on all the employees suspended by the Department, and a list of all the firms that had been double paid by the Department.

One member of the Portfolio Committee reported that he had seen 10 ambulances parked at one of our Hospitals because the hospital has been allocated new ambulances.  Other hospitals are short of ambulances.  When he enquired about what was wrong with the ambulances, he was told that the batteries were faulty and could not be used.  Such things must be investigated and resolved to improve our savings.

In conclusion, Madam Chair, we thank the Almighty God for saving our Secretary, Miss Sthombe Mqadi, who met with an accident and sustained a fractured leg.  I also thank Miss Gounden who substituted for her and performed her duties well during her sick leave.

Once again, I thank all the members of the Portfolio Committee and the officials of the Department for working closely in making our meetings a success, and for making my job, as the Chairperson of the Committee, easier and successful.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Once again like a true ANC.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for sticking within your time.  The next speaker on the list is the hon member A R Ainslie for 14 minutes.

MR A R AINSLIE:  Thank you very much, Madam Chair.  I would also like to thank the Minister and the Department for circulating the 1997 report so timeously.  It has given us a chance to peruse the report and prepare perhaps more effectively for the debate. 

Madam Chair, having said that, this report reminds me of an expensively wrapped Christmas present.  The wrapping is very expensive, the wrapping is colourful and the wrapping is glossy.  But when you unwrap that present you may not like what you find inside.  I think as we unwrap today the Department of Public Works we may not be very happy with what we find inside, because there are definitely certain very serious problems.

The Minister complained perhaps about two weeks ago that he had not been given the budget report that had been presented to the Finance Committee.  Having listened to the Minister, I wonder if he has perhaps also not received the performance audit of his Department, because if he had, he would himself realise that there are in fact very, very serious problems with this Department.  They are not simply a matter of looking at his Department in isolation from other departments.  There are big problems in the Department of Works.

These problems have prompted calls from some members that the very existence of the Department should be questioned, or that a restructuring of the Department is required.  At the very least what is required is a thorough review of the operations of the Department, with special emphasis on the following problematic areas, and also when he addressed us, the Minister said that if there was going to be an inquiry, he was not sure what the terms of reference were.  Well, I suggest that some of the problem areas I am going to mention then could fit that description of terms of reference.

The first problem area is the lack of transformation of the Department itself.  The Works Department is meant to be a catalyst for wider socio-economic change.  It cannot be if its operational style is rooted in the old ways.

The 1997 report, mentions transformation only in passing.  It gives no details, because little has happened in this regard.  There has been little or no transformation of the staff establishment, little or no transformation in the way the Department operates.  It lacks transparency, it lacks inclusiveness, and its operational objectives appear also to be very confined, simply to property management.

Let us take the staff establishment.  The staff establishment of the Department does not reflect the demographics of the new South Africa.  Look at the top 13 positions in the 1997 report which has been tabled.  Of these top 13 positions there is not a single female mentioned, not a single woman features in the top 13 positions.  It is four years since our democratic elections, and it is unacceptable that in that time this Department's staff structure has not been altered to correctly reflect the demographics of a new South Africa.

The second problem area is the poor relationship between Works and its client departments, especially Education and Health.  The problem largely revolves around finances, but also includes poor communication.  I have some sympathy for the Department, because it is often put in a very difficult position, where it does work for a client department on a promise-to-pay basis which is not met, or slow in being made.

This has given rise to calls in the Portfolio Committee that in future work should only commence once payment has been made.  The Minister made reference to that when he addressed us earlier on.  COD, cash on delivery, has not worked so maybe we should try CBD, cash before delivery.  Perhaps that will work.

Thirdly, I am not convinced that the Department exercises sufficient financial controls over expenditure, or that there is sufficient financial expertise to ensure that proper budgetary controls are kept.  Such controls and financial expertise are essential in a department where severe budgetary cuts have been made.

I also have serious doubts as to whether the Department has the will not only to stick within the budget, but also to transform this Department into the catalyst for delivery that it should be.

It is of little value if this Legislature shows the necessary political will to make unpopular cuts to the budget, but this political will is diluted once it gets to the Minister, or if the departmental officials lack the will to effect the changes that we require.

Programme 3 illustrates the point I am trying to make.  26% of the funds set aside for this programme have been spent, while 41% of the amount set aside for current maintenance has also already been spent.

We are moving headlong into a crisis unless expenditure on maintenance can be curtailed or additional funds for maintenance are found.

I am not convinced that the Department is taking our stringent financial position seriously, or that they have adequately addressed the question of cost cutting measures.  I am also concerned about the attitude of some officials to the budget cuts.  Some reject these cuts outright, and appear reluctant to take positive measures to make the budget work.  Other departments also do not like the cuts, but Transport, Environment and others are determined to make their budgets work.  We need the same dedication and patriotism from the Department of Public Works.

Also under Programme 3, 20% of the cleaning services allocation has been spent.  Looking at the 1997 report, according to that report the ~Ulundi~ region spent over R4 million on cleaning and gardening services.  On what?  Perhaps the Minister, when he addresses us after this debate, can give us a breakdown or at least an indication of what that money was spent on.  A reduced budget means less work for staff.  Why can staff not be encouraged to help clean their own work environment, and in that way avoid extra costs?

Pursuing this point I am making about cleaning and gardening services.  Durban region spent about R1,653 million on cleaning and gardening.  Pietermaritzburg region about R10 700, and Ladysmith about R281 000.  The amount spent by the ~Ulundi~ region on this item is about double all the other regions combined.  Clearly something is wrong.  Is the Department continuing to sign expensive and lucrative cleaning and gardening contracts in ~Ulundi~?  If so, why?  Expensive to us, lucrative to those people who are being awarded the contracts.

Municipal services also falls under this programme, and I am very happy to see that only 5% of this item has been spent.  But I will tell you where we can save some money on this item.  Switch off some of the lights in the ~Ulundi~ Assembly Complex.  There are lights in that building that have been on since 1994, as I said to the Portfolio Committee meeting the other day, and since before 1994.  The only time some of those lights are switched off is when the bulb fuses and you want to change the bulb.  I cannot accept that these lights are on for security reasons.  It is one area, Madam Chair, where I am quite sure savings can be made.  There must be a huge electricity bill in that one region alone, let alone electricity accounts and bills from other parts of the Province.

A further problem, Madam Chair, concerns property.  Property we own and property we lease.  The Province owns a large and valuable property portfolio.  It ranges from buildings to libraries, museums, hospitals, clinics, houses and more.  Public Works is the custodian of this property.  Its job is to protect the constructive use of all State property.

It cannot do this unless it knows what property the Government owns.  It concerns me therefore, that the asset register is only partially complete.  When the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee also alluded to this point.  The Portfolio Committee identified the completion of the asset register as priority number one as early as 1994.  We are now midway through 1998, and that register has not yet been completed.  I believe we are still waiting for two regions.  I think it is Region 5 and Region 7, if I am not mistaken.  The fact of the matter is this register has not yet been completed.  It is an important property management tool.  Its continued delay is unacceptable.

Madam Chair, we need to have a very critical look at our leasing policy.  In 1997 we hired accommodation to the value of over R34 million.  The budgeted figure for 1998/1999 is just over R21 million.  These amounts represent a large slice of the allocation to Programme 3.  Are we contracted to uneconomical leases?  If not managed expertly we will experience significant nett losses as well as receiving poor value for money when we lease properties.  The Truro House case illustrates what I am saying, and I will not go into that.  The Chairperson referred to that. But what I believe is required with regard to our property portfolio, especially the leasing segment of that portfolio, is that we need an audit of all our leases for the following reasons:

1.	So that we ensure that we are getting good value for our money.
2.	We can save money.
3.	To root out corruption.
4.	To renegotiate leases with more favourable terms where possible.
5.	To ensure that we are not entering into expensive leases when we could be using our own property.

Once the asset register is complete, that will assist us in identifying possible properties we could use instead of entering into expensive lease arrangements, like the lease at Truro House.

Also under this heading of property management I find it difficult to believe that we can manage Government property effectively, if to date the valuation of all our buildings has not yet been completed.

Madam Chair, the Portfolio Committee and the Department are determined to root out corruption.  When he addressed us earlier on, the Minister indicated that the Department has employed a team of auditors to assist in tackling fraud and corruption in the Department of Works.  The Department reports that to date 92 cases of corruption amounting to about R14 million have been identified.  We must applaud the Department for the work it has done in that field.  The Department estimates that approximately R4 million is being lost to fraud every year.  The main cause of fraud appears to be lack of control by middle management staff in the Department.

The Portfolio Committee has decided to subpoena all persons it believes could assist is in stopping corruption.  That is unless the matter is sub judice.  When he addressed us, the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee indicated that the first of these subpoenas have been issued, and that the firm Tullis Laundry and Engineering Supplies (Pty) Limited appeared before us on 9 March regarding double payment of the amount of R194 028.  As a result of that initiative we have taken certain steps against that particular company, including suspending the services of the firm until the matter has been satisfactorily cleared up.  We have also asked the Department, regarding this particular firm, to do an audit of all previous transactions with the firm, to see possibly if there is not a pattern of this kind of double payment arrangement in previous transactions with that company.

Since the Portfolio Committee meeting, when a member of this company appeared before us, the firm's attorneys have requested the Committee to supply it with a transcript of the proceedings.  We have obliged by sending them copies of the tapes and the relevant section of the minutes.  If this request is meant to intimidate us, let it be known that we will not be intimidated.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A R AINSLIE:  This matter will be thoroughly investigated.  Others can be expected to also appear before us and explain publicly dubious transactions that they have entered into involving Government finances.

Madam Chair, one of the objectives of the Department's mission statement, if you look at the mission statement here in this report on page 3, is to promote development opportunities in the Province.  An outstanding opportunity to promote economic development, especially among previously disadvantaged entrepreneurs, is by adopting an affirmative procurement policy.  The National Public Works Department has now set specific targets in this regard.  In terms of these, affirmative procurement specifications should be applied to 90% of the National and Provincial Public Works' projects, 25% of Local Government projects, and 15% of projects procured by parastatals.  There is little in reports from the Department to indicate that an aggressive affirmative procurement policy is being followed.  Perhaps the Minister can tell us if the above targets, I have indicated, are being applied in this Province and if so, what the results to date are?

Madam Chair, to conclude, the Department of Works is facing serious managerial problems.  

THE CHAIRPERSON:  You have one minute left.

MR A R AINSLIE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  It needs, in my view, to be reinforced possibly by officials seconded by other departments.  If we can send Miss Gray down to Cape Town to assist the National Transport Department, why can people of the calibre of Miss Gray in other departments not be sent to assist us in the Department of Public Works in this Province?

Middle management needs to undertake a crash course in financial controls, and the problem areas I have indicated will have to be carefully monitored by this Legislature.  Thank you very much, Madam Chair.  I support the budget.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next speaker on the list is the hon member Dr Mtalane, for 10 minutes.

DR L J T MTALANE:  The hon Chairperson, and your hon House.  The Department of Works is tasked with an important function, of making the Government delivery visible or realised by our communities.  The public judges the Government by the appearance of its buildings or structures.

The Department of Works has to meet the service needs of the other Government departments, which they refer to as the client departments.  The main beneficiaries of the Works Department's expertise is Health and Education.  Health and Education institutions are available in almost all communities.  Servicing these two departments is not an easy task for the Works Department.

The 1997/1998 financial budget constraints has put pressure on all departments officials, so that even the well established cash flow procedure from the Department of Health to Works was, to my surprise, reported disrupted.  Department officials have to ensure that this is not allowed to occur, and they are capable of doing that.  When building construction or major repair processes are stopped or are halted for a long time, that sends negative messages about our governance as a Province.

ASSETS REGISTER

As a Committee, we appreciate what the Department of Works has done to draw up the Provincial Government's Asset Register.  Although not completed, but steps have been taken to identify what belongs to Caesar, in today's corrupt world, this is worthy of praise.

DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE

Arising from the furniture stolen from the Minister's houses at ~Ulundi~, the Works Portfolio Committee noted with concern that the civil service disciplinary procedure is too lengthy and needs to be more precise and shortened.  As a result of this lengthy procedure, mischievous staff and "deadwood" remain a drain on the provincial budget.

SCHOOLS USED AS POLICE STATIONS AND MAGISTRATE'S OFFICES

This is no fault of the Department of Works, but we are urging the Department to follow up, so that these schools can be used for the purpose for which they were intended.  These institutions have been pointed out to the Department and we urge the members of this House and community leaders to inform Mr V V Mvelase of schools used for either one of the two functions, in their areas.

VANDALISM AT SCHOOLS

This is on the decrease, but we urge members of this House and the community leaders to promote the sense of responsibility in the communities they lead.  One also hopes that the elected school governing bodies will try their best to reduce this destruction of schools.

GOVERNMENT'S EXPENSIVE SCHOOL BUILDING PLANS

The Works Portfolio Committee was told by the Department officials that the Government school building plans were very expensive compared to schools built by donor agencies, for instance by the Lotto.  The financial difference between Government and donor agencies is very big, yet both building plans meet the criteria/standard requirements of a school building.  There is a dire shortage of schools in this Province.  With limited funds, a cost effective method of accelerating the building of schools is very essential.



INTERNAL OR DEPARTMENTAL AUDIT

The Committee was disturbed to hear that at times companies or contractors are paid twice, by mistake.  This was discovered by the Finance Department.  One hopes that the Department officials will be tactful to detect these errors.  However, one is consoled to know that the Department is pursuing these matters to correct the situation, and informs the Works Portfolio Committee.


TRANSLATION:  Chairperson, I am complaining a lot about the high ranking people in Government departments, who sometimes remain indifferent towards doing what they are trained and paid a salary to do.  We are paying salaries to these people, they travel in luxurious cars which we bought for them.  Let their work equal their comforts.  We respect them, they have offices, they have private secretaries, they are respectable, let their work befit that.

Why do people in Finance spoil areas that they themselves did not recognise, yet they have a high-ranking person in the Professional Service Commission and it is said that this high-ranking person is on contract for Management and Administration.  T/E

I am pleading for good work ethics amongst the top Government officials.  They are trained to do their work, and if the Department of Finance can detect mistakes, why can staff under his control not detect the mistakes, and as a result pay a company twice.

 [I am really complaining a lot about high-ranking people, because we pay them salaries and we are not regretting that we are paying them]. 

RELATIONS BETWEEN NATIONAL AND PROVINCIAL MINISTERS

 [Oh, Mr Nyambose, offspring of ~Inkosi~].  The good co-operation that we observed between you, Mr Minister, and the National Minister is appreciated, and we hope it will continue.

COMMUNITY BASED PROJECTS

These have continued and the communities are happy.  Mr Khanyile, Mr Ndelu and others have tirelessly worked on these projects.  These projects do not only uplift the standard of living of the disadvantaged communities, but they provide the communities with employment.  The community received skills training and gets psychological reassurance.  We thank the Minister that he personally hands over these projects to the community.  We thank the Department officials for the work they have done in the past year.

The budget is supported, and thank you, hon Chairperson, and your hon House.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I thank you for the few minutes you have saved us.  The next member on the list is the hon member S V Naicker, who will address us for 10 minutes.

MR S V NAICKER:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  It is a privilege to follow on the last speaker, the hon Dr Mtalane.  I also, Madam Chair, want to compliment the Minister for his comprehensive and very colourful report, with a variety of details.  I equally want to pay my respects to the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee, together with every member of the Portfolio Committee.

Perhaps, Madam Chair, in this process which is regarded as a learning curve, this particular Portfolio Committee has indeed experienced issues far beyond its ambit.  They have even had to judge on issues which overlap within the orbit of legality.  However, this Portfolio Committee has proved that one has to go perhaps even beyond its parameters to be able to do justice, in being representatives of a Province.

I therefore want to agree with the hon Mr Ainslie with his contribution in detail firstly, with regards to the COD issue, as far as the Department is concerned.  The hon Minister made some very valuable comments as far as his difficulties are concerned.  We also take note of a particular meeting which had to be rescheduled as a result of some misunderstanding.  I want to therefore plead again with the hon Minister and the administration, together with the Portfolio Committee, that no individual, no Government and no institution can function in isolation.  We need each other.

Therefore it is absolutely imperative that we must co-ordinate in order to achieve results, rather than being at each other's throats, Madam Chair.  I want to emphasise that this is a very, very important Department.  I mentioned last year that it is the mother and father of all departments.  It has a multi-faceted responsibility, from building to maintenance to the upliftment of our rural community, and also towards enabling the peasants of our community to uplift themselves.  But all this requires committal, and therefore this Department is indeed a very, very important Department.

The National Minister of Public Works, at the NCOP meeting on 20 May 1998, mentioned that at national level they are currently establishing a specialised unit, within the Department, to combat fraud and corruption.  The unit will work with the internal audit structures.  There is a National Minister who made a statement, with respect.  We would also like a measure of co-ordination between the Provincial and National Department, to see what best we can do to collectively combat this corruption which is plaguing our nation as a whole.

Over the weekend, Madam Chair, I read an article and I quote: Home scam runs into billions.  Top attorneys and officials across KwaZulu-Natal are being probed by an elite corruption busting team over alleged fraud involving billions of Rand in provincial housing projects.  

Even if this article is exaggerated, Madam Chair, how do we account to those innocent people who are expecting delivery?  I have been the person that has been extremely concerned about the consultants.  When you read this article it would appear that the fraud which is being committed is not being committed by the administration, but by the legal fraternity and even by the consultants.  I say respectfully to the hon Minister, and this hon House, let us begin to understand what an administration means.  Let us strengthen our administration rather than use specialists from outside to help us.  By doing that we will find ourselves in a dilemma.  I might as well mention, Madam Chair, National has spent R10 million towards housing consultants, but we in this Province have spent approximately twice as much.  After having spent that amount and to still find ourselves in the dilemma in which we are, is indeed a very, very painful exercise.

Coming back to the budget, Mr Chairman.  The budget at the National level has dropped by ,37% which automatically impacts on the provinces.  Compounding our problem has been the client department funding, and the roll-over situation, as the hon Minister mentioned.  What is more, the indications are that we have already spent 14% on hiring, 41% on maintenance etcetera, 20% on cleaning service etcetera, 5% on municipal services.  We have already spent this money, and before we get to the end of the next term we are going to have no money whatsoever.

In the Portfolio Committee the possibility of having to seal off the lifts, switch off airconditioners and even monitor the usage of lights was discussed.  This has not happened before.  Natalia was cited as a building that might even be affected.  Increases from national are expected, Mr Chairman.  Therefore, I want to make an appeal to the hon Minister, that even at the MINMEC meetings the message of this Province must be given loud and clear as to what our own requirements are.

The total expenditure in this budget for 1998/1999, of R243,324 million, reflects a decrease of R351,970 million from the 1997/1998 budget of R595,294 million.  This is an alarming decrease of 59%.  If we have 25% of the population of South Africa in this Province and our budget has been decreased by 59%, the question beckons us what about the future?  How are we going to address the problem, and how are we going to face those people who are dependent on us, sir?

If savings reflected were a decrease in administration costs this might be acceptable.  The largest decrease and of great concern is the development and progress of essential capital projects.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has three minutes left.

MR S V NAICKER:  Certain expenditure has been frozen.  Last year R254 million was allocated and this year virtually R1 million.  Professional and special services are down from R219 million to  R60 million.  In Education alone, 14 000 classrooms are required.  Dr Mtalane made an appeal in this House.  Mr Chairman, in this House we have spoken about the absolute need to care for the impoverished in this country.  KwaZulu-Natal Province is estimated to have the third highest incidence of poverty in the country.  At this stage we have got 1 855 schools with no water.  This was discussed in previous debates as well.  We have 500 schools with no toilets.  It is this Department that must be in a position to address this.  If we consider the decrease in this year's financial allocation, how are we going to address these matters?

In a rural area like Lower Tugela, the newspaper highlighted the issue: "Lower Tugela may lose 19 boreholes".  Again it relates to the poor people.  It is all the more reason, Mr Chairman, that we must consider the importance of addressing the needs of the poverty stricken areas.  Poverty is the product of social inequalities and exploitation, on the one hand, and under-development, on the other.  Poverty is the consequence of exploitative patterns of growth and of the absence of growth.

The principle of no funding that reflects in the white book for buildings and structures should not be politically acceptable.  Buildings for client departments are being erected, without being discussed with the relevant department, for example Health or Education etcetera.  Such major projects should be reflected in every budget and should be debated in this House.  What we find is that this Department is now shouldering all those responsibilities, and other client departments are receiving the services that they require.  Yet this Department has now become accountable for issues that other departments should equally be accountable for.

With this, sir, I support this budget, but there is a need to reassess the entire situation, and make it the Department which I regard as the mother and father of all departments.  Thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MR S V NAICKER:  Thank you, sir.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Dingila for 10 minutes.

MR T F DINGILA:  Thank you, Mr Chair.  Mr Chair, the Minister of this Department must really be complimented and congratulated for the hard work he has done.  Most of all, the work he has done for other departments is now a burden on his shoulders.  It is a pity that uBaba Dumisani Makhaye is absent today, because he is the one who talked a lot about this Department.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

AN HON MEMBER:  Because he knows a lot about it.

MR T F DINGILA:  The hon Mr Dumisani Makhaye does not know how to run the Government.  But, sir, in fact I am not blaming him, I am not blaming the hon member.

AN HON MEMBER:  Ja, you are supporting him.

MR T F DINGILA:  Experience is the best teacher.  We know that he is not experienced in the handling of Government affairs.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hon Chair, could I ask the hon member a question?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is that a question or a point of order?

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Will you take a question?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Will the member take a question?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T F DINGILA:  If he can ask the question in Zulu after 11 minutes I will take the question.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  A question in Zulu after 11 minutes.  Please proceed.  [LAUGHTER]

MR T F DINGILA:  Thank you, sir.  Little knowledge makes them think they own the world.  They accused the Minister of Public Works on unfounded facts.  However, sir, they will regret their misfortunes after the 1999 elections.

Mr Chair, I would like to express my great disappointment that after such long and continuous deliberations of peace initiatives between the ANC and IFP you still find people whom I now am going to refer to as "the fourth force". The hand consisting of various components].  I am talking about the hon member, the SACP member.

I want to strongly warn the ANC that they must make up their minds now.  If they want to talk peace, they must do away with the SACP.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T F DINGILA:  On the other hand, if they want to continue with the SACP they must then say they are not ready for the peace talks.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T F DINGILA:  The SACP and peace talks are extremes, like the South and North Pole.  The ANC must object openly against what was said by Mr Blade Nzimande yesterday during the SACP rally.  Unfortunately, Blade Nzimande is under the roof of the ANC, so the ANC must not make fools of us, and think we do not realise what their strategy is.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order!

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Chair, on a point of order.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is that a question or a point of order?

MR J H JEFFERY:  Point of order.  What has this got to do with the Works budget?

AN HON MEMBER:  That is not a point of order.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  That is not a point of order.  Please continue.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order!  Will the hon member please continue.

MR T F DINGILA:  Thank you, sir.  Unfortunately, Blade Nzimande is under the roof of the ANC.  The ANC must not make fools of us and think that we do not realise what their strategy is.  Mr Nzimande attacked Minister Zulu regarding the shortfalls in the Department of Education.  Yet SADTU is centring the ball in the National Minister's court, Mr Sibusiso Bengu.  SADTU and SACP are both ANC's affiliates or darlings.  It is therefore obvious that the ANC has an internal problem which they must first address before playing the monkey game of peace talks with the IFP.  [LAUGHTER]

Mr Nzimande said the IFP is interested in the old way of feudalism.  Mr Chairman, Mr Nzimande is a typical communist who has successfully brainwashed and dominated the ANC Government.  
HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!  Please continue.

MR T F DINGILA:  Thank you, sir.  The SACP is just a nucleus that saturates the ANC Government with propaganda.  I want to emphatically say we, in the IFP, are accepting the process of renaissance which is taking place in this country.  We are objecting to the ANC and SACP feudalism, because their feudalistic approach is very negative and it is marginalising ~Amakhosi~ in the South African times of change.

To support my statement, sir, I would like to quote from the World Book Encyclopedia, Volume 16, on page 222, on the last paragraph.  The topic is on renaissance, I quote.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Give him a hearing please.

MR T F DINGILA:  Thank you, sir.

	When the renaissance began, Europe was divided into great feudal estates owned by wealthy nobles.  Most people were serfs, who farmed the land for feudal lords.

As it happened in South Africa with the minority farmers under the ~Apartheid~ Government.  They were running the show here.

	Almost every part of life centred around religion, and the Catholic Church was the most powerful force in Europe.  As the renaissance advanced, Kings and Princes (I repeat, Kings and Princes) took over the feudal lands and built strong national governments.

Which is now strongly opposed and objected to by the ANC.  They do not want to talk about Kings, they do not want to talk about ~Amakhosi~ and the Nabantwana, yet when the war renaissance began ...

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T F DINGILA:  ...~Amakhosi~ and the Nabantwana, salvaged the situation because they ran a beautiful and smooth Government which is against the ANC today.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order!

MR T F DINGILA: TRANSLATION:  The history of South Africa will say that in South Africa's transition ~Amakhosi~, such as Mdletshe, ~Inkosi~ Ngubane, our hon Minister, ~Inkosi~ Mathaba, ~Inkosi~ Khawula and others, together with members of the Royal House, members of the main Royal House, such as the member of the Royal House of KwaMinya.  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has three minutes left.

MR T F DINGILA:  

TRANSLATION:  An ~Inkosi~ who will be the president, the member of the Royal House of KwaPhindangane the President of the IFP, who eradicated the rule of feudalism, which was created by ~Apartheid~ and built a government based on ~~Ubukhosi~~ of South Africa.  The history that I am talking about here will be written here in South Africa.

Again I emphasise that the ANC should distance themselves from the communists, so that we will be able to talk about the peace which Jesus spoke of.  Listen to the Bible, because you are communist and you do not know it.  Jesus said: "Glory in the heavens, peace on earth and love among people".  Communists do not have love among the people.  How can they talk about peace when they do not have love among the people?  Thank you, Chairperson.  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  Before I call upon the next speaker, I would like to announce some changes to the speakers list.  Instead of ~Inkosi~ Mathaba, the hon member Mr Hamilton will speak.  They have actually swopped their places.  ~Inkosi~ Mathaba takes the hon member's place.  It is now my pleasure to call upon the hon member Mr Nel.  You have seven minutes.

MR W U NEL: HON MEMBERS: THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order please!

MR W U NEL: TRANSLATION:  Chairperson, I am surprised that the hon member, Mr Dingila, is kindling fire here about matters that are not related to Works.  Communism and feudalism are not at all connected to this debate.  T/E

Mr Chairman, the one good thing that has come out of this Department is the discussion on fraud and in fact, the one or two occurrences of fraud that have been successfully resolved.  I would just like to add to the comments made by the hon Mr Ainslie.  If anybody who has been involved in fraudulently receiving double payments or payment for work that was never done, if any of those contractors imagine that this House will be intimidated into not pursuing those matters to the end, they must be mistaken.  We must pursue this until all of those cases, as far as it is possible, are resolved.

But, sir, this Department has unfortunately now entered the area of the absurd.  If we read the Minister's speech on page 10, he says that we are going to now end up in a situation where we simply do not maintain buildings and structures crumbling after 30 years simply because no preventative maintenance programmes are pursued.  We dare not let that happen.

We are facing an absurd situation.  There is talk of lifts that will be put out of commission.  There is talk of airconditioners that will not work so people cannot work in buildings that have no opening windows.  Surely in the 20th Century, almost the 21st, this cannot even be contemplated.  It is obvious for all of us.

This is a Department in crisis if ever there was one.  It is a Department that has inter-departmental communications crises.  It is a Department that has a communications crisis between itself and its own Ministry.  It is a Department that suffers from a confidence crisis with its client departments, many of whom privately say they would be better off if they did their work and did not have Works to worry about.  It is a Department that has various management crises in its own ranks.  Some may not be of its own making, but nevertheless they are there.  It is a Department now with a delivery crisis because it has no money to do the work which it normally would have to do.  It also is a Department facing an expenditure crisis in the current year, because already on its maintenance budget, it has spent 41% in one month.  One wonders how on earth it is going to stay within that budget.

We have sympathy with the Department.  We know that that budget has been cut to the bone, not to the bone, it has almost been eliminated altogether.  We do not know what really is expected of the Department.  But if we add all of this together, that then brings me and my party to the point where we simply cannot support a budget vote such as this.  We cannot support a vote where there are indications already that they cannot, for whatever reason, live within their budget.

We cannot support a budget vote where there are about 4 600 employees, and now with the transfer of another 460 from Education, roughly 5 000 employees and no money really to give them anything constructive to do.  We cannot support a budget as the hon member Mr Naicker pointed out that in housing, whilst it may not necessarily be something that this Department has busied itself with over the last years, but where in housing this Province spends more on consultants than anybody else in the country.  Yet we have a Department with 5 000 staff, who perhaps we could have used to do that work if they were functioning properly.

Sir, so let us perhaps dwell a little bit on the absurdities in the Department.  We have heard of the lack of communication between departments, and indeed we have been unable, not for months or weeks, but for years to get satisfactory answers.  If the Department of Health and the Department of Works cannot sit down and resolve issues, until finally last week the Minister of Finance was able to give us logical answers, then there is something wrong.  It is not necessarily just the Department of Works that is to blame, but why in heaven's name did it have to take so long before we could get logical answers to the fact that the Department of Works says: "We have spent the money.  We have done the work, but the other client departments have not transferred the money", and only last week we find out that it has been transferred, but because of over-expenditure on the overall budget, the money now has not been given over to Works, but has simply disappeared in the overspend of last year.

It is an understandable answer, but why did it take two or three years for us to extract it?  Why do we have to sit in the situation where the Minister is in conflict with his own Department at the Finance Committee hearing, only a matter of a week ago or so?  That surely is unheard of and unacceptable.  So something has to be done.

If I turn then again to the Minister's speech of today.  It seems to me that for a Department in this kind of crisis, the speech does not actually provide the answers.  The Minister dwelt on a lot of last year's problems, a lot of fraud etcetera, but where is the vision, where is the plan which convinces us that the staff are going to be gainfully employed in this current year, given the fact that there is no money?  

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MR W U NEL:  Where is the cogent explanation of how a department such as Works, which should be buying bricks and mortar, is going to spend 57% of its budget or R138 million on personnel?  Just a year ago it was 22%, and even then it was already too much.  Now it is 57% and rising, and the money that they have to spend on maintenance and bricks and mortar is very rapidly declining.  We cannot respond to a speech such as that and say we are prepared to support this budget vote.

The matter of the asset register.  A priority ever since 1994, and yet it is not complete.  But even if it is not complete, sir, why do we not have sight of those regions which are complete, so at least we can start working on part of the problem and looking for part of the solution?

Last year during the crisis when we were heading towards a R2 billion overspend for the Province overall, there was talk of many measures to try and raise funds.  I do not say that that was the right thing to do to fund current expenditure, but certainly I would support the notion, that unproductive assets should be liquidated and the money perhaps used for other capital expenditure in the Province.  There was a lot of talk about that, but yet to date we have heard not a word.  We should have been busying ourselves, looking at those sections of the asset register that are complete, and starting to think constructively about assets that can be got rid of, because we simply do not need them.

Sir, I say it is high time to review the role, and indeed even the need for the Department.  That is not to say that it would not be necessary to have a small team of technicians, people with the necessary skill, to overview capital projects throughout the Province.  But that does not necessarily mean that you have a separate department.  Such a component could resort in another department, but somewhere, somehow we are going to have to have a complete rethink of this Department, and how we spend its money.  

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I am afraid the hon member's time is up.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, sir.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Hamilton for 10 minutes.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Mr Chairman, Public Works is a service department, and amongst its achievements are capital investment projects totalling R477 million, 22 000 urgent service requests to the value of R45 million, R300 million worth of maintenance work and 174 projects totalling R33 million for the RDP.

Touching on the hon Wessel Nel's comment about an asset register.  A proper asset register had been commissioned.  One where we will know the exact size of our buildings, and the exact descriptions of those buildings, all of which are tiresome but necessary information to have, if we are to have an accurate asset register of our properties.  We are told that that register will be completed during the course of the next few months.  We have asked for a report, and we expect the consultants to appear before our Committee some time shortly in the future.

Mr Chairman, the Department is now faced with huge budget cuts, so serious that our ability to maintain our properties have been removed with very serious consequences.  We will have to be very innovative in how we address this huge looming problem, for major disruption to the Government and its administrations not to occur.

One of the things that do come to mind is the question of lift inspectors.  Perhaps the Department should look at investing in training, to train one of its own employees as an inspector, or in fact to engage somebody in that field, because without a valid safety certificate, a lift cannot operate, and that is the end of it.

In fact I have spoken in this House earlier, it is this kind of way that we are going to need to address our problems.  We have got money shortages and the whole country is suffering, but we cannot stop.  Our programmes have got to go ahead as best they can.  We are going to have to be very innovative as a Government in all departments, not just Public Works, in how we do things.  Ministers and their departments are going to have to be very inventive as well as Parliament and those of us sitting here.   We are going to have to sit down and find ways and means to  achieve our objectives and to look at new ideas of doing things.  Forget about the old ways, and start doing it the new way, because what we have is the real South Africa here.  The shortage of funds, that is our real problem.  Let us not go along the old ways in trying to maintain the old standards.  We have got to be very, very free in the way we think, and we have got to find quick ways to do things.

Also Mr Chairman, unfortunately, the Department is experiencing a bit of a vendetta against itself.  This has largely been brought about by the problems of apparent overspends and the lack of control between its main client departments.  As the hon Wessel Nel has said, this has now been resolved.  The client departments and the Department of Public Works were both correct.  The client departments in some cases did pay their amounts but, like so often happens, a contract may be a multi-year contract.  In fact very many of the Department's contract development projects are multi-year contracts.  For the last two years Treasury has refused roll overs for the Department of Public Works.  Very often the client department has been correct in saying they have paid, and Public Works has been correct in saying they have not got the money.  I would like to reiterate that this kind of nonsensical bureaucratic business must stop.

What does concern me, Mr Chairman, is the feeling that we can manage without a Department of Public Works.  One thing I do know about is construction.

MR J H JEFFERY:  INTERJECTION.

MR A J HAMILTON:  I can tell you in spite of the hon Mr Jeffery's little comments under his breath there, I can tell you that if we have a multiplicity of departments carrying out public works, we will have a multiplicity of opportunities for fraud, corruption, and above all, we will be indulging in the luxury of duplication, because all those departments will require to have their own architects, their own engineers, their own design teams and their own executing teams.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  No.

MR A J HAMILTON:  I hear the hon Sutcliffe's comment of: no.  I know very well how that works.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR A J HAMILTON:  Mr Chairman, what we have to do is to assist the Department.  I must say personally, I have never had anything other than complete co-operation from both the Minister and the senior department officials whenever I have come into contact with them.  We must avoid that very dangerous little thought in the back of some of our minds here.

I would like to touch on the question of fraud.  You have heard the comment by the Portfolio Committee Chairman, on the case of the Tullis Laundry people.  The Portfolio Committee with the full co-operation and encouragement of the Department has pursued this particular matter.  We have eight more cases under consideration, to subpoena firms and individuals to appear before the Committee. The Committee under the Chairmanship of V V Mvelase, has decided that wherever it is possible, we are going to subpoena people that have cheated openly or unknowing to themselves, we are going to bring them before us.  Unfortunately, we have this little problem of sub judice which crops up into our operations, but we have decided that of the eight people that we are considering, we have requested a report from the legal advisor on how many of those are in fact sub judice.  Those that are sub judice we are going to require the investigating officer to present himself to the Portfolio Committee with the case number, and a report on just how far the proceedings are.  Those that are not sub judice will be summoned before the Committee, and if we are not satisfied they will meet the same fate as Tullis Laundry until they have cleared their names.

We have also considered, and in fact I believe taken a decision that wherever possible, to refer this kind of fraud or corruption or malfeasance to the Heath Commission in order that we can quickly recover of ours what may have been taken of ours.

The problem is that court cases, and especially departmental inquiries are unbelievably long inquiries.  On the question of the length of departmental inquiries, we also had fairly lengthy discussions at the last Portfolio Committee meeting, and we are recommending that the Department, in fact all departments, certainly ours anyway, when confronted with acts of corruption among staff, should tend to rather suspend a staff member who is likely to have been guilty.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MR A J HAMILTON:  To suspend him without pay, rather than suspending people for a year or 18 months with pay and then we cannot recover the pay.  We have asked the Department to please carry that out as a policy.

Finally, Mr Chairman, I think the question of Truro House, which my hon friend Ainslie across the road referred to.  I think we should not forget that Truro House was entered into as a lease-back agreement by the previous Government, and is a project that we inherited.  I do not think we can do much about that.

In concluding, Mr Chairman, I would just like to once again thank the Minister and his Department officials, all of whom are very helpful, and express my appreciation for the assistance I have received from them.  I would like to give some warning as well about the seriousness of the building industry which is a major employer in this Province.  If the Department cannot undertake capital projects, or this Government cannot undertake capital projects, I can tell you now we will face very serious unemployment problems within the building industry.

I support the budget reluctantly, and I thank the Minister for his clear presentation in his forthright way.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Hamilton.  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Xaba for 12 minutes.

MR V C XABA: 

TRANSLATION:  Chairperson and your House, I want to also thank the Minister of Public Works for giving us this report he gave us today.  I will again thank high-ranking officers in his Department with whom he is co-operating in doing such great work.  
With those words, Chairperson, I want to say that I will support the vote that has been placed before us by the Minister, but I want to say, Chairperson, that I associate myself with the issues raised by the hon member Mr Roy Ainslie.  T/E

I associate myself with the issues raised by the hon member Mr Roy Ainslie.  It will not help, Mr Chairman, to lament and complain about the allocation to the Department.  What we ought to be talking about is how to get value for our money.

The Department has, by its own admission, been grossly negligent in the management of the funds allocated to it.  Examples of this have been highlighted in the report supplied to the Finance Committee by the Department of Works.  Fraud and corruption, by top officials, which has been spoken about in this House, acting in collusion with syndicates outside Government departments continue to seriously undermine the Government's programme of Good Governance.  Millions of Rands have gone unaccounted for, Mr Chairman.

Mr Chairman, we cannot help but say, as it has been pointed out by the hon member Mr Thami Mohlomi, that we must emulate what happens in the private sector when situations of this nature demand that heads must roll - heads must roll.  We cannot accept this kind of situation.  We cannot accept it.  The question of irregularities, fraud and corruption in this Province of KwaZulu-Natal has just become mere statistics.  If the resources of the Government are not utilised efficiently and effectively, Parliament has no other recourse but to be merciless on those who do not heed the call of the Department to stay within their budgets.

The report of this Department revealed overpayments to contractors involving millions of Rands.  Are the officials not getting returns out of this?  It also revealed overpayments of salaries involving tens of thousands of Rands, Mr Chairman.  The report also revealed that steps are being taken to remedy this problem, and for that I congratulate the Department.

I sympathise with the Department of Public Works, because the budget cut forces the Department to make difficult choices.  I agree with the hon member Mr Alexander Hamilton, when he says that the Department has to be innovative.  The hon member Mr Nel's criticism of the Department for not producing a convincing plan to gainfully employ the staff is not exaggerated.  From the speech of the MEC for Public Works, it is clear that many staff members will be left without any meaningful thing to do only causing frustration and a lot of anxiety.  We need a plan, Mr Chairman.

It has been reported in this House that about 640 staff members have been transferred from the Department of Education to the Department of Works.  If there is no money to carry out building and maintenance programmes, what are those staff members going to do in the Department of Public Works?

When I was going through this report, Mr Chairman, the report that was presented to the Finance Committee by the Department of Public Works, I discovered that the Department of Health, the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Education have not indicated whether they would be suspending any funds or monies to the Department of Public Works.  I then felt that there would be a problem.  The problem in this regard will be that quite a number of people will be left without any meaningful thing to do, Mr Chairman.

The Department of Works asked the Department of Agriculture the following:

	As the Department of Works is already in possession of some claims from contractors and consultants for major works done, to be paid in April, you are urged to react as soon as possible.

The Department of Agriculture replied as follows:

	It is with regret we advise that no funds can be suspended from our greatly reduced budget to the Department of Public Works during the current 1998/1999 financial year.

Already the Department of Public Works is sitting with legal claims from contractors, Mr Chairman, and they are being told that it does not look as if there will be any funds suspended from the Department of Agriculture, for instance, to the Department of Public Works, to actually meet this obligation.  What will that give rise to?

As a result there is going to be litigation, Mr Chairman, and court cases against the Government of KwaZulu-Natal.  Therefore, resulting in the Government having to pay a lot more as a result of the litigation and court cases.  This is a matter that has to be urgently looked into if we were to be prudent in our expending of State money in this Province.

I want to state that the situation as far as the Department of Agriculture vis-a-vis the Department of Public Works is the same situation that exists between the Department of Education and the Department of Public Works.  There are major projects which have not been completed and which are under construction.  Over and above that, those projects will have to be terminated.  I have been told that the report says that in doing so the Department will have to incur cancellation fees of about R15 million.  Just cancellation fees alone, because the Department is unable to continue with the work that is under construction.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MR V C XABA:  Mr Chairman, the main reason for raising all these issues is so that they can be attended to by almost all the departments in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal, and to avoid a situation where we incur unnecessary fees which would then force us to cut on programmes that are actually there to begin to transform our Province, that is in dire need of transformation.

Another issue, Mr Chairman, that I just want to touch on is the question of the ghost worker phenomenon in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal.  This phenomenon has cost this Province of KwaZulu-Natal a fortune.  You can go to the Department of Education and there is a complaint about the ghost worker phenomenon.  You can go to Social Welfare and there is a problem with pensioners drawing pensions illegally.  You go to the Department of Public Works and there is a problem with ghosts.  Are these ghosts there coincidentally, or have they been placed there to get certain people on the payroll of the Government so that they would actually be performing other activities on behalf of other people?

AN HON MEMBER:  It is a nightmare.

MR V C XABA:  You go to the Department of Nature Conservation and Environmental Affairs, there is the same problem.  You find people wandering idling around without anything to do.  You sometimes even doubt that those people are employed in the service of the Government of KwaZulu-Natal.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  But I am saying that this phenomenon of ghost workers has to be addressed if we want to be to be a success story.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Will the hon member take his seat please.

MR V C XABA:  Thank you, Mr Chairman. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I thank you.  Our next speaker is the hon ~Inkosi~ Mathaba.  Over to you, ~Inkosi~.  ~Inkosi~ is speaking for eight minutes.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  What is interesting these days is that Dr Mandela bowed before Dr Buthelezi and accepted his degree in the Prince's leadership in South Africa.  It is clear that very soon Dr Mandela will join the IFP, because the IFP is a real party that can lead this country to a better life.

AN HON MEMBER:  And the Works Department?

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Chairperson, hon members, I would like to applaud our Minister Mtetwa for his commitment to good governance and transformation.  The Department of Works has been committed to providing in the accommodation requirements of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Administration.

At this point I would also like to state that amidst the educational crisis, the Department of Public Works has also helped with the building of schools.  It is reflected here in the Minister's report.  The Department of Works has always been committed to build even halls in the rural and urban areas.  These halls are really a rallying point for community empowerment and job creation.

Hon members, I would also like to state that over the past three years 175 projects have been completed by this Department.  These projects have targeted the most needy in the rural areas and have created employment, supported education, and so forth.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Chairperson, what really concerns me is the state of our parliamentary offices here in Pietermaritzburg.  These offices are really poorly ventilated and the airconditioning units never seem to work.  With the cold weather conditions in Pietermaritzburg, we desperately need some form of heating apparatus.  When you walk into the IFP offices you feel the draft.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Hon members, something definitely needs to be done.  After only being in the office for a short while you can actually feel the coldness and dampness.

AN HON MEMBER:  Ja, you are not a warm party.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Any medical doctor will tell you, like my hon Dr Luthuli here, she will bear me out that it is a prerequisite for the common cold, and even pneumonia.   We need to get these offices upgraded so that we can bypass illnesses, as well as to prevent our staff and ourselves from getting ill.


TRANSLATION:  But it is my view that the Chairperson, if it is not so and it is said that there is no money, let us go and leave this place, because people who do have offices at ~Ulundi~, let us go and work from ~Ulundi~.  At that time when there is money, we will fix it and come back.  We are not saying we have a problem with Pietermaritzburg.  My people, let us go to ~Ulundi~.

As I am just talking, I do not know where the hon member has placed my pills.  I had placed them here.  I am not very well, because of this existing situation.  T/E

But I know very well that the hon member Mrs Cronje will object to the closure of this Legislature.  Recently she raised before this House the issue that she is very happy that we are now getting sandwiches here in this Parliament, and also nice tea.  So I can see that she likes tea very much, and does not care about our health.  [LAUGHTER]  But rest assured, my hon member, we will also get sandwiches and nice tea in ~Ulundi~.  [LAUGHTER]  And we will never catch any illnesses.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA: [I will again touch briefly on what my brother the hon Roy Ainslie has touched on].

The hon member Mr Roy Ainslie, up until now you have not convinced me of anything.  The reason is clear, my brother, but let me tell you, you are confused from top to bottom.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION AND LAUGHTER

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Because he is a member of a party that is also confused.  You should rather change.  Come to this side.  You are welcome, my brother.  I have got your ticket here.  You can join our party.  I have got everything here.  I am ready for you, my brother.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Point of order.  Point of order.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  On a point of order, yes.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  On a point of order, Madam Chair.  Is it parliamentary for a member to try and convince a member to join his party?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  It is not a point of order.  Will you take your seat.  Can the hon member proceed.

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  I should think it is my democratic right.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  What do you know about democracy?

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  It is my democratic right to convince my brother Roy Ainslie, and to recruit him.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Suddenly you like democracy.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA:  Since the very same member has raised that this Department should be abolished, [I think that it is hatred as well as cruelty].

We cannot let the staff work in such conditions.  I appeal to the members of the Public Works Portfolio Committee to help get the work done please.  The Department of Public Works is striving to provide jobs and training to the thousands in KwaZulu-Natal.  At the same time, the Department is looking for innovative ways to better manage its role.  I would also like to thank our hon Minister, Reverend Mtetwa, for striving to develop the Department of Public Works.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

~INKOSI~ K W MATHABA: TRANSLATION:  I think that here something astounded me, but I also found that I have joy.  I wanted to congratulate the hon Mr Deputy Speaker, the hon Willis Mchunu, for achieving the chairmanship of communists here in KwaZulu-Natal, but I think that as he is our deputy, he will not transform this, our House, and inject into it the spirit of communism or turn it to become communist.  In short, I say I support the budget for this Department.  T/E

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I do not see the hon member Mrs Downs in the House.  The next on the list is the hon member J D Mkhwanazi for five minutes, sir.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: [Thank you, Madam Chair.  Firstly, let me promise the Minister that I support this vote.  Secondly, Madam Chair], I was taken aback when I heard that we are renting Truro House.  I thought we owned Truro House.  What is the position of Malgate?  It is a lot of money that we are paying and the amount that is quoted is R70 million.  That building is old.  Could we be informed who the owner is, and if it has not been investigated, what the cost of the building was when it was built, and then it still has to be bought for R70 million?

TRANSLATION:  Proceeding from that, Madam Chair, I ask the hon Nyambose, focusing his attention in his home area of KwaMtetwa, the land of Myandeni, that the schools there, Nyambose, it is a disgrace to go to our schools and find that those schools have no windows, such as those at Mabhuyeni, schools at Malanga and the schools in that area.  You find that they have no windows.  Those schools were built by the communities themselves, also assisted by the Missions, but these schools are now totally smashed.

I wanted to remind Nyambose, that someone who has something of his own is never stranded.  It is not a shame to go back to his area as Minister Ndebele yesterday went back to his birth place to fix things in his home area.   T/E  

Proceeding from that there is talk of this Department being abolished and we that must out-source the services.  Unfortunately, this Department is an errand department.  Idiphathimenti ethunywayo umfana, ithunywa amanye ama-departments [It is a Department that is a service Department.  Other departments delegate to it, it is not totally autonomous.  Maybe that is what creates a problem for this Department], but
I am concerned when we talk about out-sourcing.  If we out-source, what about the people who are working, who are employed by the Department?

The private people to whom we are going to out-source the services, [Who are those people, are they not capitalists?  Why does it seem as if we are contradicting ourselves while we say we are fighting capitalists, we again support capitalists.  There is even talk about privatisation].

If you privatise who will buy that business?  It is not the African people who have been disadvantaged forever.  

TRANSLATION:  Therefore, we must clearly discuss that when we out-source, to whom are we out-sourcing?  We are saying that this Government's work should remain in the hands of the Government.  When the Afrikaners took over the Government in 1948, they took jobs and they were the ones working for the railways, postal services, airways and everywhere else.  They taught their children, they made money.  

Today they are the ones controlling this country, pulling it by the nose through their funds such as Sanlam, Southern Life, Rembrandt, count all these big companies that they built, that were built by Afrikaners while they were working in Government.  Now we have to preserve the existing ones for our people to work, so that they can be able to send their children to school.

Another thing I want to say is this thing that has been talked about, fraud.  There is talk as if fraud exists only in our area, KwaZulu.  I like our Province.  I want to defend it, but I do not want it to be corrupt, I am against fraud.  But Africans, let us talk properly about this.  This, our country, is covered with fraud, right from the top, and it even exists among womenfolk, and we do not know where they learnt to be false.

So I am grateful to the Minister.  I hope that all of us can work in co-operation and fight this corruption and thuggery that exits in our country.  But let us not deal with thuggery as if it is only here in our area.  I do not know what causes our people to do this, or are they doing it because money is a novelty to them, they had never seen money before.  Just every one out of every ten people.  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon member, you have got one minute.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: 
TRANSLATION:  Oh, thank you.  Even these ghosts should cease.  I concur with the hon member Xaba that these ghosts should cease, but I want to disagree with the member that the ghosts are only here in our area.  Ghosts are all over the land.  Ghosts should cease and the Minister should ensure that people do not steal government cement, government spades, as they are stealing them in other areas.  Thank you.  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next speaker on the list is the hon member Mr G Haygarth, for nine minutes.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Madam Chair, thank you.  There are two points that I would like to make initially in this debate.  It relates first of all, to this so-called communication problem between Works and its client departments, and the difficulty they have in dealing with building problems that arise and the impact that it has on the budget.  There is nobody who can make sure that a building contract, or any other contract will be completed on time.  Strikes, floods, all sorts of things intervene and one has to adjust your budget according to the conditions that operate at a particular time.  But in addition to that, at the end of a contract there is a period of adjustments, of preparing a final account, and the bigger the contract the longer this operation takes place.  It is simply not correct for a department to say, "Well, you did not finish and make all the payments by 31 March, therefore it is not our fault, and we are not going to send you the money".  That is one of the stories that was given.

That lack of understanding of the contractual process, and what it means is simply something that one has to come to grips with.  Perhaps one of the answers to that particular problem is that while the Works Department should manage a contract, the client department should retain the financial responsibility for seeing that the money is there.  The Works Department sign that the money is due to the contractor for works completed, and that goes to the client department and they have to then sign it and say, "Here is the money to meet that cheque".  Perhaps that is one of the ways in which the client departments can be brought to their senses, and to understand how to organise finance in relation to a building contract.  I think that is very important and that should be examined, to ensure that responsibility for the various elements of this joint arrangement are put where they belong, and with people who have the responsibility to attend to them.

The second point I want to make is this vexed question of a Works Department or not, and how you can operate that.  It is a very sensitive issue.  It is something that has been in all public undertakings for as long as I know.  You will have a mechanical works department who have to look after machines.  You will have a transport department who have to look after all the vehicles.  You have architects and you have electricians and that type of thing.  It is very difficult to put one department at the mercy of another in that sense.

We need to find ways and means in the particular circumstances which exist today where the amount of funds available for future development is restricted.  That position is not going to change this year, and it is not going to change next year either.  So we have to consider what that arrangement should be and that needs to be examined in some detail.

The other point that also arises from this is what to do with contracts which are in the process of construction or whatever.  The Works Department indicated that if you had to suspend a contract, if I can use that term, on a temporary basis there are clearly costs involved in that, and there are the difficulties in a half finished building.  The material will vanish from the site in next to no time.  It is said that my colleague here from the Public Accounts Committee will of course raise the question of wasted costs.

You also have to look at it from the point of view of that building being finished, and the Department then not having the funds to staff a clinic or a school or whatever, and you similarly will also have a situation where you have technically wasted expenditure.  What do you do with a product that you are unable to use because you have not got the further finance to deal with it?

This seems to me to be a problem that needs to be analysed very carefully by, and I see the Director-General there and his team of Deputies Director-General, to advise the Cabinet, and this House in fact, as to the extent of these works in process.  Whether in fact it would not be correct even at a financial cost to terminate or suspend the contract for a period of time.    Wait, but do all the necessary things to keep that building under some sort of security until more funding is available.  I do not believe that that funding is going to come in the next two/three years.

It happened in Durban.  They had to terminate a number of roads contracts at some cost, because simply there was not enough money on the budget to complete them in that particular financial year.  It is not uncommon for that process to have to be entered into.  We need to know, and have a substantial report on all of these projects that are in this unfortunate circumstance.

Lastly, I want to comment on what Mr Hamilton said about the dire consequences that the lack of funding is having on the building industry.  When you say the building industry, you do not mean simply the building contractors or the civil engineering contractors, it goes far, far beyond that.  All of the professional people, the architects, the civil engineers, the quantity surveyors, surveyors, the building suppliers, the bricks, the cement people, all of them are faced with a problem when this hits a country.  The lack of funding to invest in capital works.

At one stage when the City Council was building the Chatsworth housing scheme, and the brickyards were so full of common bricks which they could not dispose of.  Those common bricks were taken by the council and used to construct the roads in Chatsworth.  Mr Rajbansi, the hon member will tell you, that there are many, many roads that 30 years ago were constructed from bricks that were lying in the brickyard, and were bought at a price which was favourable to labour intensive construction.  The labourers put those blocks into the roadways, and many, many of the roads, including the bus routes were constructed in that way.

There are ways of dealing with these problems to the benefit of the private sector, and the public sector, and the people who are desperately in need of employment, because that is what we are faced with in this Province.  A tremendous dearth of employment opportunities, and unless we are innovative to the extreme to find ways and means to help the people, we are going to suffer and deteriorate further.  The buildings which we talked about, which will lack maintenance is something that we are unfortunately going to have to face.  It is regrettable, but this country cannot continue to operate with the standards of its buildings, and the standards of its roads that it has had in the past.  That road near Eshowe, Gezinsila Township, is an indication of what the problem is in regard to maintenance of the assets of this country.

It is a situation which we are going to have to face up to and acknowledge that it exists, and try and find ways of dealing with it.  Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We must thank you for the few minutes which you have saved us.  The next speaker is the hon member Mrs L Ngcobo, for seven minutes.

MRS L G NGCOBO:  Madam Chair, I am very sorry, I hope I will be heard.  I think the bug has got me too.  I will only read parts of my prepared speech, and leave out what has already been mentioned, for I do not think I will add any more wisdom to that.

First of all, I wish to congratulate the Minister on presenting to us this difficult budget.  But if one has the will, one will understand the problems that this Department is confronted with.  I therefore am prepared to support the Minister's budget.

The importance of the Department of Works should be clear to all, and should never be underestimated.  This is the Department that cements together all departments into a cohesive unit of Government.  It impacts on the smooth running of most sectors of the Government.  This is its strength.  But it is also this which makes it so vulnerable to attack by those same sectors of Government, as well as the cause for what is tantamount to abuse.  When other departments default in their payments to the Department of Works, they must know surely that they render it weaker and therefore less effective in its work.

It is for this that we now hear murmurs of its demise.  There are voices calling for the dismantling of the Department.  We are amazed at such short-sightedness on the part of those who seem so eager to dismantle what they cannot put together.  Indeed it is true that those are engaged in the business of destruction can never be builders as well.

This Department is owed millions by other departments, who have failed to honour their debts to this Department.  It is therefore totally unfair that this Department is viewed as failing in its responsibilities, instead of assisting it in bringing about some mechanism of handling such defaulters.  It seems to me simple common sense that this Department should operate on strict business arrangements with all client departments.  Simply put, it means that all work done for other departments should be paid for upfront, before any work can be undertaken.  Only such strict business practice can secure this Department and save it from this scapegoating.

I am particularly impressed with the version of affirmative action that is being put into action in this Department.  They have a very positive gender sensitive policy, and as a result many women being promoted to higher ranks, and are serving as Assistant Directors.  Over and above this, this Department has a strong training programme.

Without this, it is futile to talk of affirmative action.  In fact, I will go so far as to say that affirmative action without the training component is a misnomer.  We should not therefore be talking about training, we should really be talking about training and affirmative action policy.  You cannot talk of affirmative action and stop there, because the two are one.  The two go hand in hand.  I therefore applaud this Department for having a more far-sighted policy than many other departments.

I will be jumping again.  I was going to talk about ghost employees, but I think I we will proceed with the last point I have.  I am trying to conserve the voice that I have.

It brings me, Madam Chair, to the very important subject of corruption as a menace in our society.  There is a debilitation that is affecting all sectors or our society, from the top branch of our civil and Government officials, down to the down trodden, down and out criminal in the squatter camps.  It is not enough for us and the National Government to ring our hands in absolute impotence, complaining about ghost characters and lost will. 

It is not enough.  We should get to the root of it.  As the Government, and I am now combining this Provincial Government in its efforts with the National Government.  It began long ago, Madam Chair, when in anger and frustration many of the respectable people in our communities would buy anything, from eggs to suits to furniture from the evening pedlars.  They knew these were stolen goods, but they felt justified, because the white people under ~Apartheid~ were also stealing from them by not paying justified rates and they did not care whether they lived or died.  This was the state of affairs.  It generated a very deadly poison which today we, as Africans, cannot recognise, especially if you have been away for a while, you cannot recognise the personalities that are said to be African.  I constantly say: "These are not my Africans".  The white people do not recognise the creatures they have created.  These are their monsters.  This is the stuff of dreams.  They created it.

This vicious moral cycle generated this morality that we see today.  African values of the past were destroyed and they were destroyed deliberately, and we have not had the foresight to see it as our responsibility.  Instead perhaps in an unfortunate way, well we joined in different ways to encourage this deadly state of our society. 
AN HON MEMBER:  Which is the communist?

MRS L G NGCOBO:  We have to go back and reform the attitudes.  PAC, ANC, all the organisations have got to look back.  This is a challenge to the whole society.

AN HON MEMBER:  And the IFP?

MRS L G NGCOBO:  The IFP is African.  I have said it.  The Government has to spend money to do this.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MRS L G NGCOBO:  Bear with me.  I will tackle you on another day, just bear with me.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MRS L G NGCOBO:  Because I know they are so African, that to say African is enough.  Masakhane as a policy only directs people to pay for their services.  It does not go far enough. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has one minute.

MRS L G NGCOBO:  Valid as this aim is, it does not help the public to change their attitudes towards what belongs to others.  The National ANC Government, which once encouraged negative policies, should now place emphasis on property values and encourage people to be proud of what they rightfully own, and to value our achievement.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is a real sell out.

AN HON MEMBER:  Negative policies.

MRS L G NGCOBO:  Lots of them.  Theft as a vice should be targeted.  The private sector can be persuaded to participate in an aggressive campaign to promote values such as respect, honesty and integrity, because as it is, our society knows no shame.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We now call upon the hon member B Cele, for 14 minutes.

MR B H CELE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Quoting from the speech of the Minister towards the end, I think it is page 10, where it says: "It is demoralising to us to see our Province joining the rest of Africa as far as looking after immovable assets".  Really, it is a shame to think that we are not in Africa.  It is really a shame to sit here and think that we are not in Africa.  I do not know where he thinks we are.  I absolutely do not know where he thinks we are.

That mentality and that understanding will have to be put in order so that we begin to understand that we belong here.

AN HON MEMBER:  And nowhere else.

MR B H CELE:  If you do not belong here, you are allowed to go home.  But we belong here.  Africa cannot just be judged by the people who came to this country to ensure that it became what it was.  We are now trying to correct it.  Whoever said that, must read the book: Time Longer than Rope, by Andrew le Roux.  Then you will understand how we got to where we are today.

When they define these standards for Africa, they forget about Bosnia and that there are no lifts working there today.  They forget those things, and they think that we have to sit here and denigrate.  We are not going to do that.  We are not going to be part of that.

There was this young boy who used to go to the mountains and shout in a silly language and then he would hear the echo coming back to him.  This boy would go home in the afternoon and say to his mother: "I went out there.  There was a young voice shouting at me and insulting me".  And finally the mother said: "Why do you not go out there and shout good things to that young boy and hear what he then says".  Indeed the young boy went to the mountains and shouted good things, and the other young boy on the other side, which was his echo began to shout good things back.  He said: "Mummy, I shouted good things and the young boy shouted good things at me".  That is the attitude we should have.  We should be positive, and not come to this Legislature and shout bad things at each other.  Then good things will happen.  What your mentality is, is what really will go out of you.  As you do that you must make sure that you remain factual and true to yourself.  I know, I will tackle you another day and you will understand when you are given the time to understand.  Not yet.

I fully agree and concede that certain programmes have been severely cut within the Department of Works.  There is no doubt about it.  But it is absolutely no use to cry about that now.  We must make sure that we use what we have.  It is useless to say that we are going to have to overspend.  It is no use.  We cannot do it that way.

An idea has been created in this House that this is a service department.  If it is a service department, the other departments are expected to suspend money to this Department.  What happens if they do not?  Some of them have indicated that they will not.  Then what happens?  That is the first point.

The second one, the Department says it cannot repair the lifts.  That is a main function.  What happens if they do not repair the lifts?  That implies that the Department is closing itself down.  That is the logic of the Department.  That if you cannot do everything you are supposed to do, then you close shop and go home.  The Minister indicated that it was going to be difficult to do this.  Why do we have a Department of Works if all they can manage to do with their budget is pay salaries.  What are those salaries paid for?

I would request the Department and the Minister to look into the projects down on the South Coast, around Izingolweni or Ugu regional council.  There are several of them going on there.  It is about R46 million for water and all that. [only God knows] they are doing a lot of work there.

The national assessors were called in to come and make an assessment of the council and the Department to ascertain if they had the capacity to run their own projects.  It was established that they did have the capacity.  In spite of that, consultants were called in again, after the National Department had said: "You do have the capacity".  That they did free of charge.  The consultants who have been brought in now are paid.  We would like to find out what really happened there.  We understand that the National Department is paying R35 000 every month to maintain that capacity, but in spite of that consultants are being employed to do the same work that the National Government is paying for, because there is capacity.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B H CELE:  Do not worry where I get it.  What is supposed to happen is that this should be investigated and if necessary be corrected.  It is of no use to find out where I got it.  Our task is to correct the situation if we find it to be true.  That is what we need to do, and we are elected to do that.  Not to question where it emanates from, but how to uproot this corruption.  That is what we are paid for.

AN HON MEMBER:  Correct.

MR B H CELE:  Not to come here and cover up the corruption.  We are paid to uproot the corruption.  Nobody should nurse corruption, whether they are from the IFP, ANC or the National Party.  Nobody should speak in defence of corruption.

AN HON MEMBER:  It bears no colour.

MR B H CELE:  Corruption bears no colour in any way.  We would like to know if it is true that plus/minus 30% of all finances designated for projects goes towards consultants?  That is too much.  It need to be investigated and it needs to be arrested.  We cannot allow the situation that the money that is designated to the poor people - 30% of a million is too much to pay towards a consultant rather than to the project.  We cannot argue that.  That needs to be stopped.

These are the things we need to check.  The Portfolio Committee will have to check on this.  The Department will have to check on this, and the Ministry will have to check this and establish whether it is the truth.  If it is found to be true we will have to deal with it, and quite brutally because we cannot allow it to continue in this manner.

The Department has seriously co-operated with the Portfolio Committee.  I appreciate that.  But we have been too slow in dealing with the matters.  You will find that we have the same item on the agenda for six months, without resolving the issue.  That will have to change.  We are going to have to proceed faster in order to deliver and ensure that we offer the solutions that are demanded from us by our electorate.

I wanted to be short.  I believe I am.  The Department of Works will have to be open with itself, open on its assessment to find out if they can correct the prevailing situation, as the hon Mrs Ngcobo said.  Trying to co-ordinate becomes vulnerable.  It will have to check which is more problematic.  Is it really co-ordinating or is it becoming a liability to itself?

If there is no mechanism for correction, difficult solutions will have to be found.  You cannot continue spending the money on paying the workers while no work is being done.  It has been mentioned that no buildings are going to be painted, no lifts will be repaired and no client departments will pay.  We will have to establish if all those things are not going to be done,  what is the Department going to do then.  We will have to find answers and quite soon, or else we will be paying people who will not be doing anything at all.  If so, we will have to revisit our thoughts on that, and find out what the next step will be.

Finally, my colleague, the hon Mr Dingila there.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  I am really not going to respond to him, because you cannot keep on blaming.  Finally, people will find out who is doing all the blaming.  I am not going to do that.  Those members who come back to Parliament during the next term, will have to have some training.  You must understand that you get paid for speaking during these 10 minutes, and you must be relevant when you speak.  If you have been given the wrong speech, you must say no, you cannot read from the wrong speech.  Really, you must be relevant.  You must talk about things that enlighten you and enriches you, but to come here and talk as if [You talk as if you are just falling off a tree, talking recklessly].  While people are really busy talking about things they have no idea of, you cannot.

So you waste time, it is the taxpayers' money, talking as [Do not talk anyhow].  It cannot work that way.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  At least we need to listen.  We need to understand and appreciate that sometimes we must talk sense.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B H CELE:  Very lastly ...

THE CHAIRPERSON:  There is a point of order.

~INKOSI~ B N MDLETSHE: TRANSLATION:  I think that the hon member is using inappropriate language when he says that the hon member is falling off a tree when he speaks.  That is not appropriate language.  I think that the hon member should withdraw those words.  T/E

MR B H CELE: [I would have withdrawn it if I had said he is falling off a tree, but I said he talks as if he is falling off a tree.  If I had said he is falling off a tree, but I said "as if"].

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon member, please wrap up.

MR B H CELE:  Finally, hon member Ngcobo spoke about affirmative action, especially when it comes to gender.  If you page through this report you do not see a single woman in this book, only males.  From the Minister to Directors to everybody, all males.  I do not concur with her then, that there has been affirmative action in this Department.  I thank you.

MRS B S MOHLAKA:  Point of order.  The hon member said affirmative action and she did not use gender in particular.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order! Order!  I call upon the hon Minister to respond. 

AN HON MEMBER: A red card].

AN HON MEMBER:  I can get you one if you want one.  [LAUGHTER]

REV C J MTETWA: (Minister of Public Works): 

TRANSLATION:  Chairperson and the hon House, I am pleased to thank all the high-ranking members who have spoken here.  The first thing I want to commend and thank the speakers for is that they were talking about the Department, as I too was talking about the Department.  

When you talk about the Department, you are talking about money, money that belongs to this Government.  When I made my speech, I am not a person who wants to conceal or to protect whatever is not going well.  I at times wish to be told by you what you think is not in order regarding your money.  Thank you for that.

Firstly, let me thank the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee, the hon member Mvelase, for his and his Committee's report.  There is very little I can say that maybe we can correct there, but it sometimes happens, because we talk about a lot at this time.  There is truth in that I said, and even now I am saying, that the Department made a mistake when talking about finances.  Not that there is no co-operation in the Department.  I said they made a mistake by leaving me behind when they were talking about finances.  That is the only thing we were talking about, not working together.  Even regarding communication within the Department, there are no complaints.  I wish to set the record straight in that area.

My friend, Madevu, complained that as an Induna for the women, he does not see his group over there in high positions.  It is like this, Chairperson, even if he can see it that way, people move up, it is not that there are none in higher positions.  Even if he does not see them over there.  There are women in high positions, except in directorships.  

Directorship positions, they are not appointed by the Minister, we have to understand that.  There are panels who conduct interviews with those who applied.  They are the people who select a person according to the stipulated details that he was successful this way or that way.  If a woman was unsuccessful, I cannot go and say, go and catch a woman for me.  [LAUGHTER]

Let me thank the hon member, Mtalane, for the way she presented.  There is a lot she presented on which I will not use up your time, Chairperson, because there is no-where we disagree.  Everything she presented, she presented it in a constructive and co-operative manner and that she is herself the owner of this House.

Mr Nel, the hon member, reported to me that he was leaving, but he said Nkwali over there, will bring responses for him.  There is something he criticised, although he asked in his letter that he wrote to me that he would be happy if we could talk again tomorrow.  

What he complained about is that I spoke about what happened and did not say anything about what is yet to happen.  I would suggest that maybe he has not thoroughly read my speech.  I said, Chairperson and the hon House here, in my speech, that because of the things that were already put forth, and that needed me to respond to and also in preserving time, because my other colleagues were not allocated time and I was allocated time, it became necessary for me to cut short my speech and clarify that which was confusing the House.

I did say in my speech that in fact there is an important part of my speech which I was supposed to say about the way forward and that was omitted.  That is in my speech.  By that I am saying, maybe my friend has not reviewed my speech closely.

About the hon member over there, Nonkosi Xaba did very well, because we are in fact talking at a bad time during the quarter finals.  You see, when you talk during quarter finals, everyone wants to raise his neck and be seen that he is present, so that he will be present again next year.  

What Mr Xaba is complaining about is the staff from Education.  This is what he is supposed to understand, I am always explaining, the staff has long been in Works.  I am always explaining, Education was controlling the salaries.  They would work in my area and get paid by Education.  It is the money that did not return.  All of them returned and were placed in positions, everything was straightened out and the amalgamation was completed.  We were having a dispute over money.  

It is just now returning, so that their salaries are back where they work.  That is what has not been straightened out.   T/E

AN HON MEMBER: [When the Minister says Dingila is a human being, what does that mean?  [LAUGHTER]

REV C J MTETWA: TRANSLATION:  No, Dingila spoke about great matters, because he reminded us even of communists.  They are no longer in the House.  Now Cele likes this issue of communists, because he was one once.  T/E

AN HON MEMBER: He is one].

REV C J MTETWA: 

TRANSLATION:  No, he has been converted.  The hon member ~Inkosi~ Mathaba spoke the truth as ~Inkosi~, because he was speaking about tangible things I did on this entire earth, things that will not be mentioned because there is conflict.

Going back to the hon member Nkwali Mkhwanazi, what he said is indisputable truth when he said that here, as we are talking about departments and as we are talking about Truro House, yes, those are things that are being examined.  

The House will at some stage get a conclusion on the circumstances of that, because there is still a thorough investigation on whether a purchase is possible and how it could be done and whether the funds permit us.  Because this House says so, it will be the one who produces the money to purchase and we cannot employ people.  Nevertheless, that is being investigated, it is not being neglected.  We can then not talk, because we are supposed to respond now, and then say what is not there or what we do not know.

Proceeding to the hon member over there, Mr Haygarth.  He said a lot that is important and he was talking about the real circumstances, the real circumstances as it is, including that of money and about the need to be very careful when talking about matters pertaining to a department or departments, because it is not just the department.  

Although you can be unpopular and it is said that it is a department, but it is in the departments where things have to be really straightened out.  He spoke as an adult and demonstrated his adulthood and the honesty of this House.  He did not speak vaguely.  We will follow and look very closely at the words he spoke here.  I am also very pleased because he is in the Department's Portfolio Committee.

Proceeding to the hon member Ngcobo.  There is something else that one may not pay a lot of attention to that I recognised when the member pointed it out, and that is this important thing of training our people.  We can talk about affirmative action, but as the Department is doing, we are trying to correct that by training people so that they can be elevated to certain levels and take positions in the appropriate manner, so that tomorrow we will not complain.  

Because to take someone on the basis of skin colour and say because we want our own black colour, no, that is not the time, because we would also be disgracing ourselves.

But this Department of Works is trying to strengthen people who are being trained, people who will, as they rise in status, rise with the knowledge of this job.  There are things that cannot be done by just anyone.  If I can take Cele and say he should be a director, a problem will arise.  [LAUGHTER]  T/E

MR B H CELE:.  [I can handle it very well].

REV C J MTETWA: 
TRANSLATION:  The hon member Cele, here, spoke and mentioned things that are taking place over there at the Coast.  It is a good thing to expose those things, although it sometimes puzzles me that a member, the Government - because you are the Government - when a person sees something he saves it until Parliament to strike the Minister and not go to the Minister beforehand.  If he had come, Cele and I would have gone and examined that thing.  He saved it, waiting to strike a blow, using it today.  T/E

MR B H CELE: [I would have come, I was at Sayidi yesterday]. 

REV C J MTETWA: 

TRANSLATION:  For that I am also grateful, because he struck in place and I took it.  I can take it all, irrespective of what he is striking with, I will accept it.  There is not one that I can be anxious about and say, oh, this one struck badly.  If you are seeing something that exists, that is what is necessary.

I wish to say, Chairperson and the hon House, I was very pleased that in almost all the many votes and almost all the House spoke directly about the Department, whatever they were saying about it, but they were talking about it.  T/E

AN HON MEMBER: [Besides Dingila here, who went astray].

REV C J MTETWA: 

TRANSLATION:  No, Dingila was speaking about it.  It may happen that you did not understand him because he is a bit older than yourself.  Now age sometimes causes people to say certain things.  Maybe you did not understand what he was saying and how that language fits in the discussion about the Department.  Get used to it, you will eventually get it, do not worry too much.

Chairperson and the hon House, let me thank the members.  All that is questionable will be answered along the way because we are all travelling the same route, but that is if we are all travelling it.  But if we lay in ambush on each other, we will rise against each other amidst the thicket.  Thank you, Chairperson.  T/E

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon members, we have now come to the end of the debate.  The business of the Committee of Supply has not been completed.  However, leave has been granted to sit again.  I now call upon the Sergeant-at-Arms to raise the mace.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMITTEE SUSPENDED AT 17:23
	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE RESUMED AT 17:23

THE SPEAKER:  The business of the House resumes.  I now call upon the Premier to make any announcement.  Any announcements from the Premier?

REV C J MTETWA: (Minister of Public Works):  No announcement.  No messages, Madam Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  That being so, the business of the House is now adjourned until tomorrow at 10:30.  Thank you.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 17:23 UNTIL
	10:30 ON TUESDAY, 2 JUNE 1998

		DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FIFTH SESSION
	SECOND SITTING - FIFTEENTH SITTING DAY
	TUESDAY, 2 JUNE 1998

THE HOUSE MET AT 10:34 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, PIETERMARITZBURG.  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

It is my pleasure to announce that the hon Mr Meer was granted a doctorate of law by the University of Natal, Durban.  We are happy that this was granted to him.  I take this opportunity to congratulate him on behalf of the House.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

The hon the Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I have no special announcement other than to concur with you and congratulate Mr I C Meer, heartily, on behalf of Parliament and the Cabinet for this honour.  It could not have been better deserved, because we know that Mr I C Meer has had clarity of thinking over many, many issues.  He is the one who has clearly pointed the way to the unity of all the people of KwaZulu-Natal, and has portrayed King Shaka as the big unifier, and has asked us to follow in the footsteps of the Ilembe.  Congratulations, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

AN HON MEMBER:  That is because he is seated next to me.

THE SPEAKER:  

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

The hon Mr Gwala.

MR M B GWALA: (Leader of the House):  On Thursday, Mr Speaker, on 16 April 1998 a 36 member delegation from the French Parliament accompanied by senior citizens, some as old as 96 years, visited KwaZulu-Natal to hold discussions with the hon Speaker, Mr G H S Mdhlalose, and the Leader of the House, that is myself.

After the discussions the members were taken on a tour of the historic places of KwaZulu, such as the Cultural Museum at Ondini.

It was during this excursion that the French visitors presented a valuable medal called the Circle Renaissance Cree en 1970.  It was presented by a senior member of parliament and leader of the delegation, the hon Mr Michel de Roseolan.

The medal was in recognition of the important role played by the KwaZulu-Natal Government in economic and cultural affairs.  Mr de Roseolan said the French people have had a long relationship with the former KwaZulu Government dating back to the times of the late former Anglican Bishop of Zululand, Dr A H Zulu, the former Speaker of KwaZulu Legislative Assembly, as well as the leaders such as the former Premier of KwaZulu-Natal, Dr F T Mdlalose, and the former Chief Minister of KwaZulu, His Excellency Dr M G Buthelezi, now National Minister of Home Affairs and the former Minister of Education, Dr O D Dhlomo.

The medal was received by the Leader of the House in the presence of the Speaker, Mr G H S Mdhlalose, Mrs E N Shandu, Deputy Minister of Public Works in the National Parliament and Mrs S B Mohlaka, member of KwaZulu-Natal Legislature.  The same medal was presented during April last year to the National Assembly of Iraq by the same team.

It was unfortunate that the hon Premier, Dr B S Ngubane, the hon Minister of Education, Prince V T Zulu, and Minister of Welfare and Population Development, Prince G L Zulu and other Ministers, such as the Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism did not attend, as the function coincided with the horrific accident of a truck and a school bus which took place in Newcastle.  The members of the Cabinet were there to comfort the bereaved families.

In response to the message delivered by Mr de Roseolan after the medal had been presented to the Leader of the House, the Leader of the House praised them for their untiring efforts in working closely with the people of KwaZulu-Natal.  The Leader of the House, on behalf of this Legislature, presented a shield and a stick to Mr de Roseolan and small items were also presented to individual members of the French delegation.

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I formally present this medal to you so that members will be able to see it.  I thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much, Mr Leader of the House.  We will ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to circulate this.  The hon Mr Zuma.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I would like to table three annual reports.  The first one is the Annual Report of the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism.  The second one is an Annual Report of the KwaZulu Transport Service Corporation.  The third one is the Natal Sharks Board Annual Report.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Zuma.  Yes.

MR F DLAMINI:  Mr Speaker, I would like to table a training programme on conflict resolution for members of Parliament.  It will be distributed by the Secretary.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS 

THE SPEAKER:  The hon Chief Whip.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, on the next sitting day of this House I will be moving as follows:

	This House takes note of the 1998/1999 Budget Report of the Finance Committee tabled on 12 May 1998, and having considered the report in terms of Rule 134, hereby resolves:-

	That the report be referred back to the Finance Committee, and they be instructed to table an amended report dealing with various concerns raised during the Committee Stage on the Budget debate, such report to be tabled at the next sitting of the House.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Volker.

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, I would like to give notice of the following motion:

	This House notes that the appointment of a Local Government Revision Court could be seen as not being politically neutral in view of the fact that one of the Co-Chairmen is the brother of an active ANC public representative.

	Therefore this House requests the Minister of Local Government to review the appointment concerned.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

MR A R AINSLIE:  Mr Speaker, I shall move on the next sitting day of this House:

	That this House notes with concern that there are still Provincial Government Departments that do not reflect the demographics of the new South Africa in their staff establishments; and therefore:

	Calls on all departments to address continuing racial and gender imbalances in this regard; and

	further calls on all departments to implement fully the National Government Employment Policy with regard to race, gender and the disabled.

Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Yes, JJ.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Speaker, on the next sitting day I shall move the following motion:

	1.	Noting that Sibongiseni Zondi, a Std 10 student at Mzikawuthandwa High School at Emtulwa, Dalton, was killed on 18 May 1998 whilst in the custody of members of the SANDF;

	2.	that eyewitnesses allege that Sibongiseni was assaulted in a river by the SANDF members;

	3.	that the post-mortem report indicates that Sibongiseni's body showed evidence of an assault and that the cause of death was drowning;

	4.	that the SANDF version appears to be that Sibongiseni jumped off a cliff into the river of his own accord;

	5.	that no one has yet been arrested or charged for his death and the responsible SANDF members remain on duty; and

	6.	that Sibongiseni's family and friends cannot understand the reasons for the slow progress in this case.

	Further Noting:

		that numerous other allegations have been made of assaults by members of the SANDF.

	Believing:
	
	1.	That there is prima facie evidence in Sibongiseni's case of either murder or culpable homicide;

	2.	that the slow progress made by the SAPS in the investigation of this case is unacceptable.

	Resolves:

	1.	to call on the Provincial Commissioner, Chris Serfontein, to explain to this House, the reason for the slow progress in the investigation of Sibongiseni's death; and

	2.	to call on the Provincial Commissioner, Chris Serfontein, to give a report to this House on the progress regarding all other complaints of assaults made against SANDF members.

Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Any further motions?  

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

	8.1	COMMITTEE STAGE : VOTE 15 (PROMOTING RDP)

THE SPEAKER:  In that event I propose that I may now leave the chair.

THE HOUSE RESOLVED INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE
MRS F X GASA THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES TAKES THE CHAIR

KWAZULU-NATAL APPROPRIATION BILL, 1998.

VOTE 15: PROMOTING RDP
VOTE 4: ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND TOURISM

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we take our seats.  Thank you.  The House has been converted to a Committee of Supply.  The announcement I would like to make being briefed by the Chief Whip of the ANC is that the hon Minister will make his full speech when he handles vote 15.  He will not respond at the end, neither will he introduce vote 4.  These will run through.  He will only respond at the end of vote 4, Economic Affairs and Tourism.  That is a slight change.  We now give this time to the hon Minister to introduce vote 15, and he will go through the entire list.  Hon Minister.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Thank you, Chair.  I am taking into account first that your House has been sitting for quite a long time, and that when you speak about these votes it involved a lot of details.  I am therefore going to try to be very economic in presenting these votes.

There will be, in the course of my presentation, a distribution of a short report on one specific item of the RDP, the peace initiative R100 million.  That will be circulated during the course of my presentation.  In the process I will also touch on other RDP matters which are part of the report.  I will combine the two.

Madam Chair, it gives me pleasure to present to you today the Budget Appropriation Speech of the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism in two parts, as has been announced.

Recently, there has been a number of criticisms on the central economic policy thrusts of the National Government.  National economic policy provides the framework in which provinces implement their areas of jurisdiction.  These criticisms at best can be described as half baked ideas without any real substance.  They will not help us achieve our major goals of improving the quality of life and creating a better life for all.  I want to address these criticisms, because if these continue to persist, we are going to shoot ourselves in the foot.  To be successful as a Province, we all must proceed from an understanding of the basic strategic framework, National Government has put into place to achieve economic growth and development.

Our economy is inextricably linked to the world economy.  There are important changes in the global economy that requires new responses in terms of economic policy, particularly by a State such as ours.  The first is that productive forces have significantly changed.  Technological innovations are now more pervasive and being utilised by more trading economies.  The importance of computer based information technology is crucial.  Accordingly, science and technology innovations are having a profound and rapid effect on the means of production.  Those economies that can establish adaptable and efficient systems and that capture this change are more successful than those who do not.

This has implications for the democratic State.  The State now has to play a different role.  This is essentially to establish a clear strategic and institutional framework and parameters within which market forces and flexible decision-making processes provide for adaptability and efficiency.  It is the combination of these two processes that provides the overall systematic efficiency toward the attainment of articulated socio-economic objectives.

Given this, what are the starting points for the Government of National Unity around the Growth Employment and Redistribution Strategy, popularly known as GEAR?  Firstly, resource mobilisation for a country like South Africa at the end of the 20th Century is complex and we cannot rely heavily on the State to do this, since this raises interest rates and debt servicing crowds out other expenditures on the budget.  More sophisticated public financing strategies are required and have to be used.

Secondly, high costs, income distortions and overly protected economies have to restructure themselves to be more adaptable in all production, not just exports, and that redistribution and empowerment facilitates growth and development.  Redistribution is best achieved by extension of affordable infrastructure, employment in value added jobs, price stability and the generation of new economic activity.  The State uses a range of policy measures to achieve this.  These two points require a restructuring of the financing of the public sector; its activities and hence, deployment and skills of its personnel; and infrastructural delivery mechanisms.

Therefore GEAR focuses on fiscal policy first, both because it relates very directly to the mobilisation of financial resources, and because Government's own performance is most directly judged on its fiscal performance.  There are clear limits to Government borrowing.  The current level of debt standing at 58% does not put South Africa in the upper league of indebted countries and our foreign indebtedness is reasonable.  Compared to rapidly growing countries our debt level is high.  The debt level of interest that has persisted for some decades now is decisive.

At current interest levels payments will now be the largest budget item.  Consider that an average interest rate of 15% (about where we are now), then our debt doubles every five years causing a rapid escalation in interest payments.  The bigger problem is that in these circumstances lenders of money start to perceive a greater and greater risk in lending the State funds and demand a higher interest rate.  Higher interest rates affect the housing market, hire purchase, investment in productive capacity etcetera.  Therefore, to see Government expenditure as a major impetus to employment creation is not sustainable.  Accordingly, GEAR fiscal policy objectives are different and relate to improved social expenditure, and a different strategy for mobilising public expenditure and "crowding in" private sector investment (both domestic and foreign).  An analysis of current Government expenditure shows that it is of a poor quality in that it is spent mainly on maintenance and assets with a short life span.  Mr Chairman, I have got a touch of flu, do not worry.  I am just taking some water.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I guess the touch of flu makes me Mr Chairman, instead of Madam Chair.  [LAUGHTER]

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Yes.  Sorry about that, Madam Chair.  It clearly does make a substantial contribution to the longer term wellbeing.  In addition, expenditure is distorted away from key areas such as primary health care, old age, child and disabled care.  The pattern of school expenditure is also distorted.  Worse still, consumption expenditure is neither effectively or efficiently spent.  The current pattern of expenditure must be reprioritised and made more efficient.  This is the task of a major budget reform currently being undertaken by National Government.  Fiscal discipline is therefore absolutely essential to ensure compliance with the objectives of reprioritisation and improved quality of capital expenditure.

The budget reform process is linked to a particular strategy for public sector financial resource mobilisation.  Stated briefly this is the following:

*	Basic quality of life social expenditure, particularly in previously deprived communities, will be dealt with through the budgetary expenditure.

*	Where infrastructure has a cost recovery potential because it generates a predictable income flow, then the very large needs in this area must be met by the public/private partnership concept.  In this regard, the reorganised Development Financing Institutions (DBSA, IDC, Land Bank etcetera), will play a new role.  By creating the appropriate regulatory environment and careful financial engineering between the budget, the Development Finance Institutions and the private sector objectives of affordability and service provision in rural and deprived areas will be met.  This strategy is designed to increase the levels of investment by Government on the budget, within the parastatals and then to "crowd in" private sector capital into development investment.

*	The objective of deficit reduction thus has a number of purposes.  It reduces the borrowing requirement to prevent a rapid escalation of debt, it facilitates reprioritisation and moves borrowing closer to the level of good quality capital expenditure from the budget.

However, this strategy also requires the restructuring of State assets.  This is designed to focus them and give them adjusted mandates.  The change also involves a fundamental adjustment of how they functioned.  A clear distinction was made between financial support and non-financial support.  This must not mean that they function like any other financial institution.  Through State equity holdings, the rate of return expected by the State on that equity and the use of other forms of concessionary financing makes it possible for these institutions to offer favourable terms.  In doing so they have to carefully evaluate risk and economic viability since they must cover operating costs, and be able to sustain an ongoing lending programme.

The final result of the restructuring of State assets will be a clearer, better policy, regulatory frameworks, debt and asset restructuring, managerial changes, strategic equity partners and privatisation.  The basic objectives are improved public sector capacity to deliver services and to efficiently mobilise and apply resources to transparent objectives.

On the trade and industry front South Africa is an example of a reasonably successful industrialisation process behind a protective and isolationist policy mind-set.  We now have to restructure toward an adaptable economy.  To continue the protective path is to relegate ourselves to the margins of the world economy and become incapable of supplying either affordable products or sustainable employment.

The basic strategic approach that has been adopted is to ensure that by engaging with the world economy we ensure an expansion of economic activity and employment creation.  There are three interrelated policy thrusts to achieve this objective.

The first is external trade relations.  Here a managed tariff reform is designed to induce previously protected enterprises to become more efficient and to reduce our domestic cost level so that they are closer to general world cost levels.  Associated with the tariff reduction programme is a very active programme of trade expansion.  South Africa is in an unusual position since we can now truly access world markets, and we are actively striving to do so through negotiations and trade and investment.

The second area is industrial policy.  It is a basic tenant of policy that we cannot rely on market forces alone to bring about restructuring that will achieve our objectives.  We must complement our tariff strategy with a supportive industrial policy.  The role of this policy through the supply side measures is facilitative, analytical and co-ordinating focused on altering the production process.  A major focus area is on SMMEs to create new economic activity that is essential for improved wealth distribution, sustained growth and employment creation.

The third area is the internal trade regulatory environment.  This is a very wide range including corporate law and governance, business practice, incentives, standards, usury etcetera.  There are two fundamental objectives here.  The first is to improve accessibility to economic activity and consumer rights.  The second objective is to promote international trade and investment because of the certainty, transparency, legality and ethics of our economic activity.

The last area regards the labour market.  It is in this area where the major debates arise.  These criticisms have focused on employment creation.  South Africa's current structural problems are severe when one considers the backlogs of unemployment, social infrastructure and low skills levels.  We have not opted for advocating neo-liberal free market options based on cheap labour and jobs no matter what the cost approach.  South Korea did this for years and it was very successful.  When workers organised and fought back their economy collapsed with even more devastating consequences once the "Asian flu" came around.  We are convinced that this is not the path South Africa should pursue.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  We will continue to take the long hard road of building an economy based on sound macro economic policies and ensure long term sustainability and growth.

The approach of National Government is to first match the strategic objective and potential of an industry, cluster or area with an appropriately established wage, training and location strategy.  This will be achieved through "regulation by voice".  The second thrust is to try and ensure that at the macro level that productivity growth outstrips wage growth.  This frees investable resources, and it accordingly follows that this surplus must go back to the productive sector to generate employment.  A key component of this overall labour market approach is the concept of active labour markets where institutions facilitate redeployment, mobility, skill portability and support for restructuring and adjustment that needs to occur in our economy.

The basic strategic approach of National Government is not to deal with the current static position but to create a new dynamic economy.  Failure to grasp the basic economic strategic elements of our national policy results in ad hoc and in naive criticism that do not provide any constructive solutions to our economic problems.

Madam Chair, hon members, let us look at the facts of what we have achieved.  In 1995 and 1996 our economy grew by 3% and by 2% in 1997.  This is largely due to the poor performance by the agricultural sector.  It is likely that the economy will grow by between 2% and 2,3% this year as the effects of the East Asian crisis reduces global economic growth from a forecast of 4% to approximately 3%.  Foreign direct investment between 1995 to 1997 has been approximately R30 billion.  Not bad for a Government that has only been in power for four years.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Hon members, a serious and honest analysis of the employment situation in manufacturing, that takes into account the longer term cycles of investment and the extensive restructuring in sectors, will come to the conclusion that no simple deductions can be made.  For example, in the textile industry the average age of capital equipment has reduced from 18 years in 1994 to 11 years in 1997.  This is projected to reduce to eight years in the near future.  Employment dropped in the textile sectors, but grew in clothing.  We need to be careful that we do not oversimplify the complex changes that our economy is undergoing.  As the restructuring in all sectors tapers off, we should see rising nett increases in employment opportunities.  But we still have a great deal to still do at all levels of Government.

Madam Chair, hon members, the real challenges of our transition has come to the fore.  These challenges are complex, and there are no quick fix solutions.  They require effective and long lasting solutions located within a strategic framework of where we want to be as a Province in the next 25 years.  They also require bold and creative decisions on the part of the executive within provincial government.

Central to these challenges has been the austerity budget we all had to accept this year because we simply do not have a choice.  My Department and its related institutions have been hit hard.  The future of many of these institutions that play a critical role in growing our economy hangs in the balance.  In the context of growing unemployment and increasing competition for foreign direct investment between countries, leave alone between the provinces, our austerity budget sends a negative signal to those who are involved in supporting our economy.

While we accept our part of the responsibility of the burden of the provincial debt, even though we are not a big spending department, we cannot accept the reactive and crisis manner approach to the budgeting process.  This has to change and be based on a set of clear priorities for the Province.  The budgeting process must be a pro-active, led by our provincial growth and development strategy, inclusive of all key role-players, cut the duplication of activities between the various line departments and finally, be determined by what impact our provincial allocation will have on various sectors in our Province.  I hope those responsible for the budgeting process will bear this in mind as we plan the next budget.  It is the only way that our provincial budget can be used as an instrument for realising our vision as a Province.

The consequences of an austerity budget means a large Government bureaucracy with little to do because there are no funds for programmes.  It means the closure of institutions which we as a Provincial Government have established.  It means cutbacks in social welfare, health, education etcetera.  However, it also means that we have to pull together and agree to find ways in which we are able to manage and leverage resources from wherever we can get them.  It also means that line departments do not have the luxury of jealously guarding their territories.

It also means that we have to think very carefully, as a Government, what we do and are we executing our tasks in the most efficient way?  Now is the time for clear leadership, partnership, effective co-operation and working together.  There is no alternative if we are going to realise our collective responsibilities of meeting critical socio-economic challenges we face as a Province.

We have all spoken about our tourism potential with great vigour and motivation.  Yet we are unable to allocate any substantial budget to impact positively for this sector.  It is difficult to attempt to lead Government down a path of partnership with stakeholders without bringing anything substantial to the party.  The funding crisis of the tourism sector in the Province is real, and solutions have got to be found.  We cannot afford to lose the momentum in our drive to develop this as the lead sector in our economy.  Provincial Government, in particular, has to get its act together on this matter.

What existed in the last budget year for the funding of tourism in the Province was as follows:

1.	Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism, R6 million.  R4 million of which is transferred to the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority.

2.	KwaZulu Finance Corporation, R7 million for loans.

3.	Regional Councils, R9 million.

4.	Durban Metro, R13 million.

5.	SATOUR bed levies, R1,5 million.  This will not continue next year.

In total more than R34 million may be assumed to be directed into the tourism sector in the Province.  In the 1998/1999 budget there has been a 50% decrease across all these institutions.  A number of issues emerge that need to be dealt with.

We need to rationalise the number of institutions in the Province and rethink our provincial marketing strategy.  The international best practice that appears to be emerging is the marketing of countries and regions/states/provinces within them.  For example, can we continue to afford to market Durban alone outside of the Province?  Durban has been the traditional holiday destination, the Province offers the diversity for the capturing of new markets from which Durban will be a direct beneficiary.

As a Cabinet, we have little room to manoeuvre but to leverage budgets from different spheres of Government to effectively market and develop tourism.  We have little choice but to put forward measures to deal more effectively with the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority (KZNTA).

I will make proposals to Cabinet to establish an interim management committee around my Department, the Regional Councils and the Durban Metro to manage the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority and resolve these issues as quickly as possible.  This interim management committee will report to Cabinet through my Ministry and move more rapidly towards fulfilling the requirements of the legislation as soon as possible.

I cannot proceed with appointing a new board under the current financial constraints.  This simply does not make sense.  It also does not make sense to continue to pay for the time and services of those who continue to serve on the Interim National Tourism Steering Committee, now that the Authority has been established, and we also have these financial problems.

At the same time, we have to look at effectively marketing the Province.  There are discussions to establish a new marketing company which will include the Regional Councils, the Durban Metro and the private sector.  Until the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority is sorted out, we must have something to offer the private sector and communities.  This will be the vehicle for the private sector and other key role-players.  As political leadership across all spheres of Government we have the responsibility to effectively unlock this hidden treasure in the Province.

Madam Chair, hon members, on 6 May we, together with Swaziland and Mozambique, launched the Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative.  This is the biggest investment drive yet seen in the Province and concentrating on an area that has been neglected in the past.  There is clearly keen investor interest in the proposed concepts and projects proposed.  The SDI is still in the process of packaging the key anchor projects.  By the end of July 1998 this is expected to be completed after which a call to pre-qualifying bidders would be announced.  This is when the real investment process starts.

Our biggest challenge as a Provincial Government is to talk with one voice to the markets.  We cannot afford to send mixed signals.  Investors will get nervous and walk away.  There are hundreds of other opportunities they can consider across the globe.  I want to make this point clear, because although these are primarily tourism projects they involve issues which are part of other line function departments such as conservation and planning.  We need to urgently develop a more coherent approach to the investment process with these departments if we are to be successful.

This is our only chance to develop the north-eastern part of our Province.  Clear trade-offs have to be made, special measures for fast tracking investment have to be put into place to avoid the bureaucratic planning hurdles that may arise.  I want to urge all departments to put forward their concerns as soon as possible so that we can resolve them, develop a coherent investment approach and ensure that we are able to meet our tight time frames.  If the Lubombo SDI fails to bring in the envisaged investment, we will only have ourselves to blame.

On the industrial side job losses continue in our vulnerable sectors clothing, footwear and leather.  Once the tariff reductions bottom out next year, we should expect more stability in these sectors.  These highly protected industries are in the final stages of the adjustment process.  We have managed to access some of the supply side measures available to assist these sectors, particularly in the Pietermaritzburg footwear sector.

Our biggest challenge, however, still remains to attract inward investment and value adding to our competitive sectors, such as aluminium, petro chemicals, wood and furniture.  We need to clearly develop a closer working relationship and partnership with these industries and carefully develop and package the downstream opportunities for investment.  As a Department we have no resources to pursue this in a programmatic way.

The details of my Department's activities, and those parastatals that fall under my Department, are to be found in the written copy of my speech which has been circulated.

I will therefore not go into a lot of details to spare you some time, Madam Chair, but I just want to touch on one or two, not everything in detail, because I think it is important for us to appreciate some of the problems that we are experiencing, and particularly some of those that are very topical.  I wish therefore to deal with KwaZulu Finance Corporation, the KFC.

KWAZULU FINANCE AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION

The Provincial Finance Corporation Steering Committee, appointed by Cabinet during September 1996, has successfully completed the first phase of its task, in line with its terms of reference.  The Committee has developed a detailed Memorandum setting out the mandate, governance, funding and reporting structures for a new Provincial Development Finance Corporation (PDFC), together with a new name.  There are details in relation to this aspect which are in the report, and members can look into those.

KWAZULU TRANSPORT SERVICES CORPORATION LTD (KZTSC)

I would also like just to touch on the Transport Service Corporation as well.  The Corporation commenced the 1997/1998 financial year as a transformed body.  The transformation process resulted in the Corporation being completely decentralised with nine branches each having its own management team, while the Head Office function was reduced to the absolute minimum.

One of the recommendations of the transformation process was the disposal of the Corporation's subsidiary, Eagleliner Coach Services.  This has proved to be a difficult task, firstly, in finding potential purchasers, and secondly, potential purchasers found it problematic to raise the capital.  As a result the Eagleliner remains unsold to date, and the restructuring of the operation had to be undertaken.  In the process it has been, the very Eagleliner, having worked on it a bit, one of the elements that has helped financially in terms of the cash flow.

KWAZULU-NATAL TOURISM AUTHORITY (KZNTA)

I would like to touch very briefly on KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority.  This year the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism is allocating an amount R4 million to the Tourism Authority despite requesting an amount of R12,5 million as outlined in the tourism business plan.

Madam Chair, hon members, the budget of R4 million is hopelessly inadequate to achieve what needs to be done in the tourism sector this year.  I have already met my colleague, the Minister of Finance, Minister Miller, and the cold hard fact remains there are no funds.  We have entered June, the third month of the financial year, and decisions have to be taken now.  I spoke earlier about proposals that I will be taking to the Cabinet in this regard.

In addition, I want to suggest that for the 1999/2000 budgeting process we need to establish a special committee to work on achieving a bigger slice for tourism in the provincial budget.  Work should start immediately between the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority, my Department and the Department of Finance, if this is to be achieved.

The KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority has prioritised a number of projects and programmes for the 1998/1999 financial year, and funding will primarily be used for pre-feasibility studies, scoping reports and investment marketing strategies.  A report on the activities of the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority is set out in Annexure A. 

Madam Chair, I just want to remind your House that we had one of the best CEO's to lead our tourism authority.  He had to leave the Province because we could not finance him.  We cannot say tourism is important and then do not follow what we say, when it comes to budgeting.  It is a serious shortcoming which we should all address.


SHARKS BOARD

KwaZulu-Natal has been fortunate over the past 30 years to have the services of the Sharks Board to bolster the multi-billion Rand seaside tourism industry from the potential of shark attacks.  It is unfortunate, that I have to announce that we are taking a step backwards.  In the light of an effective R3,4 million reduction in provincial subsidy, the Board has had to turn to its client base, the local authorities of KwaZulu-Natal to fund the deficit.  Two weeks ago, the Transitional Local Councils along the coastline were notified of increases in Sharks Board charges to them, ranging from 30% to 800%.  Historically, the smaller local authorities were subsidised to a greater extent than the larger ones, consequently it was the smaller local authorities who faced the biggest increase.

To date, a high proportion of the local authorities have indicated that they will not be able to afford the increase, and have no alternative but to consider the removal of the service.  The remaining local authorities with netted beaches, will be faced with increases of up to 50% on the tariffs currently charged by the Board.  These increases will be effective from 1 July 1998.

Without going into the details, Madam Chair, I am sure you saw a document that was distributed yesterday which indicates what is likely to happen if we are not in a position to deal with this matter.  Let us just have one shark attacking one tourist, your tourism industry is adversely and fundamentally affected.  We do not need to argue that one.  It is a fact we need to bear in mind.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  

RDP CHIEF DIRECTORATE

As the hon members know, my Department has the responsibility of providing a programme management service for the implementation of Provincial Growth and Development Strategy (PGDS), so provides the Secretariat to the Provincial Growth and Development Strategy Task Team.  I would refer the hon members to my Department's 1997/1998 Annual Report for details of the work undertaken to date to facilitate the implementation of the strategy.

The initiation of 17 key strategic interventions are amongst the first actions that have to be undertaken by the PGDS programme management and the Task Team.  Three short term initiatives are being pursued.  These include:

*	The PGDS Financial Management System
*	The PGDS Information System
*	and the effective marketing of the PGDS

These will provide key tools required by the PGDS programme management office and the Task Team to facilitate the implementation process.  Areas of duplication, spheres of synergy, different leverage points for development will attempt to be co-ordinated with the view to adding value and integrating development approaches.

The marketing of these tools to organisations will lay the basis for their use and enhance the prospect of increased co-ordination between departments and sectors outside of Government.

I also hope that we can finally be in a position to utilise these tools in the forthcoming budgeting process to ensure that we can have a strategy led provincial budget rather than the current crisis budget.  The Provincial Growth and Development Strategy remains our only coherent strategy in the Province.  Has time not arrived for all departments to pull their weight and ensure that we are able to take bigger steps towards its implementation?

RDP DISCRETIONARY FUND

Madam Chair, one of the functions located within my Department is the management and the co-ordination of the implementation of projects funded from the Provincial Discretionary Fund for the 1996/1997 financial year.  An amount of R14 million was allocated to this fund, to be a resource to fund community-owned and community-driven development projects.

The RDP Directorate within my Department co-ordinates the utilisation of this funding at two levels:

Firstly, the RDP Directorate ensures that the RDP Co-Ordination Committee meets regularly to decide on community development project proposals.

Secondly, once a project has been approved by the RDP Co-Ordinating Committee the RDP Directorate co-ordinates project implementation.  The beneficiary community is informed of the approval of their project and a representative committee is established.  The community is requested to identify a person with the required expertise to act as project manager, responsible for developing a business plan, assisting in the appointment of the contractor or service provider.

During this financial year, 1998/1999 the RDP Directorate will continue implementing projects funded from the Provincial Discretionary Fund.

Towards the end of this financial year when most of these projects have been completed, the RDP Directorate will initiate monitoring of projects.  Aspects such as community participation, cost effectiveness, sustainability of projects, training, partnerships and integration as well as an impact on beneficiary communities will be evaluated.  Lessons learnt from such an evaluation will be fed back into policy formulation.

This programme has proved to be invaluable in the way it has assisted the poorest of the poor in the Province.  We will continue this programme into the future and build in it allocation into the 1999/2000 budget.  The Directorate has also built up a capacity to deliver on small micro projects in an efficient and organised way.  Lists of projects are outlined in Annexure C, which you have.

One of the RDP Discretionary Fund projects is one that was given to Executive members, and there are details here because the Minister and his Department established an Education Trust Fund, and there are details of what it has done.  I could just say on that one, Madam Chair, that moving on the percentage that was allocated to deal with the rural areas we discovered that a lot can be done with a little money.  We discovered orphans in the area referred to in the report, that were more than 1 000, that in fact the welfare was not aware of, who are now being linked to the welfare, and therefore they are being assisted.  There are a number of schools that are already benefitting from this one.

Could I say, if our colleagues look at page 26 in the report, under Consumer Protection and Education, the last paragraph which begins with, "During this parliamentary session".  There was an intention to put this Bill, and unfortunately the Minister in this Department was not in the Cabinet meeting that was supposed to take this Bill through, so that it was able to be presented here.  So it is not being presented in this session, as reflected here.  It will therefore be presented in the next session.  I just wanted to correct that one which is in the report.

I would also like to say something on one point that has been a point of quite a lot of public scrutiny.  The issue of the Rehabilitation Fund.

THE REHABILITATION FUND

Cabinet last year approved an allocation of R10 million for the establishment of the fund to assist small business people whose businesses were devastated by political violence between 1984 and 1994.  Since then Khula Finance has committed itself to gearing up the Fund to R25 million.  The Fund, which will operate as a credit indemnity scheme, will provide loans of up to R2 million to qualifying applicants.  All the major banking institutions have given support for the proposal to set up the Fund.  The preparatory work for the establishment of the Fund is now complete.  The Fund will be launched as soon as the enabling legislation is passed.

It is very important that we listen to this, because when people hear that a decision has been taken, they think it has to be implemented immediately .  In Government there are procedures, there is legislation that enables you to implement programmes.  What the people do not understand is that you need an enabling legislation.  That is what we are waiting for.  We cannot proceed without that, because otherwise it will not be Government.  That is where the delay is.

The Department of Economic Affairs has allocated an amount of R200 000 to finance a communication strategy for the Rehabilitation Fund.  The activities planned to educate the public about the Fund will include about nine workshops throughout the Province, dissemination of information brochures, participation in radio talk-shows and newspaper advertisements.  That is what is going to happen, and therefore the people will know what is happening in relation to this particular fund.

Madam Chair, as I said, there are details which the members can look at.  I hope that the small document I asked to be circulated has been circulated.  The document relating to the sum of R100 million that was given for peace in the Province.  I hope the members look at the document, and ask questions.  All I want to say, because it relates to the RDP very directly, is to refresh the memories of the members, that both the then Premier, Dr Mdlalose and myself pleaded with the then Minister without Portfolio, who was in charge of the RDP, to give us money so that we could help those who had lost their properties, houses in particular, due to political violence.  He gave us this amount.  This amount was further confirmed by the National Minister of Finance, not this year, last year.  The Director-General has therefore been seized with the task of working on this one.  He has dealt with it in the Province.  He established a unit that has been moving throughout the Province, meeting the stakeholders at different regions to try to deal with this issue.  The report will indicate as to what has happened in relation to this particular Fund.  Again, I am mentioning it because it has been a subject of public scrutiny.  I am sure members, as they read the report, will ask the necessary questions.

AN HON MEMBER:  It has not been distributed.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I am sure it will be in due course.  Certainly it will be handed out, I can assure you.  It is again the Government bureaucracy that makes things move in a particular way.

Madam Chair, it is now my pleasure to submit for consideration, the estimates of expenditure of the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism, for which I am responsible.

SUMMARY OF BUDGET ACCORDING TO STANDARD ITEMS

ITEM A	:	PERSONNEL EXPENDITURE

An amount of R9,542 million, which is allocated under this item, represents a decrease of R1,448 million over the previous year.

ITEM B	:	ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE

R3,732 million is allocated under this item, which represents a slight increase of R385 000 over the previous year.

ITEM C	:	STORES AND LIVESTOCK

An amount of R1,051 million is allocated, which represents an increase of R489 000 over the previous year.

ITEM D	:	EQUIPMENT

R553 000 is allocated, which represents a decrease of R232 000 over the previous year.

ITEM E	:	LAND AND BUILDING

Nil

ITEM F	:	PROFESSIONAL AND SPECIALISED SERVICES

An allocation of R11,328 million under this item represents a decrease of R3,740 million over the 1997/1998 financial year.  This amount will assist in the appointment of consultants to increase the execution capacity of the Department.  A percentage of this amount will be directed towards tourism development in the Province.

ITEM G	:	TRANSFER PAYMENT

The amount of R56,742 million, which is R23,243 million smaller than the previous year allocation, will fund the activities of the development agencies whose activities contribute to the mission and objectives of this Department.

ITEM H	:	MISCELLANEOUS EXPENDITURE

An amount of R127 000 is allocated under this item.  It represents an increase of R47 000.

The amount of funds allocated for the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism is thus R83,07 million, excluding an amount of R386 000 which forms a direct charge on the KwaZulu-Natal Revenue Fund in terms of Section 2 of the KwaZulu-Natal Remuneration Act No 2 of 1994.

It is with some hesitation that I move for the adoption of the 1998/1999 vote of the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism.

In conclusion it must be said that the reduction of the budget of this Department from R112,885 million in 1997/1998 to R83,075 million for the financial year of 1998/1999 will have negative impacts in terms of the activities of both the Department and the institutions funded by it.  Our new democracy will only survive if it is underpinned by a growing economy.  In order to grow this economy we require resources for strategic facilitation and interventions and support.  I therefore want to conclude by suggesting the following that:

*	serious consideration be given to the creation of mechanisms to allow midyear review of the Provincial Budget; and

*	serious attempts are made to substantially increase the allocation of the provincial budget in the upcoming financial year 1999/2000 to the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism and its related institutions.

This, Madam Chair, is important, because you cannot hope to solve your problems if the economy is not growing.  I thank you, Madam Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

Annexures A and C Inserted by Hansard.

	ANNEXURE A

	KWAZULU-NATAL TOURISM AUTHORITY

P O Box 2516	Tel:+27(31)304 7144	Suite 303 Tourist Junction
Durban		Fax:+27(31)3056693	160 Pine Street
4000	Durban, 4001


Report of the activities of the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority during the 1997/8 financial year.  The report was presented to the Tourism Portfolio Committee on March 13 1998

1.	Establishment of the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority

a)	Interim Provincial Tourism Steering Committee

	The KwaZulu-Natal Cabinet established the Interim Provincial Tourism Steering Committee to:

	1.	Drive the process to finalise a permanent tourism development, promotion and marketing structure for the province, and
	2.	To provide continuity in tourism marketing activities following the closure of the SATOUR regional office in the province.

	The IPTSC ultimately comprised representatives from five broad constituencies:

	1.	government at provincial and local level;
	2.	the three main political parties in the province;
	3.	the business sector, both large and small;
	4.	organised labour;
	5.	host communities, and
	6.	the custodians of the natural and cultural heritage of the province.

	The IPTSC completed its work in the creation of a permanent tourism structure for the province with:

	m	the publication by government of a Tourism White Paper setting out a tourism policy and strategic framework for the development promotion and marketing of tourism;
	m	the passing of a Provincial Tourism Act;
	m	the drafting of a business plan and budget for 1997/98;
	m	the finalisation of a staff structure and conditions of service; and
	m	the appointment of full time staff.

	Following these steps, the Provincial Cabinet passed resolution.  Cabinet resolved that the IPTSC Task Teams should remain in place and act as Advisory Committees until the Tourism Authority members were appointed and had created their own advisory structures.  The purposes was to give continuity to the work commenced by the IPTSC and to provide an advisory structure for the staff.

	The Cabinet resolution directed that the IPTSC should meet with the Tourism Authority, when formed.  At this meeting the IPTSC would formally hand over to the Tourism Authority.  Thereafter the IPTSC should automatically dissolve.

	With the completion of its main task, and in the interests of economy, Minister Zuma assigned the work of the plenary IPTSC to a small management committee, under the chairmanship of Mr Thabo Mpakanyane, working with the full time staff.

	The committee met 17 times during the year.  It put out a series of advertisements in leading newspapers in the province calling for nominations to the new board.  A total of 55 nominations were received from the public.  The applications were submitted to the Economic Affairs and Tourism parliamentary Portfolio Committee who made recommendations to Minister Jacob Zuma.  The Minister is expected to announce the members of the board shortly.

b)	Staffing

	Mavuso Msimang who was appointed chief executive officer in September 1996 resigned in June 1997.  The post remained vacant until March 1998 when former Regional Economic Forum director Gareth Coleman was appointed as CEO.  Coleman has been a member of the management committee of the IPTSC since its inception.

	The following senior managers were appointed during 1997: Busi Merafe (Development), Eric Apelgren (Development), David Hibbs (Marketing), James Seymour (Research and Information) and Robbie Naidoo (Communications).

c)	Administration

	The Authority established various controls and procedures during the financial year.  These included the drafting of documents outlining financial procedures, conditions of service and personnel procedures.  The Authority also elected to use the Pastel accounting system for its accounting controls.

d)	Budget and Financials

	The IPTSC originally devised a business plan based on a budget of R35-million.  The figure was requested from parliament however, it was reduced and R9-million was granted.  To date the Authority has committed all its funding for the 1997/98 financial year.

	The following is a summary of activities undertaken by the different divisions of the Authority:

2.	The Development Division

a)	Objectives

	The objectives of the Development Division of the Authority for the period were as follows:

	-	To extend the established community based tourism programme throughout the province and to co-ordinate similar activities within the RDP programme, utilising inter alia NGs and CBOs.
	-	The packaging of projects to stimulate investment and development in the province
	-	The creation of opportunities for SMMEs in the tourism industry
	-	The creation of opportunities for training in the tourism industry

b)	Advisory Committee: The Tourism Development Working Group

	The TDWG met four times during this period.  The group assisted in the formulation and refining of policy and programmes.  The TDWG brought in a range of stakeholders to assist in the development of new tourism opportunities and products.

c)	Workshops

	The Development Division also held a series of workshops including an Impact Environmental Management workshop to come up with recommendations or input into the IEM Bill.

	In the coming year the KZNTA will focus training on Teacher Training Colleges, In-Service Training Institutions and some High Schools.  The Tourism Education Trust has pioneered this venture with the Department of Education and the Authority will assist in facilitating the implementation of this programme.

	Plans have been put in place to launch an ~Ubuntu~ "We Care" Programme which will be directed at petrol station attendants.  The Authority will also produce a tourism "How To" booklets to assist new entrepreneurs to make an entrance into the tourism industry.

d)	Programmes and Projects

	The Division identified 15 key developmental projects in the following areas:

	-	Emakhosini Valley
	-	Mweni Valley in the Drakensberg
	-	Isandlwana Battle Site
	-	Msunduzi/Mkhambathini Game Park
	-	Shu Shu and Lilani Hot Springs
	-	Royal Zulu House
	-	Amatikulu Lagoon
	-	Port Shepstone Craft Harbour
	-	Weenen Game Reserve
	-	Mpembeni Community Lodge in Hluhluwe
	-	Ongoye Forest and the Roof of Africa route in the Drakensberg

	Funding has been allocated for the conducting of feasibility studies in several of these projects.   All of them have a strong community joint venture component.  Eighty percent of them require funding to assist communities to set up legal entities to participate legally and meaningfully in the joint ventures.

	The Authority provided assistance in the setting up of developmental trusts to the following local authorities:

	-	Tembe Community involved in Kosi Bay
	-	Umnini Tribal Authority
	-	Mbila Tribal Authority located around Lake
	-	Mabaso Tribal Authority which is also located around Lake Sibayi
	-	Isandlwana community
	-	the Greater Nquthu Community Development
	-	The Bhekithemba Community Development Project
	-	the Mambedwini Tribal Authority

	Through working with all the above committees it has been realised that lack of finances for the establishment and registration of development trusts is a major handicap.  KZNTA will assist in financing these ventures upon receiving guidelines from suppliers of the service.  A sum of R1,1-million has been allocated for this purpose and the conducting of feasibility and environmental studies.  Investment potential in these projects is good as they are located in areas with pristine nature-based tourism assets and high unemployment and poverty.  Therefore all the projects have enormous potential to generate jobs and improve the overall income of host communities.

	The Authority is also in the process of packaging three nodal projects in KwaZulu-Natal's Northern or Lubombo Spatial Development Initiative area.  They are at:

	-	St Lucia Wetland Park,
	-	Kosi Bay,
	-	Lake Sibayi.

	Funding has also been allocated for the setting up of a heritage route around cultural attractions in these areas.

	The Development Division has identified cultural tourism as the largest growing sub-sector of the tourism industry with significant export potential.  The Authority is in the process of identifying training programmes nationally and internationally for artisans in this field.

	The division initiated the Ambassadors Programme at Durban Airport.  Fourteen students were placed at the Airport and provided assistance to foreign and domestic travellers for a period of two months.

3.	The Marketing Division

a)	Objectives

	In order to clearly focus the marketing efforts of Tourism KwaZulu-Natal during 1997 and 1998, the following three major objectives were set out:

	-	Creation of an awareness of Tourism KwaZulu-Natal.
	-	Direct marketing : domestic and international.
	-	Co-ordination of provincial tourism marketing.

b)	Advisory committee : Tourism KwaZulu-Natal marketing committee
	The marketing management committee met 10 times during this period.  The committee acted as a link between the private sector and the marketing company of the Authority.  The committee provided guidance to the staff on marketing matters.

c)	Programmes and Projects
	In order to create a greater awareness and raise the profile of Tourism KwaZulu-Natal and its role in the tourism industry the following actions were carried out during the past year:
	-	A 21/2 minute programme on East Coast Radio on Saturday mornings which is intended to create awareness of the organisation and to stimulate domestic tourism.
	-	A fortnightly column in the Sunday Tribune travel supplement.
	-	The sponsorship of live crossings on East Coast Radio of the Duzi Canoe marathon.

	Domestic and international marketing efforts have included:
	-	The development of the teaser brochure which provides a facility for further information to be disseminated.
	-	The dissemination of the teaser brochure and promotional video worldwide.
	-	The hosting of media tours and educationals.
	-	The appointment of a publisher to produce a quarterly marketing magazine.
	-	The undertaking of a joint venture with Thompson's Tour Operators to advertise packages to the domestic market.
	-	Assisting in the establishment of a 'fax-on-demand' facility and an internet site.
	-	Attendance at the following consumer shows: Cape Argus and Getaway Show (Gauteng) and Indaba (Durban)
	-	Support offered to the Anglo-Boer War Centenary Commemoration.
	-	The attraction of travel groups from

	There was attendance at the following international trade shows:

	-	ITB- Germany: Currently marketing manager, Anil Ganesh is attending this show which is the world's largest.  This is both a consumer and trade show.  In the previous financial year the second largest number of foreign visitors came from Germany (22%).
	-	Dubai: Senior marketing manager Dave Hibbs attended a workshop for tour operators organised by South African Airways.  KZN was well received with several tours being generated as a result of the visit.  The KZN stand was the most popular at the show.
	-	WTM-London:  Attended by all nine provinces of South Africa.  Considerable interest was expressed in the province and the forthcoming Anglo-Boer War Centenary commemoration.  Contact was made with operators from the Benelux countries which indirectly contributed to the generation of several tours from Holland and Belgium.  A total of 270 visitors from these countries will arrive in the province weekly from March 31.  This single operation will result in a four percent growth in tourism in the province.  The same tour operator is in the process of finalising a deal to bring 220 Danish tourists into the province on a weekly basis.  They are also negotiating to bring in tours from the UK.
	-	Zimbabwe Travel Expo:  The Zimbabwean market is South Africa's 10th largest prompting representation at this show.  Marketing Manager Anil Ganesh met with key operators from Zimbabwe and the response was good.
	-	The American Travel Market:  Marketing manager Lindy Duffield attended this show, the first of its sort in the USA.  KwaZulu-Natal was one of only three provinces present.  The American market offers unlimited potential and will require further attendance in the coming year.

	During the next 12 months the marketing drive will ensure that the province becomes a primary domestic and international tourist destination and the number of visitors to the province be increased, with a view to increasing existing markets and identifying lucrative emerging markets.  This will be achieved through the preparation and implementation of a marketing strategy and the liaison with national, regional and local marketing bodies.


4.	Information management and Research Division
a)	Objectives

	-	Gather all tourism related information specifically relevant to KwaZulu-Natal
	-	To store the information in an electronic warehouse
	-	To analyse this information to develop relevant tourism marketing and development strategies
	-	To monitor the performance of the Authority's marketing and development strategies
	-	To provide strategic tourist information to product owners and service providers

b)	Advisory committee: Research advisory committee
	The committee met five times during the past financial year.  In conjunction with the key tourism tasks teams they were able to identify 10 core projects to provide the baseline strategic information required by the Authority to develop effective marketing and development strategies.  The committee also provided relevant advice to formulate appropriate terms of reference for these projects.

	Information advisory committee
	The purpose of this committee was to develop a network around the regional councils to link the Authority to key stakeholders in these areas.  The committee met three times during the financial year.

c)	Workshops
	Workshops were held for each of the research projects.  Larger workshops were held focusing on the:

	-	Development delays study
	-	Developers Guide book study
	-	Tourism Investment study

d)	Programmes and projects
	The following projects were completed during the current financial year or are about to be completed:

	-	A Tourism Asset Database for KwaZulu-Natal
	-	Tourism Framework Planning for the Northern and Southern SDI's
	-	A study which investigated the reasons why tourism development projects have been delayed in this province.
	-	A tourism developers' guidebook for potential tourism investors.
	-	A study to determine factors which bring about a successful tourism investment climate.
	-	A Tourism Consumer Survey specifically for KwaZulu-Natal
	-	The development of an appropriate strategy for community based tourism projects in KwaZulu-Natal.
	-	A study to identify tourism training needs and resources in KwaZulu-Natal.
	-	A tourism internet site for KwaZulu-Natal.
	-	A tourism marketing strategy for KwaZulu-Natal.
	-	An analysis of the latest international and domestic tourism market trends.
	-	The development of a Fax on Demand System
	-	The setting up of an Interprovincial Tourism Research Forum.

Communications Division
a)	Objectives

	High on the Authority's Communications Division's list of priorities in the 1998/99 financial year will be the need to inform the public about the achievements and work undertaken by the Authority.  The Division will do this via a media campaign and the staging of promotional projects aimed at raising the profile of the Authority.  The Communications Division will also aim to raise public awareness pertaining to tourism in the province with the long-term aim of creating a new tourism-friendly culture.  The Division aims to maintain a good working relationship with the media in the province and nationally.  In some cases the Division hopes to create a closer working relationship through partnerships in relevant projects.

	The Division will also implement strategy and actively participate in projects aimed at reversing the negative image of the province as being an unsafe place to visit.

	The Communications Division has been involved in the management of the following projects during 1997/98:

	-	World Tourism Day project:  A tourism awareness programme was conducted among taxi operators in the province on September 28, World Tourism Day.
	-	Tourism Ambassadors:  Six prominent personalities were chosen as tourism ambassadors of the province and certificates were presented by the Premier, Dr Ben Ngubane and Durban mayor, Obed Mlaba.
	-	Gateway to Tourism:  A competition was held in conjunction with Independent Newspapers and Absa, inviting the best tourism ideas.  A workshop was held at the end of the project and the winning project, the Gandhi Settlement Project, is already in the process of being developed.
	-	Radio programme - East Coast Radio:  Scripts were written and co-ordinated for the Tourism on Track programme on East Coast Radio every Saturday morning.
	-	Sunday Tribune column:  A column focusing on domestic tourism will appear every fortnight in the Sunday Tribune.  A competition will be held alongside the column and will be run in conjunction with East Coast Radio.
	-	KZN Experience show:  The Authority participated in the KZN Experience show at the ICC in December 1997 and participated in a newspaper feature in the Sunday Tribune in this regard.
	-	Sponsorship of Duzi Canoe Marathon:  The Authority sponsored the live crossings to the Duzi Marathon as a profile-building exercise.
	-	Formulation of Awareness campaign on radio:  The communication division played an integral role in the formulation of a radio awareness campaign to counteract negative image pertaining to crime in KZN.  This campaign will be aired in April 1998.
	-	Drafting of business plan:  The communications division co-ordinated the drafting of a business plan for the organisation.

ANNEXURE C: See Pages 1897 and 1898



THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, sir.  This now brings us to our debate.  I wish to call upon the hon member A J Hamilton, who is the Portfolio Committee Chair, for five minutes.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Madam Chair, the RDP is a very mixed bag with some successes, and some not so successful projects.  The lesson for us in these kinds of concepts and projects is not to set up Government departments to handle projects, but to use successful private sector organisations, NGOs and CBOs to run projects, reporting back to the Department and the Treasury on their performance, and indeed to have a performance audit regularly.  A performance audit to make sure that the objectives are being achieved.

Another difficulty with the RDP concept was the fact that in cases, for example, like the provision of schools and classrooms, laboratories, creches, clinics etcetera, the funding was only provided for the infrastructure of these projects, but no funding for operating costs was provided.  We all know, Madam Chair, that very often the operating costs of development projects far exceed the actual capital costs, very often in a year or two.  It is a major problem.

The RDP is an excellent concept, Madam Chair, and should remain with the key principles of job creation and community empowerment, such as seen in the tender procedures.  We should concentrate on using private sector NGOs and CBOs to achieve its objectives.

The concept that we are talking about is absolutely fine, and I would like to speak, Madam Chair, for a change in attitude.

MR J H JEFFERY:  INTERJECTION.

MR A J HAMILTON:  I have mentioned it.  Thank you for that, hon Jeffery.  I have mentioned it in an earlier address to the House, but I want to reiterate it again.  In South Africa today the reality is that we are drastically short of funding, not only in this Province, the entire Government system is short of funding.  We simply do not have enough funds, and as Government in all walks and all avenues of Government, we have got to start taking a very fresh approach as to how we get things done.  Not going along the same old tried and tested ways that did not work 10 years ago, did not work 5 years ago, and quite frankly, Madam Chair, do not work very well today.  That means we, sitting in this chamber and the civil servants sitting in the offices of Government, need to be flexible and innovative in the way we look at problems.  We need to sit down and find ways to achieve the objectives that we want and must achieve.  We cannot stop because there is no money.  We have got to find ways to use that funding effectively.

That, Madam Chair, is where we have problems.  Government is slow to react.  The bureaucracies have got, I believe in many instances, such stringent regulations to comply with.  To get a decision to invest in a coffee machine in this House is probably a six months operation.  How are we going to address the job creation needs of this country unless we change the way we think.

When I hear, and this is not an unconstructive criticism, some of the proposals coming out of the Public Accounts, that we are going to hold accounting officers responsible for this, and that, and the other thing, what we are doing is actually preventing quick decisions being made, and I am not advocating slack controls at all.  I am simply saying that if you make such stringent controls, and the penalties for any infringement so onerous, what are you doing is even further slowing down the decision-making processes.

So let us start being a new Government in South Africa.  Let us start being fresh in our approach to how we solve problems.  Get away from centralise this, and centralise that, and this is the policy you must adopt, even if so much of our budget goes on paying the staff to operate.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR A J HAMILTON:  Madam Chair, the kind of things we should be looking at in terms of job creation are re-afforestation programmes, the construction of earth wall dams and the construction of irrigation ditches.  These are the kind of things that actually have a payback.  Eight years after you plant the trees you cut them down.

On this particular vote, I would say really let us ease up on how it is an RDP...

MR J H JEFFERY:  INTERJECTION.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Is that an interjection or a comment from the hon Jeffery over there?  Anyway, Madam Chair, I support the Minister in this vote with the provisions that I have qualified.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next name on the list is the hon J C Matthee, for six minutes.

MR J C MATTHEE:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Madam Chair, just to follow on the hon member Mr Hamilton.  I sincerely agree with him, that we are still contented, even in this new Government, with the bureaucracy.  A good business, today, would be to open a factory to produce red tape.  It might be a very good thing.

Madam Chair, what is disturbing is that only on the morning of discussing the RDP and the Tourism Department, did we receive these Annual Reports.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order!  Can the hon members give the member a chance.  There is only one person on the floor and that is the person who is speaking.

MR J C MATTHEE:  Madam Chair, I am quite sure I can hold my own in this chamber.  I believe it is an indictment that the hon the Minister and the officials of his Department, saw it fit to only give us the report this morning.  Quite frankly, we cannot debate this report intelligently.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J C MATTHEE:  The hon the Premier has spoken on numerous occasions about Good Governance in this Province.  I would like to appeal to him this morning and each and every Minister, because I have noticed throughout this budget debate, that we receive reports a day before the debate, or on the day of the debate.  I believe that is not good enough.  If this House wants to set an example of Good Governance, then it has got to start here.  It is no use making political noises to the public outside to say we are striving for good governance, and we do not even do it within our own ranks.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J C MATTHEE:  My experience in politics is that there is a close relationship between the hon members of all political parties, the Ministers concerned, and their departments.

Madam Chair, about a year ago the hon the Minister gave my colleague the hon member Mrs Galea a list of Presidential Lead Programmes, and there are some 24 in KwaZulu-Natal.  These range from HIV/AIDS and Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Primary School Nutrition, Masakhane Campaign, Culture of Learning and Training, Water Sanitation etcetera.  But, if I look through the report no mention is made of any of these projects in this report before us.  What has happened to those projects?  What has actually happened to the Presidential Lead Programmes, the 24 that we have in KwaZulu-Natal?  Madam Chair, I am trying to address you, and I presume you are listening to me.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR J C MATTHEE:  The point is, there is no mention made of this in this report.  We as members, are completely in the dark, including the public outside, as to know what progress is being made with each and every one of these projects.  I hope that the hon the Minister in his reply will give us some indication of where these projects stand.  Which have been completed, which have not been completed, how much money is still available to complete these particular projects.

Madam Chair, with the limited time available, I would like to speak about the Sharks Board, or what used to be called the Anti-Sharks Board.  It also concerns the Minister's Department.  If a bather on the Natal Coast is attacked by a shark, I want to tell you, Madam Chair, the entire tourist industry will collapse.

I would like to appeal to all local authorities to review their situation and fund these particular nets in their areas.  They can create pay-beaches, because I believe the public must make a contribution if they want to enjoy the safety and the privilege of bathing on our beautiful beaches on the Natal Coast.  I believe that the local authorities concerned should introduce a payment system where people can know that they can swim there, and bathe there in safety.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for saving us a few minutes.  The next speaker on the list is Mrs A Mchunu, for seven minutes.

MRS A MCHUNU:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  The debate on RDP, that is the Reconstruction and Development Programme, is rather dubious in that its meaning to the people is usually unclear.  It is known that the RDP was initiated by the ANC as a Government in waiting, as the ANC already knew that they would rule South Africa willy-nilly.  I suppose the handover of the Government from the National Party to ANC happened during the Record of Understanding.

The RDP was actually meant to provide a route for the previously disadvantaged people to work out their own way towards socio-economic liberation.  The five key programmes that were meant for people on the ground were:

-	Meeting the basic needs
-	Developing human resources
-	Building the economy
-	Democratising the State and society
-	And implementing the RDP

MEETING BASIC NEEDS

I look at meeting the basic needs.  Communities have been aware of their needs for decades, and have done their best to solve these problems.  This was not easy because of the discriminatory laws that existed, and of course the finances were not sufficient.  Presently basic needs are listed, projects are started, but no money is available for these projects, as our hon Minister has just stated.  The projects that are started need to be paid for, but face collapse because of the lack of money.

FREE SERVICES

Now I come to free services.  Free health for children under six years of age was welcomed, as well as the baby clinics for preventive services.  For instance, weighing babies and immunisation.  It is also known that within the free health, services for pregnant women was also included.  It might have been good, but if we look at the way we are running out of money, this may need to be reviewed.  Pregnancy is something that is usually planned, and to say that they can receive free service for nine solid months, it might need to be reviewed.  Soon we are not going to care for anyone at all in maternity.

We know that the babies have fathers, and some of them working mothers.  So to say all children under the age of six years who become ill need to be treated free of charge needs to be reviewed.  I do agree that there are children who do not have parents, who are orphaned for instance, but those indigent cases are catered for, and were catered for even in the past.  We need to review the free health services, because we really do lack money.

HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT

We also have, amongst other points, the Human Resource Development.  This is an area where perhaps the RDP could have developed honest, hard working, efficient and effective people, be it informal employment, in the private sector, civil service or self-employed.  This is where the reconstruction really needed to start.  The reconstruction of human resources which was destroyed by the previous era and its legislation needs patient and understanding leaders.  No shortcuts will help the formerly disadvantaged people to join the economic upstream properly, and be able to move up as well.

Education is the tool for the reconstruction of human resources, and in view of the type of education the disadvantaged have had, it means that there is a need for remedial teaching to correct the ills of the past.  A certain teacher in one of the remedial schools strongly felt that all teachers should have remedial teaching methods so as to reconstruct the education of the formerly disadvantaged.  Somebody mentioned that bussing children from the disadvantaged areas to advantaged areas does not appear to really help that much.  Let us look at the schools which we have and provide some form of remedial teaching within those schools.

TRAINING

The uneducated and unemployed have to be trained and retrained in technical and business skills for survival.  With the existing projects which should be continued, there are projects women have been involved in that do not need a lot of money, like the making of small mats and baskets woven from incema and ilala.  Articles made from this appeals to the tourists.

It will be necessary for our Department of Economic Affairs, as well as perhaps funds from RDP to assist in the growing of these grasses as this helps the disadvantaged and the uneducated very much.  The people in the rural areas can survive with the sale of these items to tourists.

LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

There are projects that appear in the report that were each given about R50 000 for developing a vision, and establishing the LED.  It will be interesting to know what criteria was used to identify those areas, because people from other areas are going to say, "We need that money to develop a vision in our area as well".  It would be good if the Minister could give us an answer.

It would also be interesting to get the reports from those areas so that the areas that have not started may make use of the criteria that was adopted for the areas that are already involved, and then we can get development going.

There is no easy solution to get ourselves on the train of economic success.  The people themselves have to help themselves with the support, of course, of the Government, and perhaps even financial support from other countries that are friendly towards us.  We must be a hard working Province that is productive.

With those words, I support the budget.  Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next name on the list is the hon W Nel, for three minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I rise in some confusion again this year, as I have for the last three, to discuss the RDP.  I must also echo the sentiments expressed by the hon Mr Matthee, that it is of very little use to receive the annual reports, about three or four of them on various subjects, early this morning.  The only thing I can say about them, they are so glossy, unless you have a ballpoint pen you actually cannot write on them.

Madam Chair, the RDP has been previously described by many people as utalagu, a mirage, when you reach out to touch it, it is gone.  In fact, I think it is growing into some kind of a confidence trick.

In the current budget, there again is an amount of R4,3 million budgeted for the Directorate which is supposed to co-ordinate the RDP.  I have yet to come across anybody who can explain to me, in terms which I can understand, how the RDP is supposed to work, and what the real function of that Directorate is.  It really confuses me that we have programmes such as the R100 million peace fund which then are under auspices of the Director-General, and it begs the question, why then have we got a Directorate of RDP if the only substantial funds which are directed for the kind of purpose that I would have imagined the RDP is supposed to fulfil, if those funds are then put under the control of the Director-General?  We have just received, again belated, I got it about three minutes ago, which means many members who spoke did not even have the benefit of this report, a report on this R100 million fund.

That is a sizable chunk of money rolled over from last year, and still it has not been spent.  Quite frankly, when I look at this report, I must ask myself, what on earth is it doing in RDP, because it really is the stuff made for Local Government?  I must ask myself, why Local Governments were not asked to ask their communities what they want, because they did not come up with anything very exciting.  There is, "electricity, electricity, multi-skill centres, multi-purpose centres, multi-skill centres".  Really, Madam Chair, if they had asked me to spend one morning in my office I could have produced a list that looks very much like this, and I doubt that anybody could have disputed it.  So I wonder whether the couple of million that we have already spent on consultants and community meetings in 20 regions, whether that has been productively spent?

It leads me to the inevitable conclusion, Madam Chair, that as far as RDP is concerned, we have not a clue what we are doing or what we want to achieve.  I would suggest that we now seriously consider scrapping this Directorate, and actually just getting back to the knitting, and asking departments to run their departments in a way that best addresses the needs of the people.  But honestly, in four years I have heard nothing but rhetoric about RDP.  I have seen nothing productive that I can really describe as an achievement of RDP.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next name on the list is the hon J D Mkhwanazi, for two minutes as well.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: TRANSLATION:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  I trust that in these two minutes I will be able to make my contribution.  The actual thing, Madam Speaker, let me start by saying I support the Minister's request for development, RDP funds.  RDP became a buzz word and everybody was talking about the RDP.  T/E

Anything that was new became RDP, RDP, RDP.  But at the end of the day, [it is not quite clear what the RDP really is, what it has done] and achieved.  Be that as it may, [I am asking the Minister to do something for the business people whose businesses were destroyed as a result of violence, so that something visible is done.  I spoke to some over the past weekend, others], their businesses were burnt down because of political differences.  The businesses were not even burnt down.  The people moved away from those areas, and when the people moved away from those areas they had no support, because nobody came to buy from their shops.  Others, there was confusion TRANSLATION:  They do not go and buy at the shop, because that shop is bad, it gives food to these and those.  I think that, Madam Chair, the Minister should try, because people are complaining and I hear that meetings are being held.  I hear, even over the radio, but that is not enough to hear of promises over the radio.  What is required is something visible to see that here is so-and-so's business.  Another hon member was telling me here that another man...  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has just one second.

MR J D MKHWANAZI: TRANSLATION:  Oh!  Another man's business was destroyed and he does not know how to feed his wife and children.  This is all I am asking, Minister, that something visible should happen.  Thank you.  T/E

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next name on the list is the hon member M Mabuyakhulu, for 14 minutes.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Firstly I must say that it is really astonishing listening to the members.  Almost four years down the line, the people are speaking as if they do not know what the RDP is all about.

AN HON MEMBER:  They live in Durban North.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

AN HON MEMBER:  There is no RDP in Durban North.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  However, Madam Chair, one must recognise the fact that old habits die hard, and those who never accepted the good concept embodied in the RDP, are still trying to fight it, even today.  We are not amazed about that, Madam Chair.

However, one must actually first listen, because the debate around this vote is in essence an academic one.  It is an academic debate in the sense that, despite the fact that the RDP and its good principles and policies, during this financial year there is nothing that has been allocated to it.  It is for that reason that I call it an academic debate.

We must actually begin to unpack some of the issues.  During the previous debates we were privileged in this chamber to have been given reports.  Those reports, most of them, were made available by the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism.  From the beginning there was a general understanding that the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism had the ultimate co-ordinating responsibility over the RDP activities in the Province.  Madam Chair, in that process something inexplicable has happened.  The Department, on the one hand, was doing its best to get the resources to cater for itself, to perform this co-ordinating function, and those decisions were taken at another level.

AN HON MEMBER:  By whom?

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  We know, and as the hon Mr Matthee indicated, that we have more than 14 Lead Presidential Projects in this Province.  Those who say they have not seen progress, we all know about the Shamula Water Scheme.  We all know about many others, I have just mentioned one, where communities are already starting to benefit.

The only problem, Madam Chair, and other members have referred to it, is the question of why are we not being presented with a full report, detailing those projects, this year.

The irony is that with regard to that area in particular, the Director-General has been the person responsible for handling the RDP activities, in particular the Discretionary Fund.

On a very serious note, the Portfolio Committee of Economic Affairs set up a subcommittee.  One of its primary functions of that subcommittee was to actually get proper information on the RDP projects and programmes in this Province.  We have been unable to get information of all the RDP activities which have been co-ordinated by the Department of Economic Affairs, but we are able to approach the Director.  He is able to give us information.  We, however, were not able to elicit information with regard to RDP projects which were handled by the office of the Director-General.

We regard to the Director-General as a senior accounting officer, and we hope that he does take his work seriously, such that he is able to give us information as the Legislature, because I think the confusion that is permeating in the minds of the members is caused by the lack of that information.

Madam Chair, we have more than R45 million for RDP funding in this Province.  This funding has been in the Discretionary Fund for the last three years.  You will also find it in the Project Preparation Facility.  Project Preparation Facility, some of us have been associated with it from the beginning when it was still negotiated.  I was part of the negotiating team at the request of the former Premier, the hon Dr Frank Mdlalose.  We were assisting communities who needed to put forward a project in order to get funding and could not write their own business plans.

We need to know how much of this R45 million has been used, and where it is.  The only person that can give us the answers to that is the Director-General or the office of the Director-General.

AN HON MEMBER:  Where is he?

AN HON MEMBER:  He is not even here today.

AN HON MEMBER:  Do you want it now?

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Madam Chair, we seriously need information to be given to us by the next sitting.  This House deserves to know how this money has been spent.  We still come across communities who want to submit business plans and who are supposed to be assisted by the Preparation Facility Project.  Those communities are often told, as they tell us, that there is no funding available.  Is this realistic?  Is this a reality?

Madam Chairperson, I want to discuss the R100 million peace fund.  I am glad that the hon Minister, this morning, once again explained to this chamber, quite eloquently, how the peace fund was negotiated by the former Premier and the Minister, and the purposes for which it was used.  The Minister explained this clearly in this chamber.

The question that we need to ask ourselves again, is does this report, which was circulated about five or six minutes before I started speaking, seriously inform about what the peace fund is used for and what it was requested for?  Clearly, the answer should be in the report.  It is not, and for that reason I think this is a very serious indictment on this Province.  It is a serious indictment, and we cannot allow this situation to continue.  Funds have been appropriated for a particular purpose, and have been granted for particular projects and now we divert those funds and use them generally for development purposes.

I agree with the hon Mr Wessel Nel where he said, if you read it in this context, you ask yourself why it was not given to other line functions, why is it being kept at that level?  This fund was established to try and assist the communities who were the victims of violence and who were ravaged by violence, to rebuild themselves.

Madam Chair, at least those of us sitting on this side of the chamber are not going to be part of this.  We cannot accept that what is contained in this report is what this fund should be utilised for.  We totally disagree with that.  A serious decision must be taken by Cabinet in the first instance.  We are happy that the hon the Premier is present.  Honestly, mention is made of something million that was used for consultation fees ...

AN HON MEMBER:  It is an absolute waste of money.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  R1,2 million.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is theft.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  When we are talking about communities who have made peace.

AN HON MEMBER:  Absolutely disgusting.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  We are talking about communities, in areas where the people still do not have shelters over their heads, communities whom we should be assisting.  These cases are classical examples where both the hon the Minister and the former Premier were able to use their expertise to assist those communities.  We often travelled the length and breadth of this Province, and the people asked us questions.  What are we doing to assist communities in Shobashobane, in Imbali, in Empangeni, Magoda, in Lindelani, in Estcourt, everywhere where there was violence, where communities are now at peace with one another.  Those people who were the victims of violence, still bear the scars because most of them still do not have shelter, and they have lost whatever they had in the process.

Madam Chairperson, the Cabinet of this Province has to do something.  We in this chamber have to be unanimous in saying that that money has to be used for what it was intended.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

AN HON MEMBER:  Get it back.  Bring it back.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Lastly, Madam Chairperson, let me deal with an issue that concerns the reasons why we are unable to get the reports that we need on the RDP.  I raised a question at one of the Portfolio Committee meetings, about the Chief Directorate of the RDP.  We were given the organogram of this Department, and it was indicated very clearly that the post of Chief Director had been approved.

Now when one asks the question, what has happened to this position, the post of Chief Director in the Department of Economic Affairs?  The answer that was supplied by the Deputy Director-General of the Department was that there was an agreement between the Minister and the Director-General that the post of Chief Director, who was supposed to be in the Department of Economic Affairs, was to be deployed in the office of the Director-General, and that that post will have to be paid from the Economic Affairs' budget.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  You have two minutes left.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Surely, when we voted for this budget, we did so because part of the vote had to take into account that Chief Director's position, and because it was necessary in this Department.  The question is why, if there is such an agreement, and we need an answer, why is there such an agreement?  Why would the post of Chief Director that was never created in the office of the Director-General be paid by another vote?  That cannot be right, and we cannot accept it.  This is an issue that requires an effective decision to be taken on it.  I regard it to be illegal.

AN HON MEMBER:  Scandalous.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  With those few words, Madam Chairperson, I would like to end by saying, that we understand the problems this Department is facing to co-ordinate the RDP programme. 

MRS A MCHUNU:  Point of order, Madam Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Let us take the point of order.

MRS A MCHUNU:  Can the hon member take a question?

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  I do not have time, Madam Chair.  If I had time I would take the question.  I will take the question over lunch.

Madam Chairperson, in conclusion, I think we are seeing more and more the need of this Department to perform a co-ordinating role on the RDP programmes.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Your time is up, hon member.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Because if we do not do so we will not see any progress.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The next name on the list is the hon member Mr M A Tarr, for seven minutes.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Madam Chair, in the few minutes at my disposal, I would like to cover both promoting the RDP and the Minister's Department.

On the question of the RDP, as the hon member who has just spoken commented, it is rather unusual to debate a vote where there is no money at all.  I suppose the reason for this is that in future the objectives of the RDP, are going to be carried out by various other line departments.  Most members in this House will concede that one of the problems that we have always had with RDP is the lack of an implementing agency.

I only hope, Madam Chair, that the other line departments will pursue the objectives of the RDP, which are providing employment, looking at reducing the poverty, and looking at sustainable community development projects.  Quite a lot can be done through other departments, for example, by road building, dams, irrigation systems etcetera.

One matter which does puzzle me, Madam Chair, is that in Programme 2 of the Minister's Department, which is presumably there to co-ordinate the RDP programmes, one wonders what this section in the Minister's Department actually does.  I find it difficult to see how they can co-ordinate what is happening in the RDP programmes in all the other line departments in the Province.  One wonders just how effective and useful this Department is.  I would be very happy to hear what the Minister has got to say about this.

Madam Chair, we then get to the Department's budget itself.  The Minister has already pointed out the sorry tale that the budget presents.  For example, we see tourism being cut from R12 million to R6,7 million.  Sharks Board being cut from R12,1 million to R10 million, and the KFC being cut from R66 million down to R34 million.  I notice the hon Minister, and I think wisely so with the present budget, is not even going to take the step of appointing the Tourism Authority.

When we look at another section of his Department, we see that KZT is going to be subsidised to the tune of R10 million.  Those of us who have been in this House for some time know the sorry tale of KZT.  It has represented a nett drain on the budget of this Province for many years.  If you read through the report, it presents fairly dismal reading.  I wonder why in fact we have persevered with KZT at all.  We know what developments are taking place in the taxi industry.  I wonder, with the developments in the taxi industry, whether there actually is room at all for such a bus service.

Why I say this, Madam Chair, the Minister mentioned the difficulty in obtaining suitable buyers for certain sections of KZT.  Would it not be the right thing to just give KZT away.  Cut our losses, give it away and that money could very well be used on the Tourism Authority, and to assist the Sharks Board.  It sounds a fairly drastic thing to say, but the time has come where we must address issues like this head on, and seriously consider pruning the KZT.  If we were to do that we could certainly assist the Sharks Board, and we could certainly assist our Tourism Authority.

As was mentioned by the Minister, we are seriously looking at the question of growth and unemployment in this Province, and the one area that has been identified in every study that has been made, is tourism.  If we are going to get money coming in, create jobs, it is the easiest area in which we can do that, but yet we see fit to cut back on this budget, and to subsidise, and pour money into KZT.

Madam Chair, yesterday a report of the Sharks Board was tabled in this House.  I am sure that many members have paged through this report.  The problems which the Sharks Board experience are well documented in the letters from the various local authorities.  The report also contains some fairly horrifying pictures.  But one wonders, when looking at this report and also the Annual Report of the Sharks Board, whether in fact the matter is being handled as well as it should.  Simply to announce massive increases in fees to small local authorities seems rather drastic.  I wonder whether it would not be wise to look at other measures.  For example, differential tariffs for small local authorities, provision of the service, for example, on a seasonal basis, where in the off-season a service is not provided for at all.  I seriously think, Madam Chair, that before these drastic new tariff increases are implemented, that another look should be taken at more innovative ways of perhaps alleviating the burden that the new tariffs will cause for smaller authorities.

What is also of concern in the Sharks Board report, if you look at the number of sharks that are caught in the nets, and the number of sharks that are caught that actually represent a threat or a danger to people, less than 10% of the animals caught represent a danger.  This is of fairly serious concern from an environmental point of view, where we are slaughtering many thousands of animals totally unnecessarily.  I hope we can look at ways to prevent this.  Removing nets during the sardine run, which I believe they do, but perhaps we should be looking at this more scientifically, or try to be more effective.

As far as the Sharks Board is concerned, there are problems.  We need to look at innovative ways to deal with some of the problems, and also look at more humane ways to control sharks, and not indulge in what appears to be fairly wholesale, unnecessary slaughter.

Madam Chair, with those few words, I support this budget, but like many of the other budget votes during the last two weeks, support it reluctantly because we are not getting nearly the amount that we need to effectively carry out what needs to be done.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon members, this brings us to the close of our debate on vote 15.  As announced earlier, the Minister is not going to respond now, but after we have completed vote 4.  The first speaker on the list is going to be the Portfolio Chair.  First we are going to adjourn for lunch.  We will resume our debate on vote 4 at 14:00.  The chair will be taken over by the hon member Mr Felix Dlamini.  We will now adjourn for lunch.  Thank you

	THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMITTEE SUSPENDED AT 12:50
	RESUMED AT 14:00

MR F DLAMINI THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES TAKES THE CHAIR

VOTE 4: DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND TOURISM

THE CHAIRPERSON:  It is now my pleasure to call upon the hon Mr Hamilton, to take the floor for 14 minutes.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, the Portfolio Committee involved itself in the drafting of the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority Bill, and held public hearings, and was ultimately involved in setting up the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority.  It also involved itself in the selection process for Board members, although, with the budget constraints, the Minister has decided not to proceed with the actual appointments.

However, the functions for which the authority was formed are absolutely vital, but key to its success will be its ability to form a single marketing umbrella body which will have a focused and cost effective approach to tourism marketing.

In addition, the Portfolio Committee was involved in an ongoing review of the KwaZulu Transport Company, with all its many intractable problems and travails.  There seems to be some hope of a successful conclusion which will result in maintaining the desperately needed commuter service, and getting rid of the constant drain on the Province's funds occasioned by the bail outs, on a continuous basis.

If efforts to resolve this intractable problem are not crowned with success soon, then, in my view, Mr Chairman, radical measures are called for.  Even the possibility of giving the damn thing away in exchange for guarantees of service levels, albeit on a reduced level, and a rationalisation of the respective roles played by the bus and taxi industries so as to leave the transport industry in a sound state.

The Portfolio Committee was also instrumental in initiating a joint approach between tourism Durban and the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority with the purpose of approaching SATOUR, and offering them a major cash subsidy package for the funding of the Durban Tourism Indaba in exchange for a commitment from SATOUR to continue holding the Indaba in KwaZulu-Natal.  I am happy to say that our efforts were successful, to the extent that we have a commitment from SATOUR for the next two years, that the Indaba will take place in Durban.

The Portfolio Committee successfully motivated the concept to Cabinet, and an amount of R200 000 has been committed for this purpose.  However, it is vital that the Province's long term objective in so far as the Indaba is concerned, is to retain the Indaba on a permanent basis for KwaZulu-Natal.

The Indaba in Durban presents us with an unequal opportunity to showcase this Province.  For the information of members of the House, Mr Chairman, between 600 and 700 exhibitors are represented at the Indaba.  This year some 1 200 international tour operators visited the exhibition along with more than 100 international media representatives.  The Indaba incidentally has been held in Durban for the last eight years.

The Committee has also been involved in the restructuring exercise of the KwaZulu Finance Corporation.  I represent the Portfolio Committee as its Chairman on the Ministerial Committee set up to oversee the restructuring of the KFC.

AN HON MEMBER:  Bless you.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you.  I am happy to report that very good progress has been made with this task.  I would particularly like to compliment the Minister on his stewardship over this task which will have a major impact on our Province.  I believe a very positive impact.

The House will be interested to know that the very remarkable KFC has achieved incredible success with its Ithala Bank project, which has seen above 60% annual growth in depositors, now at more than 700 000, and an amount of over R600 million on deposits.  It has increased its expenditure by 40%, and more than doubled its income.  It is a very remarkable success story and the credit for the success must go to its dedicated committed Chief Executive Officer, Dr Marius Spies, and Chairman Paul Dube.  Together they have welded together an outstanding team of committed people, fully transformed and an ongoing process.  It has been a privilege and a learning experience for me to be involved in it.  I would also like to single out the Minister, and compliment him again on his positive and constructive support and input to the KFC itself.

Mr Chairman, a matter of great concern to the Portfolio Committee are the budget cuts to the Natal Sharks Board, which is a world class organisation.  It is probably the best of its kind anywhere in the world.  It enjoys a remarkable reputation in the world, and has had great successes in marketing itself in places like Hong Kong.  Its POD achievement was the first in the world.

I fear, Mr Chairman, that the Sharks Board has been so successful that we in this House who are old enough, have forgotten the devastation that a single shark attack in KwaZulu-Natal would have on the fragile international tourism, and local tourism industry.  May I remind this House that the tourism industry in this Province accounts for some 200 000 jobs.  That means in excess of a million people depend on the tourism industry for food and shelter.

We simply cannot let the net protection system deteriorate.  The standard of safety that the Shark Board offers to our visitors and swimmers has simply got to be sustained.

Mr Chairman, the Portfolio Committee is concerned that between the Natal Sharks Board, the KwaZulu-Natal Conservation Services and the Oceanographic Research Institution there should not be the "luxury of duplication" in regards to services.  (Sorry, otherwise I am going to keep on sneezing and you are going to keep on having to bless me.  Thank you, sir).  We have had all three of these organisations at a joint Economic Affairs and Tourism and Conservation Committee meeting to ask them to ensure that there is rationalisation between their research departments.

I may say, Mr Chairman, that we had the assurance of all three organisations that such rationalisation would take place, and that wherever possible, each would seek to use its spare capacity to assist the other organisations.  I have heard some disturbing rumours that there does appear to be perhaps some empire building going on.  I would caution that we need to ensure that this does not happen.

Mr Chairman, the KwaZulu-Natal Regional Economic Forum also falls under the purview of the Portfolio Committee, and we have had a number of presentations from them during the past year.  I also represent the Portfolio Committee on the Board.  As we know, the REF has now been reconstituted into a Section 21 company and has had a change of Chief Executive Officer.  The REF is now well positioned and has found itself a niche, and should make an ongoing contribution to the wellbeing of KwaZulu-Natal.

Mr Chairman, one of the overwhelming problems that South Africa faces is the creation of jobs.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has four minutes left.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you, sir.  If we, in Government, are as committed to the creation of jobs as we say we are, I find it strange that tourism promotion is treated as a Cinderella portfolio.  We look at SATOUR.  That organisation is charged with marketing South Africa internationally, paying the rent, paying the staff and producing pamphlets and documents for public consumption internationally.  And what do they get to spend?  R64,7 million.  Translated at R8 to the Pound or US$ 5 to the Rand, that is a meaningless amount of money.

I cannot help feeling, Mr Chairman, that the problem we suffer from in South Africa is we are trying to tackle too many things at the same time.  Education is wonderful if you have got a job, and without a job you walk the streets with a university degree in the same way as you walk the streets without even being literate.  Education makes no difference unless you are able to progress through a career path and succeed.

I have a huge problem with the way we are tackling our unemployment.  There is no faster way to create jobs than through the promotion of tourism on a massive level.  I would like to suggest to this House that if that means that other departments are going to have even less money to spend in order that we have an opportunity to create growth and jobs, then that is what we must do.  That is a hard political decision.  These are decisions that we in Government, all of us, not just in this Province, down in Cape Town and every other province, those are decisions we are going to have to make.  I think we are dodging the bullet.  We are trying to keep everybody happy, and we are going to wind up with a big problem in the future, and we will not have utilised our tourism potential to its maximum.

There are estimates that tourism can be boosted in the next three years to 2,5 million people.  That is nearly a 150% increase on the present levels.  That translates into 400 000 jobs nationwide.  More, it may even be 600 000 jobs.  On dependency factors of 4,5 to 1 we start to see what the implications are, and that is just on jobs.

Mr Chairman, the other thing that tourism is unparalleled for, is the opportunity for SMME entrants from the lowest level to running a Beverley Hills Hotel.  There is no other industry or occupation in business that comes close to it, and yet it is neglected and almost discarded, because R64 million in my book is discarding it.

Part of the success for tourism in this Province, Mr Chairman, is going to mean, that come hell or high water, we make the sacrifice and the commitment in order to see that we get our new international airport.  I can tell you, Mr Chairman, that in two years from now the Airport's Company with whom this Government, through the Ministry, has had ongoing negotiations will be a fully privately owned company, listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange.  If we do not start building our airport at the end of this year, or early next year, it will inevitably lead to massive expenditure at the existing Durban International Airport.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time is up.  Thank you.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Mabuyakhulu, for 13 minutes.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  Thank you, Mr Chairperson.  Chairperson, I must say that I really do not envy this Minister, but because he is a man with guts, he has proven himself.  He is capable of delivering with such a meagre budget.

I want to actually raise some of the fundamental issues that affect growth in this Province.  At present it appears that very little clarity is being given, particularly by the Executive on how they are going to deal with these issues.

The first issue is the one that deals with tourism.  I am not going to discuss it in detail, because my colleague the hon Ina Cronje will deal with it.  I, however, want to support the Minister.  He raised certain constraints with regard to the question of tourism.  The real question, Chairperson, is not necessarily about budgetary constraints, but about the priorities of the Provincial Government.  The time has come for us in this Legislature, and for members of the Executive, to answer this question pertinently.  What are the priorities of the Government of this Province?

It is very clear to me, Chairperson, that if that question were to be answered, and answered honestly, we could only come to the conclusion that tourism is not viewed as a priority by this economy, hence the kind of budget that was allocated.

But secondly, it continues to raise a critical question.  We, as members of this Legislature are the ones who pass the budgets. Why do we then come here year after year and complain about the meagre amount of money that has actually been allocated for tourism.  Who takes the decisions, and who decides about those priorities?  Are we really deciding or are we just here as the conveyor belt for decisions that have already been made?

It is really very serious that we must honestly answer those questions.  If we can honestly answer those questions we could then come to the conclusion that members of the Cabinet regard tourism as one of the lowest priorities.  I find that almost every member in this House agrees with that.  We should be allocating sufficient funds to tourism.  If indeed we all agree that we are not paying lip service to it, who then decides that tourism should be receiving such a meagre allocation?

AN HON MEMBER:  Dumisani Makhaye.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  I think it is a very, very relevant question.  It is a very relevant question because when I listen to the hon Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee, and you consider that over the past four years we all have complained about the amount of money allocated to tourism.  The question is, are we really toothless bulldogs that can only bark, not bite?

It is high time that we, as the Legislature, say that money must be found for tourism.  We must be able to say to the Cabinet, if we have that power: "You must do everything within your power to find money for tourism".

Chairperson, let me turn to another issue.  The money that has been allocated towards tourism is insufficient, and we all accept that.  One is further puzzled by the fact that the Department of Economic Affairs is nothing more than a post box where money goes through, but in reality that Department has nothing.  I am raising this question because I think the time also has come that when we complain about the fiscal constraints, we should ask the question, whether we really need to continue funding all the  institutions?  We must find mechanisms in order for institutions to fund themselves.

We fully concur with the notion that if a shark were to attack one person we would say bye-bye to our tourists.  If we therefore say that the Sharks Board is an important institution that needs to be properly financed we must discuss that.  We all agree with that.  I have a concern, Mr Chairperson, the time has now come for us to send a very clear message to some of the institutions, like the KFC, that they must now fund themselves, and not rely on Government grants.  The amount of money that has been allocated to the KFC during this financial year; if that money had been given to tourism, and to the Sharks Board its added value would have been enormous.

I therefore want to raise this question quite pertinently, and hope that the Minister and the Department is going to take it to heart.  I think we must now begin to deal with that question.  We must review these institutions that are in a position to fend for themselves so that we can use the little resources we have to the optimum.

The other issue, Chairperson, that I want to raise is with regard to the restructuring process of the KFC, and the question of setting up a new PDFC.  We are concerned because we are of the opinion that the restructuring process is not really dealing with the hard core issues.  At this stage it appears that the restructuring process is only dealing with the question of defining a new mandate for the new PDFC, and is only concerned with creating a legislative framework for the PDFC.

It does not appear that the restructuring process, at this point in time, is capable of dealing with the issues.  For instance, we have information that when the KFC got involved with the Sorghum Brewery industry, they purchased the property for R35 million, which was subsequently sold for R19 million.  The question is, why was this property sold at a loss?

AN HON MEMBER:  Scandalous.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  We need to really pay very close attention to the whole process of restructuring.  We must ensure that during the process, the committee that is dealing with this Bill of setting up of the new PDFC has fully internalised the critical issues that need to be dealt with.  Linked to this, are some of the institutions that we are trying to restructure in setting up a new PDFC.

I also want to raise the issue of the KMI and the KTT.  It is unclear how these institutions will be affected.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has three minutes left.

MR M MABUYAKHULU:  In the process of restructuring the KFC what do we do with them?  What role should they play?  Are we satisfied with the current role that they are playing?  The other question, Chairperson, that I want to deal with and the Minister has referred to it in his speech, and if there is anything that has happened in this Province which is exciting, it has been the launch of the Lubombo SDI.  However, concerns are being raised that despite the efforts that are being made to ensure that St Lucia, for instance, remains one of the anchor projects, we are getting the feeling that the Natal Parks Board, in particular, is not being helpful in this process.  We therefore believe that something drastic has to be done to ensure that we do not get the process bogged down.

Finally, Chairperson, I want to deal with the question of the two important ports that we have in this Province.  I would summarise it by saying that it is important that we must ensure that we set up an investment framework which will ensure that both Richards Bay and Durban ports are equally developed.  It would be wrong for any of us, and also for the hon member Alex Hamilton, my friend, to try and favour Durban over other ports.  For that reason, as a Province, we need to ensure that economic activities are distributed as widely as possible with regard to KwaZulu-Natal.

With those few words, I support the vote, Chairperson.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much, Mr Mabuyakhulu, for saving us a minute.  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Mzobe, for six minutes.

MR M R MZOBE:  Thank you, hon Chairperson.  Before I deal with the hon Minister's budget, I would like to make the following observations.  It is an honourable principle that a country that wants to be economically, socially and politically stable must maintain peace.  It is for that reason, I believe, that the IFP and the ANC are engaged in peace negotiations.

However, the IFP cannot afford the ANC harbouring the likes of Dr Blade Nzimande, of the SACP, whose party cannot stand on its own feet as a political party and destroy the peace that this Province has worked for so hard.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR M R MZOBE:  Mr Chairman, I rise to salute the hon the Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism who has fought tooth and nail to maintain economic growth in this Province of ours, hence making our Province one of the leading provinces in so far as tourism and economic growth is concerned.

However, the hon the Minister would have done even better than he has done if it were not for his own partners in the ANC/SACP/COSATU alliance.  The Government has very good intentions for the economy.  Tragically the whole country is held to ransom by COSATU which is vehemently opposed to the implementation of GEAR, which is one of the Government's best economic tools.  COSATU's constant boycotts, stay-aways and picketing has not only destroyed the country's economy, it has scared away foreign investors.  Sir, no man in his sober senses will invest money in a burning house.

It is an economic fact that you cannot help the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.  It is equally true that you cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.  COSATU's attitude towards the economy has cost many people their jobs.  That has resulted in the unprecedented criminality in our country.  Mr Chairman, it is high time that the Government must now stop COSATU's headlong economic destruction.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M R MZOBE:  Mr Chairman, when we come to the KFC, I would like to point out that the hon member, my brother, Mr Mabuyakhulu questioned the existence of the KFC.  I would like to draw the attention of this hon House, to what the KFC has done for the poorest of the poor in this country.  Many other financial institutions could not help the poor people in the rural areas.  The KFC does not only provide people with money, it also provides people with expertise, and it also provides people with jobs that our poor people in rural areas are enjoying.  Hon members, if we are really saying that we want to help our people in the rural areas, we must support the existence of the KFC and we must persuade the hon Minister not to do away with the KFC, because it is one of the strongest economic arms in the Province of KwaZulu-Natal.

Sir, whilst I respect that it is COSATU's democratic right to demand that organised business must implement affirmative action as soon as possible.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has 30 seconds left.

MR M R MZOBE:  It is my considered view, sir, that before affirmative action can take place people must be trained to acquire the necessary skills which will enable them to assume a position of high authority, to get to the offices of authority.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I am afraid your time is up, hon member.

MR M R MZOBE:  I thank you, hon Chairman.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Bartlett, who will speak for 10 minutes.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.

AN HON MEMBER:  Two minutes left.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Chairman, I have before me the hon the Minister's speech, and I would like to quote from it because I do not think he could have spoken more true a word, when he said on page 8:

	While we accept our part of the responsibility of the burden of the provincial debt, even though we are not a big spending department, we cannot accept the reactive and crisis manner approach to the budgeting process.  This has to change and be based on a set of clear priorities for the Province.  The budgeting process must be a pro-active, led by our provincial growth and development strategy, inclusive of all key role-players, cut the duplication of activities between the various line departments and finally, be determined by what impact our provincial allocations will have on various sectors in our Province.

I want to say to the hon Minister, I agree entirely with him there, and I am glad he had the courage to say that, sir.  But, he then goes further and he says:

	I hope those responsible for the budgeting process will bear this in mind as we plan the next budget.  It is the only way that our provincial budget can be used as an instrument for realising our vision as a Province.

And then on the next page he says:

	Provincial Government, in particular, has to get its act together.

And that is the nub of what I want to say right now, sir, to the hon Minister.

AN HON MEMBER:  Who is the Government?

MR G S BARTLETT:  Who is the Government, sir?  Thank you very much.  Indeed who is the Government?

AN HON MEMBER:  The ANC.

MR G S BARTLETT:  I want to say to that hon Minister, has he never heard of the concept of co-responsibility in a Cabinet, and he has got two other Ministers from his party in the Cabinet sitting with him.

AN HON MEMBER:  Were you not in the Cabinet too?

MR G S BARTLETT:  I want to say to those hon members, yes, I was in the Cabinet over three or four years ago when the hon Minister and I, and the then Premier, Dr Mdlalose and ~Inkosi~ Ngubane, at which time we talked about setting clear targets.  But, sir, since then the Cabinet has failed and the hon Minister's statement to which I have referred relates to the more recent period.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR G S BARTLETT:  They have failed, sir.  That hon Minister has accepted here that the Cabinet has not budgeted correctly, and the Provincial Government in particular has got to get its act together.

Now what are the consequences of the hon Minister's cut in his budget?  You see, sir, the hon Minister is correct in saying that we should be driving our economy, and the only way to real true freedom and liberty of our people is through economic growth.  I have said it before.  No person is really free in life until he can reach into his back pocket and pull out his wallet and say: "How much do I owe you", and that only comes through work.  It only comes through economic development.

Now, sir, this hon Minister has an extremely important portfolio.  It is to build, and drive, and assist the economy of this Province to grow so that our people can get jobs, so that they have got money in their pockets, so they can be really and truly free, and be able to say: "How much do I owe you to pay my rent, my rates, my electricity bills, my clothes, my food".

These hon members to my right who are members of the communist party, sir, they do not believe that.  [LAUGHTER]  They do not believe the principles of what I have said.  So what is the consequences of this hon Minister's budget cut?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order please!  Give him a hearing.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Sir, the hon Minister has cut by 49% his Department's contribution to the KwaZulu Finance Corporation.  If one reads his annual report, he says that the KwaZulu Finance Corporation is the cause of hundreds of millions of Rands worth of investment and development in this Province.  Yet the Cabinet has seen fit to cut that budget by, what did I say, 49%.  What effect will this have on investment and job creation?  Now, Mr Chairman, there is also the matter of priorities.  We have here the R100 million peace budget.  I read through the expenditure on the peace allocation, and I find that almost as much as the entire tourism budget has been spent just on the administrative expenditures alone of this "peace" budget.

I would also like to raise the KwaZulu Marketing Initiative allocation which has been cut by 25%.  Yet in the annual report it says that incoming investments into this Province in 1997/1998 as a direct result of their initiative was R350 million.  The Cabinet has cut by enormous percentages, the budgets of some of the most important bodies in this Province that stimulate the development of the economy.  I want to know why Mr Chairman.  The hon Minister talks about setting priorities, but he is the one who sets priorities, sir, along with his colleagues.

AN HON MEMBER:  Who messed up the economy?

MR G S BARTLETT:  That hon member says who messed up the economy.  Man, he falls for it every time.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  What is the growth rate now?

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Chairman, before this Government came into power everybody was saying when we get rid of ~Apartheid~, when we get rid of the border wars, we would find that we would have plenty of money to really develop the country.  What has happened in reality?  The army, sir, has been cut almost to shreds.  Submarines stand out of the water on blocks.  Army vehicles stand parked and are rusting.

HON MEMBERS:  What about your pension?

MR G S BARTLETT:  Sir, the whole development of this Province and this country have been sacrificed because of the inefficient and maladministration of Government.  Mr Chairman, I ask you to pull up this hon member, sir.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order! Order please!

MR G S BARTLETT:  You see, I have learnt after 24 years in Parliament that when you hit your opposition where it hurts, they squeal and they chirp like those hon members are doing, and they know I am right.  They know I am right.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR G S BARTLETT:  You see, sir, I am saying to the hon Minister, he has told us that his budget has been cut drastically.  He has told us that this Province should get its act together.  I am now saying to him, he is a senior member of the Cabinet and it is his act that he has got to get together.

I want to now turn to the Tourism Board.  We have heard so much about the value of tourism and the importance of the Tourism Board.  Yet, sir, regrettably, and the Minister has admitted it, the Tourism Board is not really operating.  Indeed it has not even been appointed yet.  Why not?  Why not sir?  Right at the beginning when the IPTSC was first appointed certain elements involved in tourism in this Province said the way the Government was going was wrong.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has three minutes left.

AN HON MEMBER:  Three minutes.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Three minutes, thank you.  They said the way the hon Minister was going was wrong.  I believe they have now been proven to be correct, because today the Tourism Board is not operating the way it should.  Yet we have heard how much tourism means to this Province, so whose fault is it?  Surely sir, the responsibility and the buck must stop with the Minister, and with the Cabinet.  Indeed, the hon Minister has admitted that the Cabinet must get its act together.

Someone mentioned the Sharks Board and what would happen to our coastal tourism industry if there was a shark attack in this Province.  I read in the latest Time magazine yesterday of what happened to the tourism industry of Egypt when some terrorists shot and killed a group of tourists.  It stated that today hundreds of tourist workers are out of jobs and the entire industry is suffering.  If you want to travel to Egypt, now is the time to go as special deals are being offered to bring the tourists back.  We must accept that shark attacks on our Natal Coast will result in our tourism industry taking a severe knock and I question the wisdom of putting the effectiveness of the Sharks Board at risk through severe budget cuts.

I now want to turn to page 7 of the hon Minister's report where he talked about job losses, and I would like to ask him who is responsible for the job losses?

AN HON MEMBER:  What did you do about job creation?

MR G S BARTLETT:  Mr Chairman, it is common knowledge today that last year we lost something like 160 000 jobs in the formal sector of our economy.  Why, sir?  It is because of the labour policies of the ANC Government.  The ANC Government is killing any real investment in South Africa, because people with money are not going to invest here when they have to face the type of labour legislation which is coming out of Parliament in Cape Town.

The hon Minister said that there is development coming in such capital intensive areas such as petro-chemicals, and also in the aluminium industry, and he also spoke of other industries such as the textile industry where the average age of their machinery is becoming younger.  I would like to, through you, sir, ask the Minister, what does this mean in reality?  It means that industry is becoming more capital intensive in order to get rid of labour.  What we see happening in this country today, because of the labour legislation of the ANC Government, jobs are being shed because the ANC want a first world labour policy in a third world country.  That is basically what is wrong here.  Even farmers today, sir, who previously were prepared to keep jobs open by cutting cane manually are now importing machines costing hundreds of thousands of Rand to cut sugar cane, because of the actions of COSATU and labour unions and the consequences of labour legislation that is coming into place.  These developments are going to destroy jobs and agriculture if the Government continues with their policy of trying to force upon us a first world labour policy in a third world country.

Sir, we are losing jobs to neighbouring countries.  People are uplifting their factories and moving them out of South Africa to Swaziland and Botswana.  Why?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MR G S BARTLETT:  Thank you, Mr Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I thank you too.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Our next speaker is the hon Mrs Cronje, for nine minutes.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Chairperson.  Chairperson, I can stand in this House and quote impressive statistics about the tourist potential of our country, and in particular, the largely unrealised tourist potential of KwaZulu-Natal.  I can go through a list of our tourist attractions in this Province alone, that will take up the entire nine minutes at my disposal.  I can recite statistics on the ability of the tourist industry to stimulate and foster economic growth, and to create jobs, to become the lead sector in our economy.  I can pontificate about the opportunities that the tourist industry offers for transformation, emerging entrepreneurs and the role it can play in black economic empowerment.

But I am not going to do that yet again - for the simple reason, not that it is not true, but that all of us have talked about these issues year after year, in this House, since the election in 1994.  We have talked about it in workshops, in seminars, in focus group discussions and portfolio committees.  We have talked about it at home, to friends, at the clubs and in the pubs, in aeroplanes, whilst sitting on the beach and whilst hiking in the Drakensberg.  We have talked, and talked, and talked about it year in and year out, including this year, and we all agree on it.  Yet, and I think this is the cause of my frustration, we are not prepared as a Province to vote sufficient funds in our budget to enable us to do something about it.  This I will never understand.

The hon Minister laid the foundation for a successful tourist industry in this Province, very shortly after he became Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism.  It is common cause that he consulted widely with all stakeholders, that as a Province we now have a widely accepted White Paper on tourism policy that we can all be justifiably proud of, and that we have passed the necessary legislation to enable us to give effect to that policy.  Legislation that was hailed throughout the country as pioneering legislation.  We have set up a structure, namely the KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority staffed by able, and I want to repeat this, staffed by able, enthusiastic and committed people rearing to go.  I would ask hon members to look at Annexure A to the Minister's speech, where it is very, very neatly set out who these people are, what their portfolios are, and what the programmes and projects are.

I wonder whether hon members have any idea of the time, effort and commitment that has gone into this.  Let us be honest, it has not been an easy task.  The industry was fragmented, insular and elitist in the extreme when the hon Minister took over, and there is of course still a lot of work to be done to change all of this.  The spade work has been done.  The structures are almost all in place or about to be put in place.  We have managed to arrive at a common vision for the Province.

Yesterday we passed, in this House, the Development Planning Bill unanimously, a Bill which should and can facilitate tourist development as well.  We have the National EIA Regulations in place that will guide responsible and sustainable tourism development in sensitive areas.  And now we are saying as a Province, having done all that work: "Sorry, there is simply no money for tourism".  I find it incomprehensible and unacceptable.

Let us look at the figures.  Programme 4 - Tourism, is given R6,7 million for 1998/1999 as opposed to R12 million last year, and last year we all agreed that that amount was insufficient, and there was not a dissenting voice in this House last year.  Come this year we have got a 50% cut.  The KwaZulu-Natal Tourism Authority will be getting only R4 million.  A 55% cut on last year's budget!  (By the way, there is not even formal provision for it in the Blue Book).

Let us look at the implications and consequences of these budget cuts, because nothing happens without consequences.  After painstakingly putting an organisation together and employing staff to give effect to what the people of this Province, and their elected representatives want, the Tourism Authority is now faced with a few very stark options indeed.  I want members to know this.

OPTION 1

The Tourism Authority can wind up its operations, retrench its staff and close shop.  It is as simple and as crude as that.  Because there seems little point in keeping anything going if programmes cannot be implemented, and please look at the programmes on the books, and in Annexure A.  There is no point in using money only to pay rent, water and lights, and you cannot do anything else.  Of course, we must consider the implications of such a drastic step.  And we should be fully aware of the negative signals that such a step would send to the tourism industry and to potential tourists, to investors and the like.



OPTION 2

The Tourism Authority continues to implement the business plan that it has worked out, for a while, in the hope that additional funds will be made available.  If the funds are not forthcoming, then Option 1 comes into effect - close shop.

OPTION 3

We crisis manage and prioritise programmes, which must of necessity be kept to a minimum, and please look at those programmes in the pipeline.  Staff can then focus on possible ways of implementing programmes and projects through fund-raising and partnerships with the private sector, if you have enough staff left to do it. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has three minutes left.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  However, it will not be able to provide the envisaged services to especially emerging tour operators and communities wanting to develop tourism in their areas.  It will be extremely limited when it comes to the transformation and restructuring of this vital industry.

OPTION 4

The Tourism Authority halts all envisaged projects and programmes where no contractual obligations exist, and it tries to withdraw from existing contractual obligations.  It can move out of Tourist Junction, and it can go and house itself in some obscure little venue out of sight, and out of mind of potential tourists.

Is that what we want?  Those are our options.  We should go into it if we pass this budget knowingly, and not act surprised when things grind to a halt.  Because these cuts in the tourism budget will have consequences in practice and for our people, not just on paper.  It is the transformation of the industry that will be affected most, bringing in emerging entrepreneurs, spreading tourism to all our people.

If we now have to rely on the private sector to drive and fund tourism development, it will of necessity impact on the priorities, programmes and projects.  The bottom line is what matters, not transformation.  If we were not in a period of transformation, this might not matter very much, but our first responsibility as Government should be to transform the industry to make it accessible to all, and to empower disadvantaged and poor communities.  We cannot rely on market forces alone to achieve this goal.  Government has to participate in this, and without money it cannot.  Let us understand that clearly.  In this budget for tourism, we as Government are abdicating our responsibility.

There may be some potential for re-allocation of funds within the hon Minister's Department, and I would respectfully request the hon Minister to look at possibilities there.  There may be duplication of functions within his Department.  Let us look at that as one of the possibilities.  Otherwise it will remain a grim irony that this beautiful Province, so rich in natural and human resources, spends a pittance on Tourism and on the Environment that sustains it!  This to me is a tragedy, because there are two things, Chairperson, that I feel passionate about, and that is tourism and the environment.  Those two things seem to be at the bottom of the list of priorities in this Province.  Why, I do not know.  So please, let us do something about it, and next year not to stand here and say, "Had we only".  Thank you, Chairperson.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Just in time, thank you.  The next speaker is the hon Miss Barrett, for 12 minutes.

MISS B BARRETT:  Mr Chairman, hon members of the House.  During the past year I have been fortunate enough to visit Europe twice, but whenever I am overseas I am reminded of the fact that the Province of KwaZulu-Natal is known to very few people.  In the minds of the world South Africa comprises of Cape Town with its Table Mountain and Robben Island, the Garden Route and the Kruger National Park.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION.

MISS B BARRETT:  Little is known about the majestic Drakensberg Mountains, and nothing is known about Lake St Lucia, Umfolozi and Itala Game Reserves, the Zulu Battlefields at Isandlwana, and the Natal Midlands - to mention a few of the many tourist attractions this Province holds.

To a large part I believe the fault of this information void lies with the tourism authorities, more notably SATOUR, and its selective promotion of tourist destinations in South Africa.  For the past eight years the National Tourism Indaba has been hosted in Durban, and if we had any sense we would ensure it remained that way.  But every year I attend this function, the stands for KwaZulu-Natal are stuck in some poky spot, way in the background of whatever venue is used.  This is despite the fact that SATOUR receives R200 000 from this Province, as well as R550 000 from the Durban Metro solely for this event.  The Western Cape, of course, is allocated the prime position, asserting its domination over the tourism industry, domestically as well as abroad.  In SATOUR's latest calender, the Cape is featured no fewer than 19 times, with KwaZulu-Natal allocated six miserly photographs - five of which are Durban - with none of our coastal areas or game resorts featured.  But whilst I am highly critical of SATOUR's partisan behaviour, this national structure is not solely responsible for the dismal plight of tourism in KwaZulu-Natal.

Tourism is the biggest industry in the world, employing tens of millions of people.  The potential for economic growth through tourism is enormous.  Let us turn to France which has the biggest tourist industry in the world with 61 million visitors per annum.  The tourism industry in France has huge spin-offs for domestic investment in sectors such as transport, with France boasting the second largest aerospace industry in the world and a highly sophisticated rail system, with the French TGV trains acknowledged as the standard in high-speed rail.

With these facts before us, the complacency governing our tourism industry in KwaZulu-Natal has got to end.  Tourism in this Province has been allocated a dismal budget.  Construction has not yet started at Durban's King Shaka Airport.  It is four years later and the must-see attraction in Durban has yet to materialise.  Where is the Point Harbour development and Roland Starkey's R700 million hotel development on the Bluff?  Why is it so difficult to get development off the ground in this Province?

AN HON MEMBER:  A good question.

MISS B BARRETT:  It was our idea to build the biggest aquarium in the Southern Hemisphere, yet it was Cape Town that transformed this idea into reality.  The hoards of tourists waiting for hours in queues to get into the Ocean Aquarium on Cape Town's V&A Waterfront, should have been our tourists - but we never got our act together.  It is what the hon Mr Hamilton refers to as the "Natal Syndrome".

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MISS B BARRETT:  This waste of time and lack of commitment to tourist development in KwaZulu-Natal, has meant a potential loss of thousands of jobs, and a lost opportunity to create hundreds of small and micro businesses related to the tourist trade.  To reverse this trend, attitudes have got to change.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MISS B BARRETT:  The first issue to tackle is KwaZulu-Natal's crime profile.  If you believed everything you read, you would be convinced KwaZulu-Natal has the highest crime and violence statistics in the country, yet KwaZulu-Natal only comes third to Gauteng and the Western Cape.

AN HON MEMBER:  You are damn right.

MISS B BARRETT:  I know we are facing huge budgetary constraints this year, but money spent on an intensive media campaign to correct the negative perceptions people have of our Province, could only boost much needed economic growth - by attracting investment back to this Province, and by attracting domestic and foreign tourists.

This media campaign must be coupled with a renewed commitment to bolster the SAPS and its crime prevention strategies in the Province.  The main tourist centres in KwaZulu-Natal must become a safe haven for foreign tourists, in order for people to stay in our hotels and visit our resorts.  Carwatch in Durban and Pietermaritzburg has already made huge inroads in preventing car break-ins and thefts.  I know of councillors who are supporting the concept of "Bobby on the Beat" on Durban's beach front, because it has been proved time and again that visible police presence is the greatest deterrent against crime.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MISS B BARRETT:  Beyond an effective media campaign, this Parliament needs to revive stalled projects such as Durban's new International Airport and Durban's Point Harbour Development.

A priority for our hon Minister and this Parliament is to ensure that the Provincial Tourism Authority is up and running.  KwaZulu-Natal needs a responsible authority to promote and oversee its tourism assets.  With the devastating cut in the budget of our Conservation Authority, much is going to depend on the Tourism Authority to promote our wildlife and conservation areas.

In the beginning much energy must be dedicated to ensuring that this Province is being adequately promoted throughout the world, and we can be pro-active and develop links with South Africa's diplomatic missions abroad, as well as actively establish ties with international hotel chains and tourism agencies.

On a separate issue, I would like to concentrate on the Natal Sharks Board.  Like all departments and statutory bodies in the Province, NSB has also experienced a cut in budget.  In the past year I have, through the Portfolio Committee, had much greater contact with the head of this organisation, Mr Graham Charter, and I must commend him and his staff for their energy and commitment.  And it is thanks to Graham that I have a better understanding of NSB's business operations.  It is with this introduction that I am hoping the Ministry and the NSB will accept some constructive criticism.

I know NSB's budget cut from R12 million last year to R10 million this year has sent shock waves through this statutory body, especially in the light of the blow dealt to NSB last year, with the theft of the designs for POD, and subsequent loss of potential revenue for this venture.  But I do not agree with the manner in which the effect of this budget cut has been publicised, which portrays the Sharks Board as a cash-strapped organisation that is threatening to remove its nets.  It is not responsible to raise alarm amongst the public.

On the contrary, I believe that NSB's budget reduction has pre-empted some very necessary restructuring.  In my opinion the capacity of NSB was allowed to grow beyond the actual needs of this Province, during a period of government when money was readily available for these initiatives, because so little money was spent on providing essential services to disadvantaged communities.  Whilst it is debated that NSB is important for tourism in KwaZulu-Natal, the need to rationalise this operation was identified a long time ago.  Its energies should be actively directed at compiling a comprehensive coastal plan for shark-netting, which identifies the areas with the greatest concentration of tourists, and at what time of the year these areas are frequented.

We also need to move away from the ancient philosophy that shark nets are essential for the success of coastal tourism.  If that was the case, why is Clifton Beach in Cape Town such a booming success?  There are no shark nets at Clifton, and nor are there in many popular tourist resorts throughout the world!  By sending alarm bells through the media that shark nets are going to be removed, is merely brainwashing the public that shark nets are central to human safety.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has two minutes left.

MISS B BARRETT:  They are not.  And even more importantly shark nets threaten marine life.  In the past year 100 dolphins and three whales were caught in shark nets.  Shark nets are threatening the survival of the Humpback dolphins, and sawfish have not been caught along our coastline for the past five years.  It is high time a balance is struck between the needs of conservation and the needs of people, and recognition must be given to the fact that the optimal utilisation or our marine environment is essential for economic growth.

Part of NSB's rationalisation programme must include this Province's conservation authorities as well, in the area of scientific marine research.  Here we have an example of gross duplication of functions.  The question must be asked, why has the NSB and Department of Conservation set up their own marine research arms in the face of dwindling resources, when ORI can perform this function at a fraction of the cost?  We are now faced with the situation where some of ORI's scientists have moved over to work in either NSB or the Conservation Department, but with the current budget cut (a situation that is not likely to change in the near future), there is no money available to conduct necessary research.  So these scientists are sitting in provincial departments doing next to nothing.  And because these duplicated research arms have been created, ORI will not be contracted to do any work whatsoever for the Conservation Department this year, thereby threatening the existence of this NGO.

With no money to do work within Government, former ORI scientists now employed in the Conservation Department have been instructed to contract out their services.  In other words, compete with ORI.  This situation is untenable, and a shocking mismanagement of scarce resources in this Province.  I raise this issue now, because the Committees of Economic Affairs jointly with both Conservation and Finance must urgently convene another meeting between these three bodies with the aim of defining the function of each body and thereby eradicating unnecessary and costly duplication of roles.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MISS B BARRETT:  I would like to conclude by supporting the budget before us.  I realise that most of the voted funds for Economics and Tourism are already committed in the form of transfers.  However, our Portfolio Committee has the responsibility to ensure that whatever remains is used wisely to promote investment and job creation.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, hon member.  Right on time.  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Nel, for seven minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, Chairman.  The Democratic Party would certainly like to commend the ANC Government on GEAR, but we would also call on them at the same time to implement it.

I want to commend the Minister on certain aspects of his speech, and I quote:

	Technological innovations are now more pervasive and being utilised by more trading economies.  Accordingly, science and technology innovations are having a profound and rapid effect on the means of production.  Those economies that can establish adaptable and efficient systems and that capture this change are more successful than those who do not.  This has implications for the democratic State.  The State now has to play a different role.  This is essentially to establish a clear strategic and institutional framework and parameters within which market forces and flexible decision-making processes provide for adaptability and efficiency.

And again on page 6 where the Minister says:

	The second thrust to try and ensure at the macro level that productivity growth outstrips wage growth.  This frees investable resources, and it accordingly follows that this surplus must go back to the productive sector to generate employment.  A key component of this overall labour market approach is the concept of active labour markets where institutions facilitate redeployment, mobility, skill portability and support for restructuring and adjustment that needs to occur in our economy.

That is the guts of GEAR and we call on the Government to implement it.  Sir, we need transformation and we need it now.  The Government must stop calling for it, but rather start doing it.

We have got too many passengers in the system.  The Democratic Party, and specifically myself, are today calling for the resignation of the Minister of Correctional Services.  He may not be a Provincial Minister, but nevertheless, it relates to the Pietermaritzburg Prison.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR W U NEL:  Two years ago or a year and a half ago the Minister was given a report which called for shock action.  They called for the dispersement of the prisoners to various other prisons which would break up corrupt syndicates, and for the dispersement of members to be transferred to break up corrupt rings within that prison.  It surprises me that further on in the report they refer to the threat of a possible strike, and they conclude that even if there should be a strike, it would not have a noticeable difference, because most of the officials are doing nothing anyway.

If that is the performance of the Minister and his response to a two year old report, then we think he owes it to people who are disadvantaged to resign forthwith and make space for someone who will do the job.

AN HON MEMBER:  He is not here.

MR W U NEL:  He is out there.  To refer to growth, sir, is not just a hoax.  We have had in the past six years an average of 3% growth per annum, and that includes the next year for which there is a forecast included.  Had we had 6,3% instead of 3% growth and we would have had it if it was not for violence, and if it was not for waste in Government departments, had we had 6% growth, our GDP would have been R823 billion and not R669.  It would have meant probably around R70 billion of extra tax, and if that were shared simply between the provinces, we could have had an extra R14 billion which is almost double our current budget.  That is the compounding effect of healthy growth which we are forfeiting because either the Government is sitting on its hands, or are we tolerating the violence.  We must now get to the end of this.  We tolerate violence and waste and the poor remain poor.  The Democratic Party says enough is enough.  Let us stop that.

I now wish to turn just very briefly, because I do not have much time, to three issues that were raised, and are relevant to this report.  The first is tourism.  

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has three minutes left.

MR W U NEL:  The hon member Mrs Cronje says we now face the despicable situation where there are only three options.  Either close the whole operation of tourism, alternatively continue and try and implement the business plan in the hope that money will come, or otherwise find the money.

The Democratic Party finds it amazing that we have gone through all the pain of setting up the structures of the Tourism Authority, passing the Act and then it now seems to us, because of political unwillingness, and because of a squabble between the two main parties in this Province, we are now not going to have a Board after all.  The excuse is it is going to cost money.

It defies our understanding why this effort should cost so much money, unless you are proposing to pay the Board members full time salaries.  The time has come to take away the people who have done a very good job.  The IPTSC, and now the Management Committee, take them away and let the industry get involved, the people who have got a stake in the industry, the communities, everybody else.  Let them get involved and they can do that at a minimal cost.  We say appoint a representative Board as a matter of urgency.  Last Christmas we were called back from recess for urgent meetings.  It is now the beginning of June and still we await the appointment of a Board.

The other matter is the Sharks Board.  Yesterday we had the grim and sensational photos included in a report, basically to argue for more money for the Sharks Board.  The Democratic Party is also sick and tired, and whilst we have the greatest admiration for the Board, there are other people who also do the same job.  We now call for an urgent review of whether or not it is not opportune to amalgamate the functions of ORI, the Sharks Board and the research arm of the Conservation Service, because we think there is duplication that we can no longer afford, and in fact they are working at cross-purposes in many instances.  That should be reviewed as a matter of urgency.

AN HON MEMBER:  There are some members here to feed to the sharks as well.  [LAUGHTER]

MR W U NEL:  Then lastly, sir, the issue of the KFC.  The KFC really has a remarkable record.  During the past year, specifically, with the institution of Ithala Bank, they have entered waters where the commercial banks are unwilling to trade, because they are always fussing about too much security and too many bureaucratic procedures.  That is their right, but the KFC has exploited that gap, and the people with R1 000 or R500 to save have now got an accessible place to do it.  They generate extremely large investments from the deposits that they receive.  So every cent that is spent on the KFC, in my opinion, is a cent well spent, and we applaud them for that.  We hope that they will continue doing this good work.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I am afraid the hon member's time is up.

AN HON MEMBER:  What a pity.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We thank you.  Our next speaker is the hon Mrs Millin, for 10 minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order!  Before she starts, may I make this special request, that I have many yellow cards ready.

MRS T E MILLIN:  Good.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  And let us heckle when it is necessary.  Let us not make it a perpetual heckling.  Over to you.

MRS T E MILLIN:  Thank you, Mr Chair, otherwise I will be asking for injury time!

AN HON MEMBER:  Are you a communist?

MRS T E MILLIN:  Chair, I am very grateful for this opportunity to speak, albeit briefly, on this combined vote, not as an expert, or even a member of this esteemed Committee, but as a deeply concerned member of the public and citizen of our Province.

The gist of my message being common sense.  Chair, KwaZulu-Natal, together with the rest of the country, has one overriding and extremely urgent priority, namely the creation of jobs, to wipe out, or, at the very least substantially reduce the currently rapidly multiplying legions of unemployed, at the same time, effectively preventing escalating crime, including murder, all too often the consequence as the hungry, homeless and jobless become more and more desperate for survival.

Here, Chair, I refer to a Mercury report of 30 April 1998.  "IFP aim to create growth and jobs", wherein our Premier, Dr Ben Ngubane, responded to obfuscatory remarks made by our hon colleague Mr Mabuyakhulu (who I am glad to see is here) in reply to earlier well-founded comments by the hon Premier on the Employment Equity Bill.

Chair, one does not need a bewildering array of university degrees and doctorates to deduce the priorities, accolades of which I am sure many in this distinguished House can boast, and not a few in the benches opposite us!

No, Chair, common sense is what we all need in super large doses... Sadly, a commodity not acquired in hallowed halls of learning.

AN HON MEMBER:  You have not got a degree.

MRS T E MILLIN:  I have not got a degree, no.  Certainly I have not.

AN HON MEMBER:  And common sense?

MRS T E MILLIN:  I have got common sense, thank you.  On the contrary, the tendency is to philosophise, contextualise, sensitise, ideologise and all the other "ises" our erstwhile intelligent and sensible thinkers, into a politically correct mould.

There are recent encouraging signs, however, that common sense is beginning to peep through the stifling quagmire of politically correct diatribe.  Here I refer to Business Day's editorial yesterday, (1 June), headed, "Ben Turok's epiphany", wherein we are told that a parliamentary task team, studying the Reserve Bank under the chairmanship of that well-known communist Turok, charged with the task of investigating whether or not Central Government should monitor/limit/usurp the central bank's autonomy, after a period of over six months, many committee meetings, costly visits to various corners of the globe, all at the expense of the already "gatvol" taxpayer has nevertheless, come to the astonishing conclusion, when late last week, Turok's Task Team unambiguously endorsed the central bank's independence!

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!  INTERJECTIONS

MRS T E MILLIN:  Hallelujah!  Chair, common sense has thus thankfully prevailed, albeit via a rather tortuous route, and at considerable, and unnecessary expense, I might add.

Now, Chair, can we please expect to see some common sense prevailing with regard to the terrible trio of labour laws.  May I remind this House that South Africa lost upwards of 150 000 jobs in the formal sector in 1997, in spite of GEAR, ostensibly the centrepiece of Government economic policy.  GEAR having forecast, in the same report, 250 000 new jobs for the same year.  And of course, our Province is one of the worst affected in the job loss stakes, as we all know.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS T E MILLIN:  However, these figures do not take into account the alarming number of job losses in the small business and informal sector.  Where increasing numbers of businesses who employ, and employed 50 or less have gone, or are going into voluntary liquidation, rather than have to contend with the impending draconian Basic Conditions of Employment and Equity Bills, guaranteed to put the final nails in the coffin of our beleaguered economy.

May I remind the House and the hon Minister of a very apt statement he made in his speech this morning, (page 2) if you want to check, quote:

	That our economy is inextricably linked to the world economy.

And I am afraid, hon Minister, that we are going to "shoot ourselves in the foot", (page 1 of your report), if we persist in implementing such restrictive legislation as previously mentioned.  And please, do not come with your bankrupt non-arguments and accusations of racism, ravages of ~Apartheid~, cultures of entitlement and redress, as this is all unadulterated and obfuscatory poppycock, and I do not care if that is parliamentary, or not!

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER 

MRS T E MILLIN:  Rather, Government must keep its sticky, meddling fingers, and noses out of business and economics, and, instead, do all in its considerable power to encourage growth.  Time prevents one from mentioning the conditions necessary for such growth, suffice it to say those conditions, under impending labour legislation, are conspicuous by their absence.

Chair, far more influential voices than mine are expounding a similar message, as in a Sunday Times editorial, 31 May, with the caption, "No reconciliation if Government fails", in commenting on Deputy President Thabo Mbeki's speech in Parliament last Friday, wherein the obvious need to create jobs is highlighted, to improve the lot of the legions of poor, further stating that Central Government needs to recognise this by:

	Jettisoning every piece of legislation, including some of its cherished labour laws that impede job creation.

That is not me that said that!  I therefore appeal for the sake of our people, our nation, let common sense prevail please.

How much time do I have, Mr Chair?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  You have four minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS T E MILLIN:  Okay, thank you.  Allow me, Chair, one or two remarks concerning the vitally important matter of tourism, and I must say I echo most of what everybody has said before me.... and one is ever mindful concerning the severe budgetary constraints referred to by the hon Minister.  Tourism is, nevertheless, a potentially dynamic industry for KwaZulu-Natal, and in particular, our beautiful coastline, and funding simply must be begged, borrowed, and I hesitate to say stolen... [LAUGHTER] to promote/encourage as many tourists and visitors to come and enjoy our many attractions as possible.

AN HON MEMBER:  Tax the rich.

MRS T E MILLIN:  That is the last thing you should do.  We have all studied the excellent Sharks Board document, together with the rather graphic illustrations of shark attack victims.  Perhaps we should have had a health warning before we looked at those.

Chair, one is aware that these figures show comparatively few attacks, when seen against the number of sharks and bathers over the period reviewed.  And taking into account our ecologically minded, who are sitting here.  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  On both sides.

MRS T E MILLIN:  Both sides, yes... and concerns for the welfare of sharks in what is after all their natural habitat, one has to weigh those needs and rights against those of our would-be tourists and sea bathers.

We all know how just one or two possibly fatal shark attacks on our coastline, particularly before the December holidays can, or would have a hugely detrimental effect on tourism in KwaZulu-Natal, just as stonings from bridges, or the roadside would have.  So please, let us not cut back on measures needed to protect our citizens and visitors to this Province, as well as our tourism industry which, as the Chairman noted, has created 200 000 much needed jobs in KwaZulu-Natal.  Again, let common sense prevail.

Very reluctantly, in conclusion, I give my support to this hopelessly inadequate budget vote.  Thank you, Mr Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We thank you, hon member, for saving us some time.  I have noticed that there is a growing cordial relationship between the hon member and her audience.  [LAUGHTER]  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Mohlomi, for nine minutes.

MR T S MOHLOMI:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  It is really surprising, Mr Chairman, to see that there are still some people who are so readily anti-working class in this country today.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T S MOHLOMI:  It is absolutely very, very surprising.  In the South Africa of today where we talk about democracy, where we talk about rights, that people are so anti-working class.  It is very, very surprising.

AN HON MEMBER:  Are we talking about jobs or what are we talking about?

AN HON MEMBER:  Those are dinosaurs.

MR T S MOHLOMI:  Of course, most of us here were voted into Parliament by these very same workers that we say must be oppressed and exploited.  Most of us, all the political parties in this House, the majority of people who voted for us are those workers, but we forget about them once we are here.  Capitalists might have pumped money into our organisations, but the people who gave us their votes are those workers.  

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR T S MOHLOMI:  The vote we are debating now is, in my opinion, the most important one, Mr Chairman.  Delivery of any sort cannot be achieved if our economy is not strong.  Talk about education, health, social welfare, housing or any facet of life, and you will arrive at the conclusion that none of these things can be achieved without a strong economy.  That is why I say the vote that we are debating is one of the most central, and important ones.

This then brings me to the question of how do we make our economy strong, and achieve growth?  My focus, however, will be on the role that all the major stakeholders should play in making a contribution to the growth of our economy.  Our past industrial relations in South Africa have been bedeviled by animosity and adversarial relationships, and you can see that in this House, between labour, business and Government.  Where has this adversarial relationship lead us to?  It has led to massive strikes in every sector of the economy, at least a stay-away or two called for every year, marches, boycotts and many other forms of industrial action.

What has been the cause of all this?  If you go to labour, the main reason that would be cited, besides different economic interests, I mean the issue of wages, and working conditions between labour and business, would be the lack of consultation and unilateral decision-making by both Government and business, which used to happen in the past.  That was the second most important reason for strikes in this country.

The call for joint decision-making, co-determination and consultation has been echoed in the corridors of power, and in the streets of our country, for years.  However, for many years this call fell on deaf ears.  It was heard when the levels of the struggle became very high in this country and that was during the late 80s.  1988, 1989 and so on.  It was only then that the old National Party Government began to accept that it could not rule the country in the old way, it had to consult.  On all fronts we saw the formation of structures which were supposed to involve extra parliamentary organisations, and the organs of civil society in decision-making.

Initially the purpose of the National Party Government was not to facilitate genuine joint decision-making, but was to co-opt and make the organs of civil society mere rubber stamps of the Government decisions.  Many such fora were formed, such as the National Economic Forum, the precursor of the NEDLAC of today, the National Housing Forum, which involved all role-players and stakeholders in housing, including SANCO, the South African National Civics Organisation, we had the National Education Forum and many other such fora.  In this Province we established the Regional Economic Forum.

It is this tripartite relationship, and not the tripartite alliance, but the tripartite relationship found in the REF that I want to address myself to, in trying to answer the question, what role must the major stakeholders play in the economy.

I believe, Mr Chairman, that the fora such as NEDLAC and the REF provide us with a golden opportunity to achieve consultation, joint decision-making and co-determination around major challenges that are facing our economy.  Genuine negotiation and not co-option, has led to the resolution of many problems in this country which might have led to major stay-aways in the past, because of lack of such consultation.  Since the establishment of NEDLAC we have had not even one stay-away in this country.  There have been threats to call such stay-aways, but because of negotiations such stay-aways have been avoided.

It must be expected that such calls will not completely disappear, because any negotiation involves the use of power.  However, the existence of avenues for genuine negotiation and consultation has minimised the use of power in the settlement of disputes, and in the negotiating process.  It is for this reason that I and my organisation, this side of the House, fully support the existence and financial support of structures such as NEDLAC and the Regional Economic Forum.

Furthermore, the existence of these fora make it possible to share ideas and views on how to develop our economy, which I believe is one of our biggest challenges at this point in time.  It is my view, Chair, that there is no one right way of doing things, especially if you talk about something as complicated as the economy.  Even if you take economists who are fully committed to the capitalist system, and ask them for their opinions on how we should grow our economy, and if there are 10 of them you will get 10 different answers to that question.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR T S MOHLOMI:  This is even more so if you take people coming from different backgrounds, different schools of thought and different class positions, because we must not forget that we are still divided into classes in this country.  We need diversity of opinions so that we can put to the test and debate each and every economic policy proposal.  I believe we can learn a lot from the business community.  We can learn a lot from labour and other organs of civil society, as well as the Government.  We need this debate desperately in our country, especially in our Province.

What benefits do we stand to gain from these tripartite institutions?  Hon Chair, the benefits are galore.  In addition to the advantages of communication, and exchanging of ideas, once agreement has been reached in these structures, this is binding on parties.  You have a binding agreement.  Besides it being binding, you are ensured of commitment by all parties to whatever agreement is reached.  I believe that would be one of the major achievements from bodies such as these.

Another point I would like to touch on, Mr Chairman, is the whole issue of black economic empowerment.  I know I am starting to sound like a stuck record, because each year I stand up and speak on this vote I say one and the same thing.  And that is that we need to be committed to uplifting small black entrepreneurs.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The member has two minutes left.

MR T S MOHLOMI:  I believe, Mr Chair, that this call comes from the bottom of my heart.  I do not want to dwell on what happened in the past that led to the exclusion of black people from the mainstream of our economy.  I think that is obvious to all of us.  My major concern for making this call is both political and economic.  It is political in the sense that the survival of this new fledgling democracy is directly dependent on whether we deliver to our people in general, but primarily on whether our people will begin to have a share in our economy.

If we do not ensure that this happens, we are going to experience what happened in many countries, such as Malaysia, where people began to riot and grabbed the properties and businesses belonging to people who they regarded as their oppressors or their former oppressors.  That happened in Malaysia.  That is what jolted the Government of Malaysia into action, to ensure that in fact if the government does not do something about this issue, the people were going to grab the whole economy on their own.  I think we should learn from that example, Mr Chairman.

I have economic concerns as well for advocating black economic empowerment.  It is always said, and it has been said in this House a number of times, that the real creators of jobs are small businesses.  Over the years, big business in this country has been reducing their employment levels, before the promulgation of the so-called tripartite laws that were referred to by the hon member Mrs Millin.  This started more than 10 years ago.  In fact even more than 10 years, about 15 years ago.  We who come from the labour movement know this, because we had to fight retrenchments in companies day in and day out.  This was long before the passing of the current Labour Relations Act and other labour legislation which is now being blamed by other people as the cause of job losses in this country.

I obviously differ from that position.  Many big companies used nice sounding words like down-sizing, right-sizing and so on, in the process of retrenching workers long before these Acts came into being.  It has been going on for years now. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MR T S MOHLOMI:  Thank you, hon Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  Mr Rajbansi is not in the House.  We will move on to the next speaker.  Mr Dingila has been replaced by the hon Mrs C Mkhize, who has eight minutes.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Hon members, we are well aware, all of us, of the fact that tourism has been identified as a potential means of generating rapid economic growth, job creation and social upliftment in our country, and in our Province.  We know that we have some of the poorest of the poor people in KwaZulu-Natal.  Mr Chairman, we must recognise the importance of this industry since the people of KwaZulu-Natal will be able to derive maximum benefit from the tourist industry.  It is a fact also that tourism is an activity which is particularly beneficial to development in rural areas where no other industrial opportunity may arise.  We have got to follow the 2020 vision, and we must achieve it.

The arts and culture of indigenous people are an integral part of eco-tourism.  We also have to think of innovative means to boost our tourist industry.  I want to share with you the experience we had when visiting Uganda, with some of the other women parliamentarians.  The women had started their own craft work industries which were in fact very viable.  Those projects and programmes were, particularly, supported by the women from parliament through the government.  They are exporting their goods to Asia, Europe and many other countries.  We in KwaZulu-Natal have got the same resources, for example isundu, that is palm.  I would really, if I may, request the hon Minister to communicate with the women who went to Uganda in order to exchange some ideas as to how we can achieve that with our women in KwaZulu-Natal.  We saw quite a number of things that we can implement here.

I remember also last year, that women in Grahamstown were collecting old plastic bags, which they also do here in KwaZulu-Natal, and they crochet them into attractive hats, bags, flags and mats.  This group of six women has now created a self-help project with their products being sold in Europe and Asia.  This can also be achieved in KwaZulu-Natal.  Before continuing, it is very important to make help accessible to women, or whoever is creating these programmes and projects that are of so much assistance in eco-tourism.  This group of women even won the Eastern Cape Tourism Award.  These women form part of the Masithandane project.  They have also made flags and promoted cultural tourism by providing Xhosa lunches to foreign tourists, as well as the running of bed and breakfast operations.  The women weavers of Hlabisa have begun to weave beautiful patterns into their beer baskets.  These craft workers have realised that the more original their creations are, the more clients will want to buy them.  Just as these women have thought of new ways, people need to unlock their creativity and wealth in this Province.

We need to find key tourist attractions.  This requires an establishment of a tourism asset database.  Developing ways to ensure that tourism development adds value to the economy.  At times, Mr Chairperson, I look at the women I always work with, who are to willing to have something to do.  They have even brought themselves together in trying to produce something for a living.  I find that the only needs that they have is to find a place where they can work.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  Hon members, we have to start taking extraordinary steps to make the necessary interventions that would set us on the path of prosperity.  Our hon Premier has also made a lot of progress in seeking investments in KwaZulu-Natal, as well as his commitment to promoting peace and harmony, and making KwaZulu-Natal into a winning Province.  We certainly have a Province in which economic growth can be dynamic.  We have beautiful fauna, flora, game parks, ports, international airports and beautiful sites.  These are all the prerequisites for a thriving tourist industry.

King Shaka Airport will be of immense value to our people of KwaZulu-Natal.  Hon members, we know about the high rate of unemployment in our Province.  Rural people, almost 55% of them, live below the subsistence level, while 90% of the households earn less than R800 per month.  Due to the high unemployment rate, we need to unlock wealth and jobs in this Province.  The King Shaka Airport will also enable us to forge trade links.  At this point, Mr Chairperson, I would like to stress that we may have optimal locations, resources etcetera, but with the ongoing crime and violence, all our resources and locations mean nothing.  Violence and crime hamper our attempts.  Recently, after the murder of two Swedish tourists, new slogans were created which said: "Tourist are dying to come to South Africa".  It is a shame, and we have got to try and do something about this.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MRS N C MKHIZE: (Whip):  I thank you, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Our next speaker is the hon J D Mkhwanazi, for five minutes, Ndonga.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Thank you very much, Mr Chairperson.  Like I always do, first of all, I want to congratulate the Minister for such beautiful work and such a beautiful report.  I am not surprised, because there is an Mkhwanazi involved in the production of this.  [LAUGHTER]  I only hope that it was not too expensive to produce.

Having said that, I have always applauded the KFC.  I have explained before, and it has been said that the KFC has really helped our people who could not be assisted by the big banks, because they want all sorts of cholesterol.  I do not know what they call it.  What is it called?

HON MEMBERS:  Collateral.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Collateral.

AN HON MEMBER:  Cholesterol is what we have got.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Yet, KFC attends to the needs of the people.  But I have a little quarrel with KFC.  My quarrel with the KFC is that the small business people, particularly from the rural areas, due to the violence had their businesses destroyed.  The KFC keeps on demanding and is even taking them to court.  I want to appeal to the Minister to intervene in these cases.  Where are these people expected to get the money from?  It is not their problem, it is not that they failed to pay because they squandered the money.  Something has to be done.  I appeal to the Minister to discuss with the Premier, and even with Dr Spies, and others really to sympathise with those people.  I know the KFC's money is not KFC's money per se, it is the people's who have invested their money there.  But I think if we stick together, and even perhaps appeal to our friends in the friendly countries, that would help.

Another issue I want to draw the Minister's attention to is the question of the street vendors.  These people who sell their goods in the streets.  I am suspicious that those businesses do not actually belong to those people.  The fact that they stand in front of somebody's shop and sell the same goods that are sold inside the shop, I suspect that they are working for the big business people who own shops.  Could the Minister investigate that.  Because if that is the case, the exploitation of our people is still continuing.  If it is their own business, it would be understandable.

The next point I want to make, which has been mentioned, is the question of the portion of the budget that has been given to tourism.  We are not thinking properly, because, according to the Minister, tourism requested for R12 million ...

THE CHAIRPERSON: [Mr Shamase is left with one minute].

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  But they only get R4 million.  How on earth do we think that tourism can continue?  Yet tourism, I repeat as I have said before, it is a goose that lays the golden egg.  Why are we roasting it or cooking it?  I thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON: Thank you Ndonga, for saving those minutes for us].  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Konigkramer, for 10 minutes.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, I think we have concurrence in this House that we in KwaZulu-Natal have a competitive advantage in the field of tourism.  In addition, I sense that there is consensus that tourism offers the best opportunity to grow our economy, and thus creates critically needed jobs in the short term.

Yet, while we seem to agree on the need for economic growth, too few of us fully understand that things are not looking all that rosy.  In fact, as I will attempt to show in my brief remarks, the future is decidedly gloomy.  So gloomy in fact that the lack of economic growth that can sustain the majority of our people poses a serious threat, not only to the fabric of our society, but to our young democracy itself.

Before motivating this standpoint, I should like to make two general observations about the overall budget.  The first is that the vast bulk of expenditure is demand driven, which, given our ~Apartheid~ past is perhaps understandable, but should be a matter of serious concern to the more thoughtful.  Secondly, who can argue that it is the bureaucracy, and not this Parliament, the voice of the people, that has determined spending priorities?  I think that case is unanswerable.

Mr Chairman, very careful research conducted by Professor Lawrence Schlemmer has revealed that some 24% of our people are unemployed.  While this is lower than the oft-quoted figure of 30%, unemployment remains disturbingly high.  In fact, the Professor has estimated that unemployment is likely to grow by two percentage points a year, and that in 10 years time it will stand at a world high of 40%.

Before looking at some of the reasons for the increasing failure of our economy to create jobs, let us look briefly at one of the main reasons why the unemployment rate has been overstated by virtually all economic forecasters in both the private and public sectors.  Quite simply, Chairman, it is because of the incredible performance of the informal sector.

Schlemmer has shown that the level of employment in the informal sector is at an amazing 20%, compared with hitherto official estimates of some 12%.  One does not have to be an economist to observe that this is truly one of the miracles of post-~Apartheid~ South Africa.  Once the dead hand of Government control was removed through democracy, the people created miracles in helping themselves.  But, again, before we rush into believing that the informal sector will solve our unemployment problems, one needs to look carefully at what the informal sector is doing in the field of job creation.  Schlemmer has shown empirically what any careful observer can see in the streets of our cities, towns and our villages every day, that is that virtually the entire informal sector is active in the field of either retailing or providing services.  Almost everybody in this sector is either selling something which he or she has not made, or is providing a personal service like hair cutting or shoe repairs.

What this means in practice, Mr Chairman, is that there is very little value added production.  That in turn means that almost the entire informal sector, and remember it is creating 20% of the jobs, is dependent on the level of formal economic activity.  Put differently, the informal sector is taking a slice of the existing economic cake, and it is not adding to the cake.  And, it follows, that if the economic cake does not grow, there will be less and less to share and the unemployment queues will grow longer and longer.  There is, Mr Chairman, I believe a very important lesson for us to learn in the face of these facts.

While the informal sector has indeed helped itself, we as a Government have failed to help these people without whose initiative we would be in very serious trouble indeed.  What is needed on a large scale, is training to equip this sector with appropriate skills aimed at stimulating the making of goods.  Not the selling of goods, the making of goods.  The goods that are made should be identified through proper market research, and once this has been done, we need to help with marketing and with the supply of low cost materials, affordable credit and business training.

Chairman, there are increasing indications that our formal economy is failing in the field of employment creation.  According to the Development Bank of Southern Africa, South Africa's labour force grew by an average of 400 000 a year between 1990 and 1994.  Compared to this, the number of people employed in the formal sector of the economy dropped by about 108 000 a year.  This shrinkage of jobs in the formal sector continues apace.  The DBSA estimates that while 1 000 new people enter the labour market each day, some 197 jobs are shed every working day, according to the Reserve Bank statistics.  In summary, nearly 1 200 jobs are lost every working day of the year.

What this means in effect is that while the economy might be growing marginally, fewer and fewer are direct beneficiaries.  Put differently, Mr Chairman, and this might be unpopular, but it is a fact, we are busy creating a labour aristocracy, while the vast majority of people are becoming more and more marginalised.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  That is why I said at the beginning that the future is looking gloomy.  What can we do about it?  Well, within the parameters of this debate, we have to find money to grow the one sector that can grow the economy in both the formal and informal sector, tourism.  We must learn to put our money where our mouths are.

Given that, we must accept that there is no fat whatsoever in the budget.  It has all been used up, as we know.  There is really no alternative but to find money for tourism development and marketing within the Department itself.  The most obvious source, Mr Chairman, is the money allocated to subsidies for KwaZulu Transport.  Our Government has now frittered away in excess of R100 million to this monument to ~Apartheid~, because that is what it is.  The time has come to stop this madness.

I would suggest that at least R5 million of the R10 million budgeted for this loss-leading ~Apartheid~ monster be transferred to the Tourism Authority immediately.  And then, the time has also come, and I address my remarks to the Minister personally, for both the Minister and the Cabinet to stop the fragmentation within the tourism industry.  We simply cannot continue to, on the one hand, build a Tourism Authority, and on the other hand, continue to provide money to the KFC for tourism.  But it is even worse, because within the Department itself there is another section which deals with exactly the same things, which is essentially community driven tourism which is carried on within the Department.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has three minutes left.

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Thank you, Chairman.  Mr Chairman, this is one matter where we cannot blame anybody else.  The Cabinet and the Minister has total authority to change that, and the time has come to do it.  We must begin to co-ordinate.  We cannot blame, for example, a lack of co-ordination outside, in the regional tourism councils, but we do not co-ordinate ourselves.

In conclusion, Mr Chairman, I should like to underscore what I am saying by referring to the Department of Transport.  We all know that we have got a very energetic Minister who is bent on building community access roads.  That is noble and very necessary, but I would like to pose a question, and it is this.  How many people who use these roads are paying taxes?  How many?  And how many of those people that are using those access roads are growing the economy?  I would suggest very few.  Mr Chairman, if we truly wish to help these people ...

AN HON MEMBER:  So they must not have roads?

MR A J KONIGKRAMER:  Mr Chairman, I can understand the economically illiterate asking those questions, but I would suggest that the more serious people should consider the following:  If we really want to help these people, we must create long term jobs, because it is a fact, Mr Chairman, that it is unemployment, not the race factor which is the greatest cause of poverty in our country.

If we do not change our thinking and our actions, our Minister of Transport may well be remembered as the Minister of Community Roads and Potholes, because we in this House have potholed our economy, not to mention our tarred roads, by failing to invest productively in job creation.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.  The next speaker is the hon Mr Edwards, for nine minutes.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Chairman, the budget estimates of the Department of Economic Affairs do indeed reflect it to be a crisis budget.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  In the words of the hon Minister himself.  The funds provided to promote economic activity and much needed tourism, which sector has the ability to lift our economic growth, and other speakers have mentioned this, to lift it out of the doldrums, have been cut to the bone.  Looking at the details of the medium term expenditure framework, the restrictive budgets for the next two years paint a very gloomy picture indeed.

Expenditure is budgeted at R102 million for the year 2000/2001, against actual expenditure of R112 million for this past year.  We are going backwards at a rate of knots.  To put things into perspective, the budget for 1998/1999 of some R83 million as a percentage of the total provincial budget of R17,9 billion is less than 0,5% or half a percent.

It is true that this past year has been one where KwaZulu-Natal and South Africa have found themselves to be in the midst of a severe financial crisis.  But we need to find ways of boosting our economy and tourism potential to improve growth and the tax base.  Expenditure, we realise, must be properly controlled, but without economic growth things can only get worse.

The rapid and alarming devaluation of the Rand in the past three years and particularly in the past six months, to record lows against the US Dollar and Pound bears testimony to the loss of confidence in our economy and the stability of our country.  Devaluation of 25% in the last two years, and 6% in the last three months, people should be investing offshore I think.  After promising so much, the ANC led Government has failed the people of South Africa dismally.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  What has failed nationally is also true in our provinces, and local authority and municipality areas.  In 1994 the ANC promised to provide potable water to 6,5 million new consumers in five years.

AN HON MEMBER:  How much did the National Party supply?

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  But by November 1997 only 1,5 million new consumers were on line.  In their GEAR programme the ANC planned to create 126 000 jobs in 1996 and double that to 252 000 in 1997.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order!

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Chairman, Central Government statistics tell us that in 1996 we saw a loss of 71 000 jobs, and between September 1996 and 1997 a further 116 000 job opportunities were lost in the formal sector.  Unemployment is now estimated at 24%, and at the present rate of job destruction could rise to 40%, as the hon Mr Konigkramer said as well, within the next 10 years.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Certainly a sorry state of affairs when we see our economy going in reverse gear, not GEAR, but reverse gear, and future growth I think is bleak indeed.  The hon Minister in his budget speech showed some cautious confidence, and the Minister is reasonably confident in the long term future of our economy.  There are so many variables, however, and unless world business confidence can be restored, recovery will take longer than our young democracy can afford.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  The labour unions play an important role in job creation and economic recovery.  

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Chairman, if I could have a word somewhere between the hon Mr Schutte and others.  [LAUGHTER]  However, the unions will have to do some soul searching.  Through unrealistic demands they have destroyed many job and business opportunities, and labour together with their alliance partners, the ANC and SACP, will have to achieve a more balanced approach, or we are doomed to economic failure.  World renowned economists advise that fundamental deregulation of the labour market is a prerequisite.

In his address to Parliament in February this year, President Mandela boasted some 400 000 new domestic electricity connections in South Africa.  That is most commendable.  But in the main these services have been installed by municipalities.  Okay, they have been driven by National Government to do it, with the assistance of Eskom and regional councils, at their cost.  Water and electricity services are essential we know, for socio-economic development.  Many municipalities find themselves in dire financial straits due to the escalating ANC inspired culture of non-payment of services, and total lawlessness in the theft of water and electricity, in bypassing meters, illegal reconnections and the like.

In Pietermaritzburg, overdue accounts for service charges have risen from some R8 million in 1994 to R60 million reported today.  Quite frankly, the situation is out of control in towns and cities, and no improvement is in sight.  So much for Masakhane.  Eventually whole areas will have to be disconnected or the law-abiding citizens will have to pay through increased tariffs or rates to ensure survival of our civilised norms.

This is part of the headlong rush to economic collapse.  I plead with President Mandela and his Government to wake up before it is too late.  On 1 April this year, the local newspaper, the Natal Witness, published an article on how the Democratic Party had devised a plan to cut municipal charges by 50%, and they are not here.

The City Treasurer of Pietermaritzburg, and Chairman of Finance, Councillor Latif of the ANC, wrote several letters to the Witness which were published.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Which were published, setting out clearly just how preposterous the claim was.  That is quite right, but they would not publish our letters on it.  To the amazement of many, and we assumed this plan was an April Fools joke, the editor of the Natal Witness provided an editorial comment on just how wonderful the DP and their municipal plan was.  Certainly, he was the fool.  [LAUGHTER]

Most of us, I am sure, believe in a free press and freedom of speech in the interests of promoting democracy and economic development.  But one can only doubt the objectivity, independence and integrity of the media, especially the liberal media.  When those, like the Natal Witness and Hogarth of the Sunday Times, go out of their way to ignore or denigrate those who they perceive as coming from the old order, and you know they have reformed, irrespective of the political consequences of leading South Africa to a one party ANC alliance State.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  They give warped publicity out of proportion, to their representation, so much so that the Witness has become the mouthpiece of the Democratic Party.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  The reporting of recent by-election results in Ward 7 published by the Natal Witness prompted the hon Mr Volker to write a letter, suggesting a more balanced approach.

AN HON MEMBER:  What has this got to do with economic affairs?

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  The Witness published a letter with negative comments in reply to that.  What reaction has the Natal Witness to the conduct of Mr Radley Keys, the DP candidate in the coming by-election in Ward 13 in openly canvassing support for the ANC candidate against the NP on that election day.  Is it now a DP/ANC alliance.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  In the budget before us, Mr Chairman, of R83 million, the bulk of this meagre budget is allocated to the parastatal transfer payments, some R56 million, or 68%.  The transfer to KwaZulu Transport of R10 million is, we realise, necessary to provide essential commuter transport.  But there is a big question, Mr Chairman, on the continued underfunding from Central Government on bus subsidies, and it is high time this was resolved, and the Minister knows about this.

The R10 million to the Sharks Board we are told is inadequate.  We know it is inadequate, and may lead to a disaster shark attack.  Local authorities on the coast already are struggling financially.  They will be forced to save the day, or the Board will have to find ways and means of raising additional revenue.  I know they are going about this.  Perhaps the Minister can tell us how they are going to do it.

The funds allocated to KMI of R1,5 million, and KFC of R34 million.  These bodies have the ability to gear themselves to create economic activity, but they will be severely restricted with their budgets being reduced.  They will have to be innovative.  The KFC continues to do outstanding work, as others have said, in funding emerging business initiatives, and must be congratulated for their efforts.  Succeeding where others would not even venture.

The amount allocated to the promotion of tourism of R4 million is totally inadequate, and the hon Minister needs to review this urgently, and obtain national finance if need be.  But we need to stop fraud and corruption in our Province, in the school nutrition programme in three years, R177 million was forfeited from RDP funds, and R78 million is unaccounted for.  The mind boggles.  We could have put this into tourism and its promotion.  The balance of the funding of some R12,8 million is available for operating expenditure of which the bulk will go to pay salaries and regrettably very little on programmes.  There will be no money for programmes, people may as well stay at home.

Included is an amount of R440 000 allocated to Liquor Affairs, a substantial portion for remuneration of Liquor Board members. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  There is dissatisfaction on the granting of licences, and we hope the Minister will address this.  Why it is taking so long?  Thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  Our next speaker is the hon Mr Jeffery, for nine minutes.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Thank you, Mr Chair.

AN HON MEMBER:  Why do you not start giggling.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Chair, following the lead from many members, I just want to invite the hon members of the National Party to the burial of the bones of Mubi Khumalo who was from Sobantu and murdered by the security police.  I hope that they will be attending that funeral, which is taking place soon.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Chair, I intend to deal with a number of issues.  The first is the question of the economy of small towns.  It is common practice that demographics change as the economy changes.  In the 1860s Grahamstown was the second largest town in Southern Africa, it is now a very tiny town compared to other towns.  If we look at the Province, we have a number of small towns that have a fair number of people living in them.  Towns like Mooi River have spent quite a lot of money on housing projects, in providing housing for their residents.  But the common feature that these towns face is that the economy is changing.

Places like Colenso had Eskom and the railways there as major employers, those have gone, and the problem that the town is facing is a question of employment.  In Mooi River the main industry is the textile industry which is also facing a threat with the globalisation of our economy.  There are other places, like Greytown, Glencoe and so on, and to really appeal to the Minister for a co-ordinated approach to the question of small towns.

The Department has given support to some of these towns to assist them to establish local economic development forums, but this is not enough.  These towns lack capacity and there needs to be a co-ordinated approach involving the Department of Economic Affairs, Local Government and Agriculture, because agriculture is a major industry, to try and assist these towns and provide the support to ensure that they can create jobs and promote growth in industries that are applicable to those towns.

It is accepted that the face of the economy has changed from the protectionist sanctions era of Mr Bartlett (who is not here), and Mr Edwards' into the global economy; that industry is moving towards the ports.  So obviously those are the threats that are being faced, but we do need I think, to put a lot of effort into supporting those small towns.  Mr Chair, that was the first point I wanted to make.

The second point related to an issue I raised in the Environment and Conservation budget debate, and that was the potential for rural development from the conservation areas, the protected areas.  Not much is being done on the question of investigating the potential for downstream small businesses from the tourists that visit the conservation areas.  My second point is also to request that attention be given to research that can assist members of communities surrounding a protected area and to advise them on what forms of local businesses they can develop to tap into the tourists that are coming to the reserves.

Thirdly, I wanted to just make a comment about the Unfair Business Practices Bill and in particular to support that Bill.  The area of consumer protection is an area that does need development.  The Bill will be very welcome.  Very often people talk about how wonderful the private sector is compared to the public sector.  But very often when you have dealings with the private sector you find that they are not as professional and as competent as they make out to be.  The establishment of a consumer court to deal with consumer problems will give the consumer hopefully a lot of respite.

I want to deal with the question of investment missions.  We have heard in the Portfolio Committee of missions representing the Provincial Government going abroad.  There appears to be a problem of co-ordination.  We were given a copy of a document that the hon Premier took with him, I think it was to Germany.  The Portfolio Committee heard about the visit once he had gone, and we understand that the Department and our Minister was in more or less a similar position.  The document that was taken was, with respect, not particularly professional.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Hamilton was on that trip.  Swaziland had disappeared, Maputo had lost its port, its access to the sea and so on.  The point I really want to make is that there is a need, and that whilst it is important to market the Province, that marketing needs to be co-ordinated.  Obviously the Ministry and the Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism is a crucial role-player in that, and really needs to be at the core of all marketing initiatives overseas.  The hon Premier is unfortunately not here, Mr Hamilton is, I want to really appeal to other members of the Cabinet to make sure that there is that co-ordination.

Comments have been made on the Sharks Board, but also to add my voice to say that the pictures in this document are really sensational, and it appears to be a desperate attempt to get money for the Sharks Board, and I think it is really in poor taste.

Many comments have been made about labour policies and the problems that they are causing for job creation.  The problem of jobless growth is an international one.  It is not something unusual or unique to this country.  I do not think the blame can be placed at the door of labour legislation.  It is quite odd to hear from the IFP, some of the comments that some of the individual members have been making.

AN HON MEMBER:  You have talked sense up until now.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Firstly, the IFP has by and large supported the labour legislation.  They supported the Labour Relations Act, and what is important with the labour legislation is that we have come from a past ...

AN HON MEMBER:  It is a serious contradiction.

MR J H JEFFERY:  .... where the runners of the economy were able to treat their employees very badly, because those employees did not have the vote, and that is a fact Mr Hamilton.  You laugh, but it is a fact.

AN HON MEMBER:  And it is the employers in the IFP.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is your party's policy.

MR J H JEFFERY:  One obviously needs to correct those imbalances.  You cannot compare us to America or other places where people had the vote for a long time.  In this country people did not have the vote until 1994.  It was very easy for business to say this is how the law should be made, because those people who were the workers did not have the opportunity to express their view in the vote. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member has two minutes left.

MR J H JEFFERY:  It is surprising to see the IFP with the support base of not just the unemployed, but also the employed and unionised people articulating that position.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is those who have businesses.

MR J H JEFFERY:  It is surprising to see, in the light of IFP support for a lot of the labour legislation, and there are a number of IFP supporting unions, like UWUSA, POSIMU and APOSA.

AN HON MEMBER:  Mr Chairman, will the speaker take a question?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Is that a point of order or a question?  Will the member take a question?

MR J H JEFFERY:  No.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  No.  Please continue.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J H JEFFERY:  I would hope that the IFP will carefully consider its position, especially in the light of its constituency.  As far as the National Party's comments in that regard, it is a pity the hon Mr Bartlett is not here.  He had his say and then he left.  I would have liked Mr Bartlett, when he complained about the problems with the budget and the national debt, to maybe explain to the House how much money he is getting as a pension, as a member of the tricameral Parliament, and as a Deputy Minister, I think.

AN HON MEMBER:  But he worked for it.

MR J H JEFFERY:  It is a nice situation.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J H JEFFERY:  You were working, you get a pension, you carry on working but you still get that pension.  How much is that costing the economy?  Advocate Schutte is also one of those contributing, and the hon Mr Burrows.

AN HON MEMBER:  What is Mandela's salary?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order please!

MR R M BURROWS:  So is Mr Cronje, and so are a number of your MPs.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Continue.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Thank you.  I do not know if that was a point of order.  I thought one heckled without using the microphone.  So, Mr Chair, those are the points that I wanted to very briefly raise in contribution to this debate.  Thank you very much.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you very much.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Mr Chairman, before the speaker sits down, will he take a question now?

MR J H JEFFERY:  Mr Chairman, I do not know what the problem is with him.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time has expired.  He cannot take a question.

MR J H JEFFERY:  And I do not know, I had already explained to the hon Mr Hamilton that I would not take a question.  He did not seem to have heard me.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Okay, shall we proceed.  The next speaker is the hon Mr Tarr, for 10 minutes.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Chairman, I would like to respond briefly to a few of the comments Mr Jeffery has made.  The sort of arguments that the ANC use, they use in this House frequently, and I see they use it frequently in Cape Town, is that they set up their own target and then shoot it down.  They say, for example, if you do not support this legislation then you wish to exploit labour, then you are insensitive to labour, or whatever it may be.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Did you support the legislation?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  You set your own targets and then you shoot it down.  The reality, Mr Chairman, is that we are losing jobs.  There is nothing you can do, we are losing jobs.

MR J H JEFFERY:  IFP supported the labour legislation.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I will answer that in about 30 seconds.  We are losing jobs.  That is the reality.

AN HON MEMBER:  We have been losing jobs for years.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  It is quite clear that we are somehow sending out the wrong message to potential investors.  Look at what is happening to the Rand.  What the IFP is saying is that we should have a more flexible situation in the labour markets.  We should not be insensitive.  We should look at training and should make it possible for workers to be channelled into industries where they are needed.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  The IFP's position.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!  Order!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  People who are retrenched should ...

MR J H JEFFERY:  Show us your policy documents.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Chairman, can I make my own speech without Mr Jeffery making it on my behalf?  [LAUGHTER]

AN HON MEMBER:  They must get the red card these people.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  There is a bunch of people in the peanut gallery down there, who sit and comment on every speaker right throughout the whole debate.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  No, I will not take a question.  Madam Chair, if you look at a country like Western Germany they do not fire labourers.  They actually at State expense retrain them and channel them into industries where they are wanted.  They do not lock them in through legislation where they are not needed.  We are very sensitive to labour issues, but we try to be a little bit more imaginative than the members on that side of the House.

MR J H JEFFERY:  Show us your policy documents.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  And you know the other thing is, Madam Chair, the day will come, because they are trying to buck the economic marketplace, but the day will come when you are proved wrong.  We will see it in five years time.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  As sure as anything you will be proved wrong.

AN HON MEMBER:  Come 1999.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Are you not in favour of retraining workers?  Are you not in favour of channelling them to sectors where they are needed?  Are you not in favour of that?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order!  We would like to hear the member speaking, in order to follow the debate properly.  If we are all going to talk together, it makes my task very difficult.  If I give members injury time there must be no complaints.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Madam Chair, there is also another issue, and this is going to be an election issue.  What is happening in our economy?  If our economy had grown we would not be in the desperate situation we are today, because with the cake getting bigger, the tax taken off that cake is better.

AN HON MEMBER:  When did you come to South Africa?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I have been here all my life.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Know what?

AN HON MEMBER:  NOT ON RECORD

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Well, I do know.  I know as much as you do about the growth of the economy.  Madam Chair, that is the problem, we are not getting the tax take we should because the economy is not growing.  We are sending the wrong message to investors, and they can whine about it, and yell about it as much as they like, there is nothing that wishes will accomplish.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  What we need to be looking at is the FFC.  How do they determine the share which we get, because the ANC Government are actually setting up the provinces for failure.  That is what they want.  They want to centralise everything at national level.  They slap Section 100 of the Constitution on us, and set us up for failure.  That is what is happening.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Madam Chair, there is also another issue in this debate.  Other speakers have spoken about it at length.  I cannot improve on what Mrs Cronje and Mr Konigkramer said on tourism.  The reality is it is quite amazing.  We all say in this House we need extra funds to promote tourism.  It is the one sector where we can promote growth in the informal and formal sectors.  We pay lip service to it.  We are looking at an extra ,03% of our budget and we sit here today and we are going to pass this budget, like it stands, without voting that money for tourism.  Madam Chair, I think it is absurd.  I cannot see one member here, not one member who does not agree it should be done.  I do not know who decided on how it should be allocated as it is, but I actually believe it is not acceptable.  If members will look at Section 120 of the Constitution.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  You see, Madam Chair, the members on that side, when you say something they do not like, the only way they respond is by getting abusive.  They do not look at the real issues.  Section 120 of the Constitution, Madam Chair says:

	A provincial Act must provide for a procedure by which the province's legislature may amend a money Bill.

Madam Chair, we do not have that procedure now.  I believe it is high time we had that procedure.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  We are now being forced to pass a budget which we know operates in the long term to the detriment of this Province.  That is wrong.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I believe we should be making a change to this budget, if not possible now we should be looking at it.

Madam Chair, just one final issue.  For once I must stand up and support the DP in this House.  The DP, and this was raised by Mr Edwards, came with a plan to cut the costs of the budget in this municipality by 50%.  The ANC think that this municipality, and every other municipality in the Government is an employment agency.

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  Even the Chamber of Commerce said it was nonsense.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  It is not.  I will tell you what the ...

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  The Chamber of Commerce said it was nonsense.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  My hon friend Mr Bhamjee, anybody who has been in business, will tell you that even in a well run business, the potential for cutting costs is at least 20%.

MR Y S BHAMJEE:  The Chamber of Commerce said it was nonsense.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I am telling you, you are wrong.  There is potential to cut the budget in this town and most other towns by at least 50%.  What those members do not realise, that a saving in one area means money to be spent in another area, and money perhaps spent in a more productive way in terms of generating employment, jobs and in creating infrastructure.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I am telling that hon member, the Chamber is wrong, because important members in this chamber ...

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I cannot afford to have a dialogue.  It is not fair.  It is really not fair.  That is not parliamentary heckling.  Heckling to a certain level is accepted, but a  dialogue is definitely not allowed.

AN HON MEMBER:  Yellow card.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can you continue.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Madam Chair, the point I am making, and I am using Pietermaritzburg as an example, is that the State, and the provinces, and the municipalities are not employment agencies, and there must be a retrenchment package somewhere along the line to free up money to be spent elsewhere.  The money can be spent on job creation, infrastructure creation and things we sorely need.  It will probably end up employing more people in the long run than the jobs you might lose in the shorter run.

The people who might lose their jobs, we do not believe you throw them out on the streets, you offer them a retraining programme, on full pay, until they have another acquired skill and you then channel them where they should go.  But we do not do that.  We simply get hysterical and start yelling about people losing jobs, and people not caring about people losing jobs.  We should lift the level of our debate to be a bit more creative on matters like that.

Madam Chair, with those few comments, I must also voice my displeasure, particularly on the tourism budget.  I certainly hope that in the months ahead we will find a way of getting more money into tourism.  We desperately need more money there.  We need to be opening up offices in other countries.  I recently met a tour operator from Japan and I was told that the potential for Japanese people to come to this country is immense.  But we are not marketing ourselves properly.  We are simply taking a very short-sighted view.  I hope that in the course of the next few months we will find another source of revenue to help our tourism industry.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We now call upon our hon Minister for Tourism to respond.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Thank you, Madam Chair.  Firstly, can I request that the members correct page 27 of my report, the figure at the top.  It should read "R200 000", not R2 million please.  It is a typing error.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Could I then, Madam Chair, thank the House for a very lively debate, and a very clear debate on the matters facing our economy.  On the RDP vote, a number of issues were raised.  Members must excuse me because, as I said earlier, this session has been long so I will not reply to each and every speaker.  I am therefore only going to refer to some of the issues that were raised.

The issue was raised about the RDP Chief Director who went to the DG, with the agreement of the Minister, but that post remained financially operational in this Department.  I just want to report that as of 1 July the Department will no longer be paying for that Chief Director.  I think it is important for the House to know.  The hon Mr Mabuyakhulu raised this issue quite vehemently.  From the Department's side as from 1 July we will not be entertaining this.

A number of other issues were raised.  The one issue that I thought was important to underline and acknowledge is the issue of the money for peace, the R100 million.  We all heard the concerns that were raised.  I can a assure you we will look into the matter and see how we can best deal with it.  As I have indicated, there was a specific idea behind it.  In an operational manner the matter is being proceeded with in a particular way.  Some members of the House, during lunch time,  commented about this.  It is clear that it has caused great concern.  We will look into it, and see how we can handle it.

Of course, as a general point, I must say that the RDP, I do not think you can have a one-sided view that it has just remained a mirage.  Or course, if we are wanting to make a political point, you could.  One of our citizens, who always harps on the point, that the RDP remains in the white areas and it does not come to the rural areas.  But the people from the white areas say they have never seen the RDP.  There are projects that are being implemented and that can be identified.  People in those areas have a different view about the RDP.  They think it has made a difference.

We must not make sweeping statements in order for our criticisms to be taken seriously.  We should have very focused criticism where we think the RDP has not worked.  We cannot generalise about it, and make as if nothing else has happened.  This particular programme was devised to deal with a very serious problem in this country.  With the Government bureaucracy this could not be handled.  The emphasis is now that departments should handle the RDP.  There are very few departments that are sensitive towards the RDP.  Many think that it is additional money that they will receive, and it does not necessarily work that way.  But I think on the whole, it has alleviated the lives of some people.  It has brought projects that other people never saw before.  It is a fact.

I also acknowledge the point that was made in terms of duplication.  We are all here, and all the departments are here, and we can look into that.

I now come to vote 4.  I must thank everybody, including the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee.  This has been a very lively debate, and very wide ranging, touching on a variety of issues.  We have taken copious notes on matters raised that need to be followed up.  I will again not go into the details of each and every speaker, although I have noted almost everything the members spoke about.  We will follow up these issues and try to ensure that we do our best.

One of the issues that has dominated this debate, and everybody agrees, is the issue of tourism.  I agree with everything the speakers have said.  I also sense that the members are  frustrated about this issue.  I did mention earlier that we lost one of the finest CEOs.  He was hoping we were going to do something, and we did not.  He finally said, "Let me go.  I came here because I thought this Province was very serious about this issue".  He left.

In almost every budget this has been the issue, but instead of doing better we have actually regressed.  I therefore agree with the sentiments of the members.

The question that has been asked is a pertinent question, namely who decides at the end of the day which direction the Legislature must follow, because it might just be a debate and then we will have to come back again and debate the same issue.  I have made some proposals as I was speaking.  Maybe the Chief Whip of the IFP was correct to say that we need to find some enabling legislation.  If that is the feeling of the House, how then do we effect that.

I said serious consideration should be given to creating a mechanism in order to do a midyear review of the provincial budget.   This was a suggestion that was made.  I cannot believe that it is not possible to do that.  We need to find a way to ensure that we do it.  If we do not do it we cannot speak about tourism as an important issue.  We must just keep quiet, because there is no point in us doing so.

The people responsible for budgeting should in actual fact do something about this.  The concern has really been more than emphasised by all the speakers.  It has been said that I should appoint a Board.  I know that the DP in its own wisdom thinks that it has not been appointed because of the conflict between the IFP and the ANC.  It is not true.  I must correct that impression.  There is no money.  That is a fact.  There is no conflict.  We have debated this in the Portfolio Committee.  Lists have been set up and on every issue members have disagreed, but at the end of the day, as the Minister who is responsible for appointing this Board, I know what to do.  There is no conflict.  There is no money.  We do not have the money for the Board to operate.  We had a better budget last year and we could not appoint the Board.  Last year we had R12 million point something.  We now only have R4 million.  There is no debate about that.

MR W U NEL:  Madam Chair, would the Minister take a question?

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Yes, I will take the question. 

MR W U NEL:  Thank you very much, Minister, in an effort to be constructive.  Why does it necessarily have to cost money, and how much would it cost to appoint a Board, including the stakeholders?

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Your question is academic.  I am saying there is no money.  Your question is very academic my brother, hon member.

MR R M BURROWS:  But if it costs nothing, it will cost no money.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION.

MR R M BURROWS:  What?

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I want to correct that impression.

MR R M BURROWS:  It is not an answer.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I will not allow the DP to cause conflict between the IFP and the ANC where there is no conflict.

MR W U NEL:  No, that is not what I am seeking.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Let us move away from the issue of the problem of the budget.  Well, let us not politicise tourism.  It is a serious matter in the Province.  That is all, I was correcting my learned friend, the hon member.

Broader issues were raised by members about our economy, and what the problems are.  Among these is the issue of labour laws.  I would like to underline some of the issues.  We appear not to be on the same wave length.  I would just like to clarify some issues.

Firstly, the loss of jobs did not start in 1994.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  The loss of jobs started a long time ago.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  It is important for us not to allow the National Party to take its own mess and make it the mess of other people.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  They messed up this country totally.  They messed up this country totally.  I will come back to them at the end, because they do need to be attended to.  [LAUGHTER]  In so far as the economic issues are concerned, they messed up this country, because all the laws in relation to the labour market were based on ~Apartheid~, for example job reservation, and everything you can think of.  Influx control, every wrong thing was committed by the National Party.  Today they are brave enough to say, "You know, we have got job losses because of the ANC Government".  If they were bright enough they would not be saying such things, because by saying such things they are actually blaming themselves.

An hon member wrote a note to me and mentioned that when he listens to the exchanges between the ANC and the National Party, he cannot but help think about something in the Bible.   [LAUGHTER]  I do not want to enter the [bones of Hezekia] story.  [LAUGHTER]  Because, [the bones are talking] that is what you are saying.

The basic issue, and I want to repeat this, because if you do not attend to labour issues you are on a false premise in our economy.  Because whether you like it or not, at some point the working people start forming themselves into unions and you will find that your economic base is in trouble.  All this Government is doing is to correct the wrongs caused by the National Party.  Correct the laws, remove job reservation and create employment equity, so that we do not have a situation where the workers were not even recognised by the labour laws.  They were regarded as something like the slaves, like nothing.  The domestic workers, the farm workers, and the DP should know about the farm workers.  Those are very touchy issues.  We would not want to come back to them, and debate them in terms of supporting the labour laws that are necessary.

MR R M BURROWS:  You talk about flexibility as well.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  It is very critical and very important that we need to understand that.  With the process of transformation we are also in a sense correcting in the economy that which was wrong.  The structure of the economy is totally out of this world.  We had a situation where if you were black you were not allowed to own businesses.  You had to remain in the corner shop or a supermarket or a butcher by law of the National Party.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  We are changing that structure.

AN HON MEMBER:  It has been changed.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  There are people who are condemned to what is called the low standard in this country.  I do not think we need to raise temperatures and debate those matters, because they are facts, they are realities.  That is what we are trying to correct.  What I am saying is, to criticise the labour laws is wrong.

MR R M BURROWS:  It is one way of doing it.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  It is important for us to appreciate that.  I agree with the hon member who is out now, who said that we do need peace in order for our economy to develop and grow.  I hope we took note of that point. I thought that was an important point.  The reason for saying this is because we have tried to do that in this Province, to bring about peace and stability.  To some degree, more than in any other province, the investors have seen the potential in this Province, because we have tried to deal with that issue. 

Madam Chair, before I conclude, let me return to my colleagues of the National Party, as I promised.  [LAUGHTER]  

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  It is unfortunate that my colleague, the hon member Bartlett has left.  He was very heated when he raised these issues.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hon Schutte is here.

AN HON MEMBER:  He is a coward.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  You see, I  want to give friendly advice to the National Party.  They are one of the luckiest parties in the world, to be part of the past and part of the present, and that is because of our sober thinking, in an attempt to reconcile this country.  Otherwise they would have been history and forgotten.  They must not therefore provoke debate.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  The hon member who is making remarks now, in one of the debates mentioned that the leader of the ANC in this Province accused the judiciary.  It is important for my colleagues to be aware of the damage that the judiciary has done in this country.

MR V A VOLKER:  Like the Premier for Northern Province being instructed to reinstate a Minister.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I am one of the examples, I fought for my rights ...

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I would like the members to address the chair when they want to comment.

AN HON MEMBER:  He behaves like yesterday when he was a super boss, Volker.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I fought for my rights and these Judges found me guilty, and sent me to prison for 10 years.  I am not just theorising, I am talking from experience.  I know they were wrong.

The judges sent the State President to prison for twenty seven and a half years, life imprisonment.  That is why the Judges today, even though he is the State President, still regard him as a prisoner.  He must come and explain whether he applied his mind when he took a decision.  That has never been expected from any Prime Minister, or any President in this country.  I will take your question.  Let him ask the question.

ADV D P A SCHUTTE:  Madam Chair, I would like to ask the hon Minister, is it correct to infer that the President of this country is above the law?

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  I am saying the Judges in this country have never called and seen any Prime Minister or any President who made devastating decisions to come and explain: "What are you doing".  What does it mean when Mandela is a President?

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS!

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  This judiciary, my brother, and I am saying, the National Party must not touch on these sensitive and emotional issues.  I am giving them a friendly warning.

AN HON MEMBER:  Why?

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  Because they are not going to help.  They must debate the issues as we all debate them.  They must not begin to accuse people and say things which are very serious.  We are faced with a problem today where Judges interpret the Constitution in a very funny way.  Today, if a criminal victimises a person, the Judge's interpretation of the present Constitution is that it undermines the State.  They say the criminal has all the rights, human rights and he or she must be given bail etcetera.  Forget about the human rights of the victim.  In the first instance, and it does not need any genius, they should be very vocal that anyone who interferes with other people's rights cannot then come and say: "I have got the right to stay outside", and not interpreting the Constitution that way.

In reality, that encourages crime.  Those criminals go out and continue with crime because of the manner in which they interpret the Constitution.  That is the reality.  I am giving a friendly warning to the National Party, they must not provoke debate that they cannot stand for.

AN HON MEMBER:  That is a promise.

MR J G ZUMA: (Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism):  In conclusion, Madam Chair, I am very happy with the debate.  To me it indicated an important point, and we all agreed here that there are three major departments that needs to be favoured, that is Education, Welfare and Pensions and Health.  It is important for us to say if we are going to give money to this Department with no economic growth at all, we might run the risk that the money will be exhausted.  Attention needs to be given to the Department of Economic Affairs so that we can encourage investment and create more jobs.  Then there could be money which could even be helpful to deal with our favoured departments.

It is therefore important to begin to look at the practical issues.  The issue of tourism is one that the House has identified as an immediate issue that we need to deal with.  We need to deal with the dying towns that the hon Mr Jeffery referred to.  I hope we will bear that in mind.  I hope that this House will try to find a way of making some adjustment to our budget in order to deal with tourism, because if we do not do so there will certainly be no point in us talking about it.

Madam Chair, thank you very much, and I thank the members.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Hon members, we have now come to the end of the debate on vote 4.  The business of the Committee of Supply has now been completed for today, and leave has been granted to sit again.  I now call upon the Sergeant-at-Arms to raise the mace.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMITTEE SUSPENDED AT 16:52
	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE RESUMED AT 16:53

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Before I call for announcements by the Premier, I would like to remind the members that after the House has been adjourned, there is going to be a finance briefing by the Minister of Finance.  I would like to remind the members so that they do not leave after we have adjourned.  I now call upon the Minister to make any announcements.

REV C J MTETWA: (Minister of Public Works):  No announcements, Madam Speaker.

THE ACTING SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  The business of this House is adjourned until tomorrow at 12 o'clock.

	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 16:54 UNTIL
	12:00 ON WEDNESDAY, 3 JUNE 1998

		DEBATES AND PROCEEDINGS OF
	KWAZULU-NATAL PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURE

	FIFTH SESSION
	SECOND SITTING - SIXTEENTH SITTING DAY
	WEDNESDAY, 3 JUNE 1998

THE HOUSE MET AT 12:08 IN THE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER, PIETERMARITZBURG.  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

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  The hon Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order in connection with the Order Paper today.  Today is a Wednesday and the Order Paper should contain questions and/or interpellations.  I note that it is not on the Order Paper.  I wonder if you will inform us why it is not on the Order Paper.

THE SPEAKER:  The Whips should be in a position to do that, Mr Burrows.  The Chief Whip please.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, Mr Burrows is correct.  The regular practice in this House is that questions should be on the Order Paper on Wednesday.  In fact, on the programme for the budget sitting they are included there.  Prior to this sitting I did, however, establish that there are five questions, apparently, which were tabled since the last sitting of this House, but that no replies have been received to any of those questions.  The question paper should still have been tabled, but because no replies have been received from the Ministries concerned, and I am not sure what the Ministries are, I assume that is why questions are not there.  So, yes, questions should have been there so we could see what they were, but there were no replies forthcoming.  I do not quite know how to resolve it from there, Mr Speaker.  Perhaps if you could from the chair indicate how seriously this House regards the fact that questions are not replied to.  Perhaps the questions would need to be dealt with by way of written reply in the next few days.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Tarr.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, just to place on record that I was under the impression that we would be dealing with questions from now until lunch time, and that it would be on the Order Paper.  The omission has certainly not been discussed with me.  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Rajbansi.

MR A RAJBANSI:  Mr Speaker, this is a very serious matter.  It is in this Legislature, in open session that we are dealing with an important function of Parliament, and that is public accountability.  I want to say that during my budget speech, when we refer to questions, it is questions where you cannot normally deal with the Department.  Even when we write to certain departments and Ministers, you are just ignored.  You feel ashamed to be an MP.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Mr Edwards.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, I was also under the impression questions would appear.  It so happens that some questions had gone in, and some of the members have received written replies, only yesterday.  I think those questions could have been for oral reply and had been replied to.  So it is also  strange that the questions are not on the Order Paper.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Yes, Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I wonder whether you might enquire of members of the Executive that are present here now, whether they have any replies to any of the questions that were posed, and if so, could they read such replies.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes, Mr Tarr.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, perhaps the best way to resolve this is to request that the question paper be tabled during the course of the debate, and that questions, if there are any replies, be dealt with at the conclusion of today's proceedings.

THE SPEAKER:  That would appear to be the best way to settle this issue.  We shall now proceed.  

The announcement I have here is that the hon Mr T D Ntombela has brought to my attention that the hon Mrs Happy Blose made a death threat against him within the precincts of Parliament.  This threat was apparently repeated by the hon Mr Dumisani Makhaye.  I regard this incident in a very serious light, and have acceded to his request that this matter be referred to the Disciplinary Committee.  I intend to ask the Chairman and the hon Deputy Speaker to investigate this matter urgently and report back to me within two weeks.  I think it is important that when members leave, it must not be under conditions where their lives might be at stake.  We have tightened up the security around here to protect the members.  But if we have to introduce measures to protect members from other members, that complicates matters.  Thank you very much for that.

5.	ANNOUNCEMENTS AND/OR REPORT BY THE PREMIER

The hon the Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!

THE PREMIER:  The previous day's proceedings were reported this morning on the Zulu programme.  Mr Mabuyakhulu's strictures against the Director-General were reported.  I am not saying that one should not be free to voice criticisms in this Parliament, but there are some instances where we shoot ourselves in the foot.  Instead of dealing with these very sensitive issues within our structures, namely the Portfolio Committees, where we exact accountability, I do not think it helps the image of the Government if what was said in Parliament gets to be broadcast.  I am appealing to the members that even though we have problems with Ministers, with officials, let us avoid this thing of airing the whole issue in public, while there is a way of dealing with it in a more in-house manner. 

The Director-General has told me that he is quite prepared to meet the parliamentarians and the Portfolio Committees to deal with the whole issue of the R100 million, and how it is being used.  He has given me his reasons why he has worked with it like this, getting communities to agree on a monument to peace in their area, be it a multi-purpose centre and so on, and there was logic in it.  So I think if we sat down to discuss it seriously there will be logic.  And also the issue of repairing the damaged homes, as well as repairing other structures, is on the plans.  It is not as if it is totally being ignored.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes, Mr Miller.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  I had already risen on point No 4.  With your permission, may we go back to the question of questions?

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Sir, I simply want to record from the point of view of the Executive, that this morning early we called for a copy of the Order Paper.  The Order Paper clearly makes no provision for questions or interpellations.  As such then, it was reasonable to presume that there were to be no interpellations or questions.  If in fact there were supposed to be an interpellation and a question, could I then formally ask, sir, that you institute an investigation as to why that matter has been left off the Order Paper.  The Order Paper is what guides us in our preparation for the sitting.  I certainly want to say from my point of view, sir, that if the Order Paper does not contain the item, questions and interpellations, I think it is reasonable to presume, and one comes therefore to the session not prepared to give those answers.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Miller.  Yes.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I do not want to take the House back, but I must agree fully with the hon Minister Miller.  On the programme that was circulated, the amended programme, it did indicate that there would be questions and we did discuss it as Whips that there would be questions today.  The hon Minister Miller is quite correct.  If it then does not appear on the Order Paper the only reasonable assumption is that it is not there.  But I would also like to know as Chief Whip of the ANC, why it has been omitted, because we did discuss it as Whips, and as I say, the amended programme did indicate that there would be questions today.  I do not know at what level that decision was made.  If the reason is, and I think that is what the hon Mr Tarr tried to say to this House, that no answers were received;  then I would submit very respectfully that that is no reason at all, to omit questions from the Order Paper.  If questions were sent in by members, they should appear.  If the answers are then not forthcoming that is another issue, and that can be dealt with in the House.  But I would fully concur with the hon Minister Miller that an investigation must be instituted into why this item has been left off the Order Paper, after agreement was reached by the Whips of all the parties that it should be there.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The investigation will in fact take place to satisfy the House on that issue.

6.	TABLING OF REPORTS AND/OR PAPERS

No tabling of reports and/or papers.

7.	NOTICES OF BILLS OR MOTIONS 

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

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will move on the next sitting day of this House:

	This House Noting:

	1.	The high cost to the Provincial Government of its vehicle fleet;
		
	2.	the high costs of maintaining this fleet;
		
	3.	the opportunity for misuse of these vehicles;
		
	4.	the potential for the Government to realise a substantial cash amount, and 
		
	5.	the opportunity for this Government to save substantial costs incurred by the ownership of its fleet of vehicles.

	Hereby Resolves that:

	1.	the Premier and the Executive Council be asked to undertake an urgent investigation into the feasibility of disposing of this fleet;

	2.	replacing this fleet with vehicles supplied on a maintenance rental basis by the private sector;

	3.	the disposal of its vehicle fleet maintenance workshops and the transfer of this function and staff to the private sector;

	4.	an investigation into the allocation system of vehicles be undertaken to ensure that excess vehicles are not being operated, and 

	5.	that this investigation covers all branches of Government.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Tarr.  Yes, Mr Rehman.

MR M F REHMAN:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I hereby give notice that on the next sitting day of this hon House, I intend moving: 

	Noting that many elderly have been turned away from hospitals;

	our hon Minister to assist our elderly parents to receive dentures and glasses, so that they can enjoy the last few years of their lives;

	noting that advertising on regional television has incurred costs of approximately R30 000, hence there is an urgent need to reprioritise our budget spending.

	This House therefore calls upon the hon Minister to intervene and assist the elderly in their need for their basic necessities.

Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The hon Mr Burrows.

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

	That this House noting:

	1.	the laudable objectives of the Good Governance Programme;

	2.	the necessity for the active involvement in partnerships of the private sector and the public; and

	3.	the obvious potential for improved delivery and greater efficiencies within the provincial service.

	Hereby resolves:

	That the House establish an ad hoc Good Governance Committee to which members of the public, the private sector and/or NGOs may report any specific instances of inefficient and/or wasteful Government performance; together with constructive suggestions for improvement, or constructive suggestions for a process to achieve such improvements.  This Committee would then take cognisance of the inputs and delegate selected members to investigate, with the assistance of appropriate and knowledgable members of the public, and make recommendations in each case.

Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  Yes, Mr Nel.

MR W U NEL:  Mr Speaker, I hereby give notice that I shall move on the next sitting day of this House:

	This House noting that:

	1.	there is a Directorate within the Department of Economic Affairs charged with facilitation of the establishment, development and co-ordination of the Reconstruction and Development Programme within the Province of KwaZulu-Natal;

	2.	that the major funding allocation currently budgeted for Reconstruction and Development purposes in the Province is the amount of R100 million which has been placed under the direction of the Director-General and not the RDP Directorate; and

	3.	the duplication of structures and procedures which inevitably arise from this splitting of responsibility with respect to RDP related programmes.

	Hereby resolves that:

	1.	The Director-General and the Directorate - RDP, under the guidance of the Premier and the Minister of Economic Affairs and Tourism should meet as a matter of urgency and report to this House before 30 June 1998 on:

	(i)		the full terms of reference of the Directorate Reconstruction and Development;

	(ii)		the level of co-operation between the Directorate and the Director-General in respect of the administration of the R100 million "peace fund";  and

	(iii)	whether they are satisfied that the current modus operandi is efficient and has not, nor will result in duplication, wasted expenses and inefficient delivery.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  The hon Mrs Ina Cronje.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  I hereby give notice that I shall move the following motion in this hon House on the next sitting day:

	Noting that this week is Environment Week;

	further noting the events and programmes presented by the Keep Pietermaritzburg Clean Association in conjunction with others at the Pietermaritzburg City Hall to include the public and schools in observing this important period;

	This House commends their efforts and resolves to observe this important week by giving special attention to our precious environment.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mrs Cronje.  No further motions.

8.	ORDERS OF THE DAY

8.1	COMMITTEE STAGE : VOTE 6 (FINANCE AND AUXILIARY SERVICES)

The House will now resolve itself into the Committee of Supply, and I therefore propose I should leave the chair.

THE HOUSE RESOLVED INTO A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE HOUSE
MR T S MOHLOMI THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES TAKES THE CHAIR.

KWAZULU-NATAL APPROPRIATION BILL, 1998.

VOTE 6: FINANCE AND AUXILIARY SERVICES.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We are now going to deliberate on vote 6, Finance and Auxiliary Services.  I wish to call upon the hon Minister of Finance, Minister Miller, to address the House.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Thank you very much, Mr Chairperson.  I am a little alarmed and somewhat disappointed to note that the Chairman of my Portfolio Committee is not present in the House.  I really would have liked him to have been present as I deliver my particular address.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Chairperson, will you allow me to just tender an apology to the hon Minister.  The Chairperson is on his way.  There has been an unforeseen delay, and he should be stopping at the House right now.  I would like to apologise on his behalf.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mrs Cronje.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Thank you, apology accepted.  Mr Chairperson, I want to say that it has been my privilege for the last few weeks to listen diligently to most of the budget debate that has taken place.  Inevitably pressures of other demands resulted in some of the contributions, by hon members, being missed.  But I want to say that the debates that have taken place have delivered one unmistakable message amongst the many messages delivered, namely that the Province has insufficient funds to meet delivery obligations and targets to the people of this Province.

Yet, Mr Chairman, few, if any, speakers have been prepared to really address the cause of this parlous state of affairs.  I intend to do so today.

An analysis of the budget reveals the following shocking information.  We have a gross budget available to fund the total needs of the Province of R17,9 billion.  An analysis of how this budget is spent reveals that R10,543 billion is spent on personnel and personnel related expenditure.  A further R3,75 billion is spent meeting the Province's welfare obligations, especially to old age pensioners, and is in fact a simple transfer payment with the Province receiving the money with one hand, and paying it out with the other.  In other words, the Province simply acts as a Post Office.  Similarly, the Province receives and pays across R550 million to municipalities.  Once again a simple transfer payment.  Finally, the Province has fixed expenditure on rates and taxes, rentals, service charges, overheads and other expenses of a non-discretionary type which amount to R1,62 billion.  These four cost centres when added together, total R16,473 billion and represent, and I ask members to particular note what I am going to say now, this figure represents expenses the Province would incur even if it were possible to close the entire administration down and send all the staff on paid leave for a year.

Subtract this amount from the gross budget of R17,9 billion and the Province is left with R1,527 billion to fund actual productive services to the people of the Province.  For those members that were here for the briefing that I gave to members last evening after the House rose, you will actually know that in our current year the situation is even worse by a sum of R500 million, because that is the R500 million that we have to use to pay back bridging finance at the end of the year.  So the reality in the present year, we have not got R1,5 billion, we have only got R1 billion to fund productive expenditure, but in terms of the budget we have R1,5 billion.

This R1,5 billion, in terms of the budget book, we have is all that is left to provide drugs, medicines and equipment for hospitals, textbooks, stationery and equipment for schools, construction, repair and maintenance of roads, equipment and supplies for the conservation of our natural resources and the running of our parks and reserves, the construction, repair and maintenance of schools, clinics, hospitals and other Provincial buildings, the replacement and maintenance of office furniture, equipment and other capital goods, the promotion of tourism and of economic development, the prevention of shark attacks and so the litany continues.

Expressed in percentage terms the Province spends 92% of its budget on personnel, transfer payments and fixed costs and only 8% on productive, service delivery orientated activities.  What is the result, Mr Chairman?  The result is schools with no books, hospitals and clinics with no medicines, roads full of potholes, deteriorating infrastructure, shabby buildings, no capital expenditure and no fixed investment.

Clearly, and I am sure hon members will agree with me, the Province and country is on the slippery slope to disaster if this situation is allowed to continue.  But I must pose the question, have the politicians the political will to apply the only remedy available?  This remedy is very simple.  The Province and the Public Service as a whole employs too many people.  To paraphrase President Mandela, "the public service is not an employment agency".  Yet, and I want you really to note these shocking figures, in the 12 months, 30 April 1997 to 30 April 1998, the number of civil servants in KwaZulu-Natal increased from 169 079 to 183 338, an increase of 14 259!  In the nine provinces as a whole, the numbers for the same period increased from 832 119 to 899 948, an increase of 67 829.

Mr Chairman, these figures encapsulate the critical problem facing those who are trying to control the nation's finances.  Provinces and departments within provinces seem to be unable to control employment, particularly in the lower ranks.  Managers seem to think that they are obliged to provide jobs to all and sundry.  This trend has not only to be stopped but it must be reversed.  The effect on service delivery would be dramatic.  For example, a mere 7% reduction in the personnel and fixed cost portion of the budget would effectively double the amount available for essential service delivery.  An increase of the discretionary budget from R1,5 billion to R3 billion would be sufficient to remedy all our education and health deficiencies and would pump an extra R1,5 billion into the Provincial economy, stimulating growth and investment, probably sufficient to absorb all the retrenched public servants and more.

The million dollar question therefore remains, have politicians in general, and that includes all of us in this House, but more particularly the African National Congress as the governing party in South Africa, the political will and guts to put country before party, to put the country's interest above the interests of COSATU, to promote the long term future and long term prosperity of all the citizens of the country above its own short term political interests?  If it has then we all have a bright and promising new millennium to look forward to: if the ANC fails us, then the situation is indeed bleak.

What is required?  What is required, Mr Chairman?  Stated very simply, the Province and the nation needs a properly funded and effective retrenchment tool now.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  We must immediately be able to retrench and/or make redundant supernumerary and superfluous civil servants.  Wherever possible, we must out-source and contract out activities and cease some activities entirely.  The 92:8 ratio must be improved as soon as possible to 85:15, and in the long term to 80:20, this being personnel and fixed cost as to productive discretionary costs.

I have calculated, Mr Chairman, hon members, that in KwaZulu-Natal an investment of R1 billion by the National Government in a properly funded and workable retrenchment package would very likely pay an annual dividend of R1 billion per annum in perpetuity.  I pose the question.  What could be a better investment than this?

The advantages of such a course of action, Mr Chairman, are surely self-evident and I challenge, in particular our colleagues in the African National Congress to have the courage and vision to promote and support such a course of action.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  As is my custom, Mr Chairman, I always have something to say to stimulate a bit of debate before I get to the mundane administrative features of the budget debate.

It is my pleasure today to submit to this House the policy speech of the Department of Finance and Auxiliary Services.  I will share with the House the activities of my Department, as well as the purpose for which the R529,707 million that I am going to request, will be utilised.

As a Department that is "committed to providing and promoting efficient and effective financial administration and management, as well as specialised services to the Province of KwaZulu-Natal", the Department of Finance has a daunting task ahead of it.

FISCAL AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES

There are specific programmes and projects that have to be maintained or expanded in order to ensure that we achieve that which our Department sets out to achieve. 

The first of these projects is the review of the Provincial Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF), and this framework was discussed at length in the presentation of the budget.  It is important here to emphasise that it is necessary to review the fundamentals of our MTEF as we move forward into the new financial year.

As a financial planning tool, the MTEF has to be informed by the Provincial Growth and Development Strategy (PGDS).  As a policy option, the PGDS assumes certain changes in the provincial spending patterns with a view to achieving growth and development in the Province.  The direct benefit of this will be the alleviation of poverty and the enhancement of self-reliance.

The MTEF review mentioned earlier will be initiated by the holding of the Second Budget Indaba that should answer a few questions.  These include the analysis of the provincial economy that should indicate growth trends.  This analysis should show us the direction that is being taken by our economy.  It should give us an indication of the sector or sectors that contribute more to Gross Geographical Product, thereby enabling us to decide on the level of investment that we should, as a Government, make in each sector.

We also need to have an in-depth analysis of the budget that we have in place with a view to checking whether it is in line with the actual performance of the economy.  In a nutshell, this analysis should open up the debate in terms of the investment that we are making in the budget.  It must be understood that budget formulation takes place within certain national prescriptions, such as the priority funding of basic social services, and this has an apparent crowding out effect on capital and infrastructural development expenditure.

This pro-active approach, Mr Chairman, will enable this Province to engage the national budget planners in a meaningful debate in terms of the allocations that we make to each of our sectors.  The budget that should come out of this process will influence the adjustments to be made to our three year fiscal plan.  It will be dangerous to wait for a period of three years before we do this review, because it is then too late to correct some of the things that may need correcting.

The other programme that the Department will be concentrating on is the Performance Enhancement Plan (PEP).  As a Cabinet policy document, the PEP's main objective is to create a sound financial and fiscal order in the Province.  As in many programmes that are aimed at changing patterns and correcting behaviours, this programme requires the support of each one of us in the Province.  For this programme to succeed, we need to action a number of initiatives that are mentioned in it, more or less at the same time.  For instance, when the consultants who are driving the programme have finished their work, the Province must have the required capacity to carry the best practice forward.  It is for this reason that departments are now being exposed to cash flow planning and management as well as the establishment of structures such as the Internal Audit.

Cash Flow Management

It will be recalled that during October 1997, the Treasury introduced committees within each department that approved all planned purchases over an amount of R10 000.  These committees had a significant impact on the amount of purchases made by each department as from the period of introduction.  Our information is that in the departments where there are a multiple of regional or district offices and institutions, these committees revealed the unacceptable manner in which purchases have been made.  This alone had a very significant contribution to the usage of cash in the Province.

As from the beginning of this financial year we have built onto this system.  The Treasury does not insist on being represented on these committees any more, but a broader cash flow management system has been introduced.  All accounting officers were requested to break their allocation into 12 monthly cash tranches.  In these calculations, each accounting officer is expected to provide adequate cash for fixed costs such as personnel expenditure as a first cut for each month.  Thereafter provision should be made for projects or programmes of the Department.  These cash flow estimates were consolidated for the whole year for the Province.  Then on the other side, the Treasury matched these cash flow budgets to the expected amounts that will be transferred to the Province and suggested adjustments which adjustments have already been effected.

It is pleasing to note that all departments have fully supported this process.  It is early in the financial year, therefore it is not easy to state the benefits of this system with certainty.  It can however, be projected that all accounting officers now have a full picture of how money will flow into the Province.  This will discourage them from creating expenditure expectations that cannot be accommodated in the cash flow.  Further, it will enable each department to state the full financial implications and when these implications will materialise when presenting any policy matter to Cabinet for a decision.  This point needs to be emphasised because the tendency to ask Cabinet to allow a department to carry out an additional function still persists.  Not only are we insisting that all Cabinet submissions with explicit or implied financial implications must be referred to Treasury, but we are also insisting that the source of funding must be clearly identified.

During the first month of the financial year, we have seen our account reverting back to a positive balance.  This has been made possible by a number of initiatives that departments themselves have put in place and by the realisation by all of us in the Province that we are the people who will get ourselves out of this trouble.  No amount of outside help will be meaningful if we are not willing to do the right thing ourselves.

The Internal Audit Function

I turn now to the internal audit function.  This function requires special mention here today because of its significance to the entire Administration.  My Department is on the verge, in fact has reached an important milestone in so far as the implementation of an independent internal audit function is concerned.  I, and my colleagues in the Cabinet, are committed to the speedy implementation of an independent, coherent and effective audit function for this Province.  It is important to see the establishment of the internal audit function within the context of the continued implementation of the PEP.  This function forms the basis for the maintenance of sound financial systems and processes of Government.  The interventions that were made since the first implementation of the PEP will be sustained and enhanced by the introduction of internal auditors into the system.

One may ask why it has taken so long to implement this very important function.  Government structures have since the implementation of the new Government dispensation, undergone drastic changes and reorganisation, with a long list of issues requiring priority attention before full attention could be given to the implementation of an internal audit function.

The internal auditors will deal with all elements of internal auditing, but fraud and corruption will top their agenda.  We need to eradicate fraud whilst at the same time ensuring that correct systems and procedures are in place to prevent it.  One of the first tasks of the Internal Audit component will be to collect and analyse all data on irregularities, fraud and corruption within the Provincial Service to enable all departments of the Province to take more effective steps against perpetrators of fraud, theft and corruption.  The process of the collection of data for a future database has already been initiated and it will be some time before comprehensive information will be available, due to the mass of information to be collected and captured on computer.

Combatting of Fraud and Corruption

A major concern of mine is the amount of fraud that is being perpetrated throughout the Province, and to this end I am happy to report that a number of anti-fraud measures are currently being implemented by my Department, working in close relationship with other departments.

There are a number of transversal programmes undertaken by my Department that have a universal effect on all departments of the Province in reducing the opportunities for fraud and corruption.  I wish to mention but a few initiatives of this nature which will enhance internal control throughout the administration and which are currently in progress, and those that are on the verge of implementation.

*	Electronic Payments to Suppliers

	The testing and implementation of this system has been completed.  However, a decision that payments to creditors will only be made once a month was made by the Province.  The effect that this decision had on the proposed payment of creditors through the system is that a change at the Central Computer Services where the FMS is being run is necessary.  This is being investigated at present.

	This system, when implemented, will eliminate the thousands of cheque payments which are made throughout the provincial administration to suppliers on a daily basis.  This will contribute to a vast reduction in the number of cheques in circulation, resulting in less opportunity for fraud to take place.

*	Electronic Payment of Salaries

	I turn now to electronic payment of salaries.  A number of stakeholders and decision-makers are currently being consulted with a view to implementing a system of paying salaries into banking accounts.  Apart from the obvious reduction of cheques that the Province will have to print and the cost associated with this, it is a known fact that cheques associated with salaries are a major source of fraud.  These cheques are negotiated at places that are not banking institutions.

	Such places are supermarkets and garages that do not have the capacity and the skill to deal with the sophistication that is associated with cheque fraud.  In some instances the shops, garages and supermarkets are implicated in the fraud business.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  And I might add, that in some instances shops, garages and supermarkets that cash fraudulent cheques then turn to us to say we must make up the difference.  Naturally this we have not done.

It is therefore, Mr Chairman, in the interest of the Province to encourage the elimination of cheques as instruments of payment and that salaries be directly paid into banking accounts.  The other benefit in this regard is that banks have a responsibility to ensure that the accounts they operate are valid.  In this way they become co-responsible in the fight against crime and corruption.

*	Biometric Access for Data Capturing

	I turn now to the Biometric Access for data capturing.  The Biometric Access system is currently being implemented in Pietermaritzburg and ~Ulundi~.  This system will greatly enhance the control over data capturing access through which fraud is presently being perpetrated, whereby we will now be in a position to pinpoint accountability for transactions captured.  This system ensures that transactions generated can be traced to the source using the fingerprint of the user.  Should any of these be fraudulent transactions, the evidence presented will be accepted in a court of Law.

*	Localised Printing of all Cheques

	We are also going to localise the printing of all cheques.  The advantage of this system change is that there will no longer be a need to ferry cheques, blank and printed, to and from Pretoria.  This plan eliminates a further risk of cheques being intercepted and the administration being defrauded.

GAMING AND BETTING ISSUES

The Horse Racing Industry

Mr Chairman, hon members, I now turn to gaming and betting issues, and I start with a review of the horse racing industry.  As you and members of this House will know, the racing and betting industries have, for many years, enjoyed prosperity and have been able to contribute substantially to the local economy and to provincial tax revenues.  It would be true to say that there has been a healthy equilibrium between the level of prosperity enjoyed by the industry and the level of income earned by the Province from that source.

Over recent years, however, the prosperity and along with it the tax revenues have been reducing.  Revenue earned from betting taxes last year amounted to R38,5 million, a 14% reduction over the previous year's income from this source.

Racing seems to be in decline and some go as far as to say that the industry has brought this on themselves and that it is not Government's responsibility to protect it.  I believe this is an overly simplistic view and I would like to dispel some myths attached to it.

I believe that Government has a responsibility to protect the enormous infrastructure that the racing industry has built in the Province.  This industry collectively includes breeding, training, riding, racecourse operations, catering, totalisators, bookmakers, and so on, and provides direct full and part time employment for 7 500 people.  The extent of indirect employment generated cannot be measured accurately, but the international norm suggests that racing generates, both directly and indirectly, approximately 10 jobs per horse in training.  Using this norm, then horse racing in this Province can be said to generate as many as 25 000 employment opportunities.  In my view this is worth protecting.

I also believe that we need to take cognisance of the fact that successful businesses do not become unsuccessful by accident, and that there are always factors that influence success or failure, some within and some outside of one's control.  There are several external factors in the case of the racing industry, and the first of these is:

The End of the Wagering Monopoly

The monopoly which the industry enjoyed by virtue of being the only legitimate form of gambling has been, and rightly so, eroded with the advent of other forms of gambling.  It has also, however, been eroded by the advent of unlicensed, unregulated and untaxed alternative forms of gambling.  This threat will not go away when casinos and other forms of gaming are licensed.  International studies have shown that a State lottery can reduce totalisator turnover by between 17% and 22% and casinos can further reduce this turnover by between 35% and 50%.

Thus the potential combined loss or real totalisator turnover could be between 51% and 70%.  Racing's monopoly as a leisure time activity has also been eroded with the re-entry of our sports teams into the international sporting arena, bringing exciting international competition into our homes, via television and onto our sports fields.

Value Added Tax - VAT

It is universally accepted, Mr Chairman, that gambling has a maximum rate at which it can be taxed before it is destroyed.  This applies to all forms of gambling, whether it be casino gambling and lotteries, or racing.  Despite several representations to VATCOM and again to the Katz Commission, Government has seen fit to impose VAT on the gambling industry.  For racing, the path of destruction commenced on 30 September 1991, when VAT was applied to the horse racing industry.  As a result of this, horse racing in South Africa is amongst the most heavily taxed in the world.  The effective tax rate imposed on betting is 9%, not 9% on profit, but 9% on total revenue or turnover.

The Impact of the Economy on Horse Racing

Over and above the negative contribution of competition to the industry, there are other factors that need to be considered.  Factors such as unemployment, violence, an unacceptably high crime rate and an unfavourable exchange rate have all impacted negatively on our economy.  When an economy is on the decline, the consumer market in which horse racing falls is the first to be affected.  The reason for this is that disposable income for the majority of people becomes less than in times of growth in the economy.  The projected economic growth brings with it the hope that a positive contribution will be made to this industry which was thriving a few years ago.

Arresting the Decline

The question thus arises, what do we need to do as Government to arrest the decline?

AN HON MEMBER:  Invest in more of Rajbansi's horses.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  This Provincial Government has recognised the need to preserve the industry, and to this end has granted concessions to the racing industry for the specific purpose of enhancing stakes.  Stakes are essentially the pivotal point around which the industry revolves.  If stakes are not pitched at the right level, then the quality of race horses declines, as it would no longer be profitable for breeders, owners and trainers, and even the owner of Minority Front, and the punter interest declines, thereby reducing turnovers and provincial taxes.

MR A RAJBANSI:  My horse is running tonight.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  The concessions were conditional upon the racing industry taking steps to rationalise and to identify measures to restore it to previous levels of prosperity.  In this regard the industry has not shirked its responsibilities and is currently undertaking a programme to bring about the rationalisation of its resources.  It is important to note that if one looks at the international experience, horse racing in South Africa is not breaking new ground.  There are many comparable cases from around the world where the role-players have attempted to deal with the problems.  Three scenarios worldwide have emerged:

*	either racing itself ignored the signs of imminent decline and the effects which other legalised forms of gaming would have on it, or Government ignored the signs, resulting in job losses, and the concomitant negative effects on the socio-economic sector and the loss of taxes;

*	ad hoc and/or insignificant concessions by Government resulting in a prolonged period of decline or maintaining of the status quo, but without promoting growth;

*	the third scenario is that meaningful intervention by governments who have recognised the right of horse racing to compete fairly for market share and have provided opportunities to do so by reducing taxation on betting, and interestingly enough increasing total tax yield.  The successful racing jurisdictions are found mainly in the USA where the effective tax rate, on average, is 2,78%.  In states such as New York (where there is no casino gaming as yet), and in New Jersey, (where there is casino gaming), the tax rate is 0,5%.  One has to compare this to the 9% in South Africa.

AN HON MEMBER:  We are getting there.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  At the national level, the racing industry in this country has agreed that it needs to be aggressive in its challenge to the alternative form of wagering.  Its most significant achievement to date has been the rationalisation of racing fixtures which has resulted in a considerable increase in totalisator turnover, whilst keeping the costs associated with handling this turnover to a minimum.  This has been achieved by increasing the number of stand alone meetings.  This year 441 race meetings will be staged nationally over 351 days, as compared with 1988, when 410 race meetings were staged on 187 days, and in 1997 when 446 meetings were staged on 295 days.

There is, however, still much to be done, hon members.  I want to say that on the 18th of this month I will be meeting with all the stakeholders in the racing industry to give impetus to this rationalisation process.

Bookmaker Industry

I will deal briefly with the bookmaking industry.  There have also been developments in respect of this industry.  A committee to investigate the determination of bookmakers licences in the Province, appointed by one of my predecessors, finalised its work late last year, and I have recently approved the recommendations made by the committee.  The committee was established to undertake a thorough investigation of betting rooms in KwaZulu-Natal with a view to devising an organised plan for their establishment and future expansion.  The committee's recommendations will undoubtedly assist the industry to grow in the competitive gambling environment which is currently developing in the country.

The Gaming Industry

I turn now to the gaming industry.  The development of a regulated gaming industry in KwaZulu-Natal was seen as a mechanism through which the following objectives could be achieved:

*	the development of tourist and community based facilities and infrastructure;

*	the creation of employment opportunities, but with care being taken not to divert consumer spending to the extent that gambling becomes responsible for the decline of jobs and revenues in other businesses; and

*	to uplift, advance and economically empower historically disadvantaged and underprivileged people and communities.

Mr Chairman, with regard to the licensing of Route and Site operators in KwaZulu-Natal, the process is being delayed by the absence of National Regulations prescribing the number of gaming machines permitted outside of casinos in each Province.

To that extent, I can tell hon member that later this afternoon members will notice that the Chairman of the National Gambling Board, Mr Chris Fismer, will be in the precincts of this House, and he will be meeting with me tonight after the House rises to deal with the issue of this delay.

The National Gambling Board has finally been established, and they held their first meeting on 28 April 1998.  We have every reason to hope that the question of the allocation of gaming machines outside of casinos will be one of the first issues that is addressed, and that as a consequence thereof National Regulations will soon be published which will enable the provinces to commence with Route and Site operations.

As a consequence of this, the Premier and the KwaZulu-Natal Gambling Board agreed late last year, that the casino licensing process should be commenced with and accelerated.  As a result of this decision the "KwaZulu-Natal Casino Development Project -Preliminary Proposal" (RFP) document was issued on 21 January 1998 by the KwaZulu-Natal Gambling Board inviting interested parties to state their interest and to make the necessary applications.

Mr Chairman, I am pleased to announce that the process of licensing casinos, which will address the objectives which have been set and which I mentioned earlier, has commenced.  On 20 April 1998, the KwaZulu-Natal Gambling Board received 15 proposals for the five casino licences available in KwaZulu-Natal, and in fact a 16th has subsequently been admitted.  A combined total of R5,1 million was paid to the Board in the form of non-refundable preliminary proposal fees.

These proposals are currently being assessed for general compliance with the requirements stated in the KwaZulu-Natal Gambling Act and the Casino Development Project - Request for Proposal.  All preliminary proposals that meet these requirements will be invited to furnish detailed proposals.  Only after the final proposals have been received on 17 August 1998, will the comparative analysis of the projects take place.

The 15 proposals mentioned earlier on, represent a direct investment of over R3 billion in our Province, and we hope that this will contribute to "kick-starting" the tourist industry within KwaZulu-Natal.  Thousands of jobs will be created, not only during the construction phases, but also during the operating phases of the proposed developments.

The standard of the proposals received is exceptional and the people of KwaZulu-Natal can expect to see developments of world class standing once the final licences are awarded.  In this regard, it is anticipated that the announcement of the preferred applicants will be made towards the latter part of October 1998, with the licences finally being issued towards the end of December 1998 or early January 1999.

Mr Chairman, one cannot expect investors to invest in developments of this magnitude in an unregulated gaming environment, where illegal operations are allowed to flourish unabated.  In this regard, Mr Chairman, the media has portrayed the recent and ongoing case of Johannes Schinkel v The Premier of KwaZulu-Natal and Others as evidence that illegal casino operators are successfully exploiting a loophole in the KwaZulu-Natal Gambling Act, 1996.  I just want to state that no loophole in the Act has been exposed, nor is one likely to be.  I have been informed that the Attorney-General and the Commissioner of Police are working together to ensure that a uniform strategy is adopted to control and police the illegal industry.  In fact, an announcement was made by Director Bala Naidoo, and I heard it over the radio this morning that the police and the prosecuting authorities have now reached agreement, and action is about to commence.

As another forward moving step, I wish to announce that with effect from 4 May 1998 the process of registering Manufacturers, Suppliers and/or Maintenance Providers of Gaming Equipment commenced.  The closing date for the first round of registrations is 22 June 1998.  This process will ensure that by the time casino licences are issued manufacturers, suppliers and/or maintenance providers will be in place to service the industry.

Turning now to Bingo, I can advise that draft regulations are almost ready to be referred to the Portfolio Committee for comment.  The regulations take into account both styles of bingo operation (excluding keno), namely "British bingo" and "Spanish bingo", that exist in the gaming world.  It is envisaged that Bingo will be regulated to ensure the following two main objectives, namely:

*	The protection of the bingo-playing public; and
*	The protection of the Province's tax revenue from this source.

In closing, Mr Chairman, I just want to deal then specifically with the Department's actual budget.

I have given a list of key performance areas that the Department will be involved in during the current financial year.  The objective of these initiatives is to ensure a sound fiscal order in the Province.  In pursuance of this objective my Department have five programmes which support these objectives, and I will deal with these individually.

PROGRAMME 1:  ADMINISTRATION - INCREASE R349 000:

The main purpose of this programme is to conduct the overall management of the Department, with the main emphasis on departmental policy formulation by myself and the Department's management personnel.

This programme reflects, as I have said, an increase of R349 000 when compared with the amount provided in the previous financial year.  This increase is, however, not due to an increased allocation, but rather the reorganisation of the Department and the movement of staff.  This can be seen in the increase of personnel expenditure from R2,877 million to R3,949 million.  There are 60 posts associated with this programme and 13 of these are vacant.  Provision is made in this budget for the filling of only 13 of these posts.

PROGRAMME 2:  TREASURY - INCREASE R216 188 000:

This programme funds the activities of the department that are associated with the formulation of the financial policies of the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Government and regulate the financial administration, as well as to grant financial dispensation to departments when funds were available.  I hasten to add that this will not be possible in the present financial year.

The increase reflected in the programme is an increase when compared with the amount provided in the previous financial year.  However, I want you to understand that this increase is in fact ascribed to the amount of R426 483 000 which we have had to set aside, and as I explained to members last night, to address the redemption of the overdraft in respect of the provincial bank account.  So it is an increase on paper that is already committed to the redemption of our overdraft from last year.

In the 1998/1999 budget an amount of R439 371 000 is reduced by R426 483 000, then the allocated budget for this programme is R12,888 million.  This represents a reduction of 80% when compared to the previous year.  The function of servicing of Development Bank Loans has been transferred to the National Department of Finance, and this contributed to this decrease in funding.

This programme, the Treasury programme, provides for 71 posts of which 32 are vacant.  Only three of the 32 vacant posts will be filled in the current financial year.  An amount of R6,228 million is provided for under professional and special services which will be used to finance the implementation of the Performance Enhancement Plan and the internal audit function which I have already described.

PROGRAMME 3:  FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES - DECREASE R4 991 000:

This programme's main aim is to secure the financial management of provincial departments.  The main focus will be on salary administration, financial control and financial management systems.

The decrease of funding to this programme can be ascribed to the fact that no provision has been made for the expansion of the "Biometric Access Control System", and can also be ascribed to the relocation of some personnel to Programme 1 - Administration.

This programme has a total of 357 posts of which 93 are vacant.  Of the 93 vacancies only 9 will be filled, and that will be at a cost of R895 586 which is budgeted for.

PROGRAMME 4:  GAMING AND BETTING - DECREASE R3 242 000:

This programme funds the activities associated with the establishment of gambling policy and legislation, as well as the control of betting.

This programme reflects a decrease of R3,242 million which can be ascribed to the fact that no provision has been made for the gaming function as such, a matter which will be addressed in the additional estimates, and a cut in the budget which has resulted in six vacant posts being unfunded.

PROGRAMME 5:  AUXILIARY AND ASSOCIATED SERVICES - 
	      DECREASE R5 608 000:

The aim of this programme is to render auxiliary services associated with the Department, which includes Information Technology (IT) Provisioning and Stores.  The Information Technology function and the Provisioning and Stores functions will be moved during the financial year to the Department of the Premier, and the Department of Health respectively.  I hope that is accurate.  IT services provide services to all departments and it is therefore a transversal function that should be effectively carried out in the Corporate Services branch of the Department of the Premier.  On the other hand provisioning administration provides and holds at least 95% of stock for the Department of Health.  It is therefore logical to place this function with that department.

The decrease can be ascribed to the fact that previously State subsidised restaurants are being privatised and so there is no obligation to render a subsidy for these restaurants in the new financial year.  There is also no augmentation of the Standard Stock Capital account of the Central Provincial Store for the ensuing financial year.  In addition, 19 of the 29 vacant posts have not been budgeted for in this financial year.

The written document that I have given you all, gives a table which sets out in tabular form the comparative amounts between last and this financial year.

	PROGRAMMES
98/99    R'000
97/98   R'000
1. ADMINISTRATION
  5,276
  4,927
2. TREASURY
439,371
223,183
3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICES
 53,640
 58,631
4. GAMING AND BETTING
  2,193
  5,435
5. AUXILIARY AND ASSOCIATED SERVICES
 29,227
 34,835
          TOTAL
529,707
327,011

It should be noted, Mr Chairman, that the original estimates of revenue for vote 6 did not include the provisions for Programme 4, namely gaming and betting, as this programme was at the time still reflected under the Department of the Premier.  The estimates have subsequently been amended to reflect the transfer of gaming and betting to vote 6.

Mr Chairman, before concluding the presentation of this vote, I wish to briefly refer to the change of the provincial account from First National Bank to ABSA Bank.  The contract between the Bank and the Province was for a period of three years with an option to extend for another year.  The contract period was to end on 31 March 1998.  The Department did not exercise the option to extend the contract, but instead decided to invite tenders from interested finance houses to take up the business.

As a result of the complexity of the tender and the diversity of the product range offered by banks, the Department did not issue specifications for the tender.  A tender enquiry was made which was followed by presentations and a recommendation to the Tender Board which took the final decision.  For the provincial accounts only three banks, namely First National, Standard Bank and ABSA tendered.  The Tender Board decided that ABSA was the bank that best suited the needs of the Province.

It is only one month since we have started the relationship with the new Provincial Banker.  We are satisfied with the manner in which they responded to the implementation process which took a period of less than two months.  Our appreciation goes to the staff who had to run the two accounts in order to ensure a smooth transition to the new Provincial Banker.

CONCLUSION

It is evident, hon members, Mr Chairman, that from the preceding information that I have rendered here today, that my Department is ready to embark on a year filled with many challenges and new developments.  These challenges are not for the Department of Finance alone.  They are challenges that each department must face and see as real.  Each one of the elected representatives of this Province needs to ensure that he/she makes a meaningful contribution to the effective running of the Province.

Fiscal discipline alone cannot achieve for us that which we should achieve this year.  We need to be reminded of the decisions that we take or contribute to taking to ensure that such decisions can be supported by the resources at our disposal.  We also require a political will and commitment to make decisions that will have future benefits to this Province and ultimately to South Africa.  I must say that the one I suggested in my opening comments is probably the most important one we need to take.  Mr Chairman, during the presentation of the Provincial Budget, the Minister of Finance, who was the hon the Premier, at the time requested that each of the Ministers make a commitment to remain within the budget for the current financial year.  I am happy to make this unequivocal commitment to ensuring that my Department remains within the resources allocated to it for the current financial year.  I now have pleasure in moving the adoption of the budget of the Department of Finance, vote 6.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  At this point the Committee of Supply is going to adjourn for lunch and we will come back at half past two and proceed with our debate.  The Committee adjourns.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMITTEE SUSPENDED AT 13:25
	RESUMED AT 14:32

RESUMED DEBATE: VOTE 6: FINANCE AND AUXILIARY SERVICES

THE CHAIRPERSON:  We are now going to resume our debate on vote 6, Finance and Auxiliary Services.  I wish to call upon the hon member Mr Makhaye, to address the House for 20 minutes.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Chairman, thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  You wanted to say something, Mr Burrows.

MR R M BURROWS:  I was just going to take a point of order that you were starting the House while the bells were still ringing, but the bells have stopped.  Thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for that.  Mr Makhaye, the floor is yours.

MR D H MAKHAYE:  The Chairperson, Minister for Finance, KwaZulu-Natal, the hon Mr Miller.  At the beginning of this session the Finance Committee presented its report to this House.  I have nothing to add or subtract to that report.  I believe it was an objective and honest appraisal of the financial situation prevalent in KwaZulu-Natal.  This House will very soon pronounce on that report.

For the first time, our report used the performance measures or tools which were adopted by this House when we adopted last year's report of the Finance Committee, which contained time- frames for implementation of some aspects of the report.  When the House, including members of the Executive, who occupy that position by virtue of being members of this House, unanimously adopted that report, including the time-frames, this House assumed its ownership and that it was then binding on all of us, including the Executive.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Point of order, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we take the point of order from Minister Ndebele.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Is the Chair certain about the quorum?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I think we have a quorum.  I am certain.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  But it is shocking that on the other side there is no quorum.  Are you already running away from your responsibilities as a Government.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Chair, the caucus of the IFP were meeting when I last saw them.  They should be coming into the House at any moment.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Tarr, but we do have a quorum.  Mr Makhaye, you may proceed.

MR D H MAKHAYE:  Obviously, there was a reaction from members of the House to that report.  The Finance Committee appreciates that reaction.  There were moments when I was confused whether the Finance Committee was expected to simply type out the views of the Executive and parrot them in this House.  Perhaps we were expected to say there was no over-expenditure of R1,9 billion during the past financial year.  Perhaps we were supposed to say everything was perfect.  We will never lie to this House, to our people or our consciences.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR D H MAKHAYE:  Let me be emphatic on this.  I WILL NEVER CHAIR SUCH A COMMITTEE.

There were also those members of the House, fortunately very few of them, whose manhood or womanhood had deserted them, tried to evenly distribute the blame for the financial crisis among all of us.  Perhaps this was in the name of collective responsibility.  But the blame must be put where it really belongs.  There can be no collective responsibility without personal responsibility.  There must be personal bitterness when the task is not properly performed.  We must demand personal accountability.

The response of the Minister for Finance, the hon Peter Miller, who informed this House that the concerns and recommendations of the Finance Committee were also the concerns and recommendations of the Executive, reassured us that there is no sinister political agenda in the Finance Committee report.  The comments of the Premier, when he was asked to: "make any other comment" towards the end of the business of the day, was also reassuring.

We have all agreed, and the National Government does agree with us, that we are not as yet receiving an equitable share of the national revenue.  The political will, mechanisms and processes are in place to ensure that justice is done in that direction.

But let us remind ourselves of what we have received from the National Government in the past four years:

	1994/1995	R11,6 billion
	1995/1996	R13,3 billion
	1996/1997	R14,5 billion
	1997/1998	R15,4 billion
	1998/1999	R17,4 billion

That gives you a total of around R72 billion.

Surely, this is no pocket money.  In the course of debates, many colleagues have nauseatingly over-emphasised the problem of underfunding.  There are some who almost suggested that it was unnecessary to look after the funds we receive from the National Government, because it was too little.  All they want is more and more funds.  Only then can we think of properly managing our funds.  That would be the height of irresponsibility.

I repeat, we must demand equitable funding, but we must never use the lack of it as an apologia for subjective weaknesses.  We must agree that it was not the lack of equitable funding that led to mismanagement of the implementation of voluntary severance packages.  We must agree that it is not the hon Trevor Manuel who is the cause of massive corruption.  In some departments we still lack value for money.

Such excuses have even blurred our great achievements as a Province.  We can proudly account for what we have achieved with the R72 billion.  We can talk of many roads crisscrossing the hills and valleys of our Province, built in the last four years.  We can talk of more than 100 clinics dotting the surface of our Province, bringing health services to our poorest of the poor.  We can point at the growth in development and tourism.

We can say with pride that the aged and the infirm are now receiving a better service.  Nor can we forget that with the programme of good governance and the anti-corruption drive, we are getting our house in order.  The crisis in education is not a crisis of failure, but a crisis of achievement.  Education, irrespective of many subjective weaknesses, is becoming more and more accessible to our people.  Those who refuse to be deployed to areas of need are creating a crisis in this sphere.  There are those who think to resolve the education crisis, we must again limit the accessibility of education to our people, especially the Africans.  That is criminal thinking.  The Local Government is up and running.  There is hope looming vividly in the eyes of our people.  Let us not through pessimism fail them.

Recognising some of our achievements, we must not be lulled into thinking that we have done everything necessary and possible.  Our achievements must be a clarion call to do even better.  They must be regarded as spring-boards to greater successes.

To do this, there are some fundamental things that we must do.  The problems concerning the transfers between the Works Department and client departments, especially Education and Culture, Health and Social Welfare must be resolved immediately.  The active involvement of the Provincial Treasury and the Premier and his Cabinet in the solution of this problem, is urgent.  The buck stops with the Premier and his Cabinet.

There must be a clearly defined programme of capacity building in each and every department, especially in finance matters.  The situation demands greater involvement of political heads in the finances of their departments.  It may be necessary that financial advisers are made available to Ministers.  The output may outweigh the cost.  That means that there must be greater investment in the functions of finance control, internal audit and early warning systems.  The employment of financial experts by the Department of Transport has made an immediate positive impact in that Department.  The Finance Department must play a more visible role in ensuring that all the provincial departments have the capacity in financial matters.

The Treasury and the Department of Finance must eliminate the provincial overdraft as a priority.  This overdraft is costing the Province rather too much.

There must be a collective political will, from both the Legislature and the Cabinet, that mismanagement of funds and overspending by any department, will be severely punished irrespective of the party political affiliation of the culprit.  We must be merciless on this.

The Province must continue to demand the tool to deal with the blown out bureaucracy in order to control personnel expenditure.  Of course, this tool can only be used through negotiations with the relevant stakeholders, especially the trade unions.  It is important that we extend a hand of friendship and co-operate with the unions.  We must not wait until there is a crisis.  We must cultivate the spirit that the Government and unions are partners in achieving a better life for all our people.  Of course, the Government and workers as employers and employees respectively, cannot avoid the struggle between them.  But the Government, in order to be an employer, it must first employ the employees.  For the workers to be Government employees, they must be employed by the Government.  Therefore the Government and the Government employees, whilst constantly in a struggle with each other, they must also co-exist with each other.  The relation between the two is that of unity and struggle of the opposites.

The buck on financial matters may lie on the doorstep of the Cabinet and their accounting officers.  But it also lies with the Legislature through its committees.  The Finance Committee will this financial year implement the decision of this House to organise quarterly budget reviews to ensure that departments operate within their budgets.  This will be an additional measure to the usual monitoring of the monthly expenditure of departments.

We do not encourage adversarial relations between portfolio committees and their relevant department, nor do we encourage a situation where portfolio committees become mere public relations bodies of the departments.  They must take the monthly expenditure of their departments seriously.  They must make use of their constitutional right to be involved in the preparation of their departmental budgets from the very beginning.  It is not sufficient to be told at the end of the budget process and accept that as a fait accompli.

The dynamic co-ordination between the Finance Committee and other portfolio committees must be reused and improved on.  It is not enough that the only sight of co-ordination is in the Chairperson's Committee meetings.

Lastly, Chair, we must remember that the measurement for good governance does not lie in how much political rhetoric we make, nor does it lie in how much noise we make about the lack of funding.  It lies in whether we can optimally use the funds available and deliver to the people without overspending our budget.  In a normal democracy if the governing party cannot work within the budget, they are removed.  We will see what the taxpayer of KwaZulu-Natal will do in 1999.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, hon member.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Aulsebrook, to address the House for 10 minutes.

MR J F AULSEBROOK:  Is it 10 minutes, Mr Chairman?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Yes.

MR J F AULSEBROOK:  All right.  That is the new list.  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  I must compliment the hon Minister on his very comprehensive address, and particularly his opening statement which reads, and I quote:

	Committed to providing and promoting efficient and effective financial administration and management, as well as specialised services to the Province of KwaZulu-Natal.

Certainly, I regard this as a declaration of commitment by the Department to this House, and to the people of KwaZulu-Natal.  The Minister also went on to say that he always gives us something to stimulate debate.  I am afraid that that addendum to his budget speech, left us rather dumbstruck with certain facts that, to say the least, were rather horrendous.

Mr Chairman, the Department of Finance is certainly the operational nerve centre of our administration.  It plays a co-ordinating and supervisory role in the budgetary process, and has the responsibility to ensure sound financial management in the Province.

The Department's functions go well beyond administrating the FMS system and in monitoring the administration expenditure, as we have heard from the hon Minister.  It certainly plays a pivotal role in the success or failure of the administration of this Province.

I would now like to turn to some of the initiatives that were undertaken by the Premier when he was the Minister of Finance last year.  These include the zero base budgeting which certainly commenced after our first budget Indaba.  Referring to that first budget Indaba, I am glad to hear that the Minister intends calling a second budget Indaba.  At that first budget Indaba we were also introduced to the concept of the Medium Term Expenditure Framework, which certainly gives us the ability to start planning in a three year cycle, which should be beneficial towards some quality delivery.

The other initiative taken by the Premier was certainly the introduction of the Budget Council.  This has certainly proved to be an effective and quick way of dealing with issues surrounding the budget and the other crisis issues.

Then of course the anti-fraud campaign has proved to be extremely successful, and in fact this Province was complimented in Cape Town at the NCOP for what it has done in so far as combatting fraud and corruption.

I would now like to turn to the Finance Committee.  If this House were to check, the Finance Committee certainly met more frequently than any other committee of the House, and this purely because of the nature of its responsibility.  The work of this Committee is demanding on its members.  Firstly, there is the budget process which spans certainly over nine months of the year.  We have the midyear budget review which was added last year, and has become an important feature in our financial year cycle.  Then there are regularly monthly meetings where the monthly expenditure of all departments is reviewed.  Certainly this Committee has a major responsibility and role to play in this Province.

Last year the Committee realised that while expenditure control was important, we found that by omission we had not sufficiently monitored the cash flow situation.  This has now become a major feature of this year's budget.  Certainly, we now will require all portfolio committees, when dealing with monthly expenditure of departments, to ensure that they are monitoring cash flow schedules of those departments as well.  The Portfolio Committee is certainly committed to co-operating with the Department and certainly we will assist wherever we can.

The next issue I would like to turn to - this week, Monday and Tuesday when I was down at NCOP, during the national debate of the Finance Department's budget, we made the Deputy Minister of Finance, Ms Gill Marcus, aware of our Province's plight of underfunding.  We were able to substantiate our claims by presenting facts and figures.  The Deputy Minister assured us that the Department would have a relook at the situation, especially when it comes to the R2,8 billion, that is in their budget, for allocation to departments, specifically to remedy certain disparities and unforeseen circumstances regarding the provinces.

It was interesting to note that provinces, like the Western Cape, Gauteng and North West, called for more stringent action to be taken against provinces that overspent.  I must admit that these same provinces, when they had their opportunity to speak, spoke about issues of macro economic policy, monetary policy and international economics, whereas all the other provinces were more concerned about the very basic issues.  They have the privilege to do that.  They are quite content with their allocations, and this in itself tells us the story in the entire picture.

I also caution that as a Province, when we appeal for increased allocation, we must substantiate our claims with facts and figures.  We have them.  We have been given a lot more here today.  We have a very strong case, but let us not cloud the issue with emotion.

GAMING

I would like to refer to gaming.  Our cautious approach to the introduction of the legalised gaming industry is starting to pay dividends.  We may not have been the first province to rush into it, but when one looks at the bids that we have received for our five casino licences, they are of an extremely high quality.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Two minutes left.

MR J F AULSEBROOK:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  To such an extent that the Board will have their time cut out selecting the preferred bids.  The introduction of casinos will mean that we will receive an investment in excess of R3 billion.  But a more exciting aspect is the high level of job creation that will flow out of this.  The construction phase which could last two to three years, offers a wide variety of employment opportunities.  Then there are the operational staff associated with casino complex developments, and these are permanent jobs.  Really, job creation is our most critical issue in this Province.

Another very positive benefit is the fact that development will be spread throughout the Province.  It is not concentrated in the Durban/Maritzburg area.  It is well distributed.  While I was in Cape Town yesterday, I was very encouraged and excited to see newspaper ads for casinos advertising jobs, pages of them.  Right, they were not for this Province, but certainly our turn is coming.  Our casinos will be advertising and employing people in this Province in the not too distant future.  Certainly, our legalised casino industry, that we are introducing, is going to be the most significant initiative to promote the economy of this Province, the most significant in years. 

With regard to Route and Site, I implore the Minister to hasten the issuing of those licences.  We all know it took two years to appoint the National Gaming Board, and I certainly know that it was June last year that I met with the Portfolio Committee and sat on that selection panel to select the two/three national members, including the Chairman who is present with us today.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time is up.

MR J F AULSEBROOK:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  I have pleasure to call upon the hon member Mr Haygarth, to take the floor for 10 minutes.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Thank you, Mr Chair.  Mr Chair, I would like to start off in my inimitable way, I think the Minister referred to it, to the Department's report on page 34, paragraph 6.2.2.27.  It says:

	Cash flow management has been eased further by the introduction of an additional control mechanism that encompasses reconciliation of gross salaries, deductions and nett salaries immediately after every main and supplementary run.

Really, Mr Chairman, one would have expected that all computer programmes have the necessary controls to be implemented immediately thereafter.  No document should ever be issued from a computer control room without it having been reconciled with the controls that are normally there.  I express concern if this is the way it applies to all of the computer programmes in the section, then there is cause for concern, and I hope that the auditors that are being employed will have a look at this.  I raise this particularly, because one of my recent documents that I received from the Department, the upper section and the lower section did not appear to reconcile, and that is of some concern if that is in fact the case.

The second point I want to make is that the Minister makes strong reference to the introduction of an internal audit, a viewpoint which this party has been requesting for some considerable time, and he explains the lack of finance which has delayed the introduction thereof.

Internal audits are an essential mechanism in strict financial control, but they are not the only mechanism.  What I want to say, and I did write to the Minister and he responded to my question in connection with internal check systems.  He said that all departmental heads were aware of the need to implement and oversee the implementation of internal check systems.   Mr Chair, that with the extent of corruption and fraud that appears to be prevalent in this Province, simply the internal check systems cannot be working.  They simply cannot be working.  I understand, naturally, that in internal check systems you are dependent upon the honesty and integrity of the two people that are normally involved in such a system, and you are dependent on there being no collusion between the two of them.  That of course, is the weakness of the internal check system.

But, unless you monitor it and discipline those who fail to implement it, then you are not going to have a successful fiscal discipline in regard to the control of expenditure.  Perhaps for those who are failing to monitor and implement these systems carefully and properly, that it is a system whereby the number of staff in the departments, that the Minister would like to see being removed, could be removed by strict discipline through the normal conditions of service.  I understand the difficulties the Minister has in this respect, and I merely say that there is need for everybody in the service to understand what this is all about.

The third thing I want to say, Mr Chair, is the subject of deficit financing.  Deficit revenue financing is a highway to disaster and financial bankruptcy.  That is why the Minister of Local Government ensures that in any legislation which he has to control Local Government, that Local Government is not allowed to budget for a deficit, and if it incurs a deficit at the end of a year, it is required to take remedial measures very quickly.

But if you look around the world you will find that New York City was a place that went in for deficit revenue budgeting.  And what happened to it?  It went bankrupt.  That is what happened.  If you see what is happening in the financial crisis that faces local authorities in this country today, you find that Johannesburg metro is an example, has borrowed from its regional services levies to meet the revenue deficit.  And Durban, if I read the paper correctly, is just applying a R150 million of services levies to meet their projected deficit for the coming year.

Once you get into the clutches of deficit financing, it is extremely difficult to get out of it, and that is the Minister's dilemma.  Is how he can keep the people who are spending the money under adequate control, to make sure that not only do we keep within the budget, but we repay those loans and whatever interest bearing needs there are in connection therewith.

In financial regulations, for example in Local Government, no person can make a decision in regard to expenditure without producing a financial certificate from the Treasurer that says money is available to meet the cost thereof.  Now one must ask then, and we take the Education Department as an example, how are decisions given to increase the number of temporary teachers or whoever, and to alter the periods at which their contracts should terminate without due regard to the financial implications thereof.  Are people simply making decisions regardless of the implications?  Because if they are, that is quite beyond the bounds of acceptability in any public service.

If I, as Town Clerk of the city, had taken those sort of actions in the City of Durban, the Minister of Local Government would have had me fired, and he would not even have blushed at it, he would have taken it straight away.  He would never have permitted a local authority to carry on in that sort of shape and form.  It is completely unacceptable that that should happen.  We just simply cannot have the people who are managing departments, we have talked about these financial responsibilities being placed on various people.  We simply cannot permit them to carry on in the way in which they did in the last financial year, carry on regardless, because, as I have said before, that is completely unacceptable.

The Minister has said categorically that he undertakes to make sure that his budget is not exceeded.  When he said his budget, he meant the Department of Finance's budget and the Department of Local Government's budget.  He did not talk for anybody else, because when the Finance Committee met and had written submissions from him, and all of the departments, there were a number of them which did not commit themselves to managing their budget within the limitations that there were.  That is significant, because unless we have the same commitment that Minister Miller has made to this House from each and every one of the other Ministers, we cannot be certain that we are going to finish with a budget imbalance.

The Department of Education in particular relied on its statement that it had to maintain national norms and standards.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Two minutes left.

MR G HAYGARTH:  Thank you.  And it used that to breach the budget regardless of fiscal discipline.  It is significant that in this morning's Mercury Minister Bengu says this, he was talking about taking the allocation of Education funds through the Central Government, and he said:

	Even then, however, we would still be obliged to staff our schools according to budgetary dictates.

"According to budgetary dictates", and I am sorry the Minister of Education is not here, and with those other Ministers involved, where the budget is the law.  The budget is the law and the departments have to comply.  Professor Bengu goes on to say:

	The Government was working around the clock to avert the threatened strike but warned that the Government would not compromise the fundamental principle that the public service was budget-driven.

I cannot think of better words to explain to everybody exactly what is involved in the dilemma that we are currently in.  Unless everybody is willing to meet those criteria and to accept that the budget is the law, we are in for another disaster.

I want to make quick reference to what the Minister said about the impact of no fixed investment.  That impacts severely through the whole economic fabric of this Province in respect of building construction, the architects, the engineers, the surveyors, the building suppliers, everybody who is involved in the creation of fixed investment is detrimentally affected the moment a major public undertaking of this size, in this Province is restricted in the amount of money it can put into that service.  I want to emphasise that.  The Minister has said, the impact goes far beyond what it does to us in regard to our assets.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time is up.

MR G HAYGARTH:  It affects the livelihood of a large number of people.  Thank you very much, Mr Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  I now wish to call upon the hon member Mr Mzobe, to address the House for 10 minutes.

MR M R MZOBE:  Hon Chairperson, and members of the Provincial Legislature.  Although money is not everything, it is, however, a commercial fact that it is the life and blood of any administration or any business undertaking.  Sir, it is equally true that this reality can only be achieved, when people in their respective localities, are given power to govern themselves in order that they may exercise their economic and entrepreneurial skills to augment and stabilise the country's economy.

It is also an unwavering reality that without a stable economy, business cannot withstand the test of time.  They simply close down, as we see it happening today, which has sadly resulted in skyrocketing unemployment, which has resulted in untold criminality that we see prevailing in our country.

It is history that the majority of the black people of South Africa were intentionally, and systematically left out of the mainstream of economy from the very onset.  Commercial subjects which prepare people to participate in the development of the country's economy was unheard of in black schools.  Those of us who are engaged in business merely got through the back door into the business world.

It comes as no surprise that the majority of these people were so disadvantaged.  In his capacity as the Minister of Education and Bantu Affairs, Dr Hendrik Verwoerd had the following to say, and I quote:

	Let us educate the natives to be hewers of wood and drawers of water only in our own kitchens.

However, Mr Chairperson, let us turn our scars into stars.  To redress the imbalances of the past, education must be changed to conform with the present social, political and economic circumstances.  It is therefore in this context that I appeal to both the public sector and the private sector to train their respective employees to acquire the necessary skills, and expertise with the view of achieving a stable and prosperous economy.

It is a hypocrisy of the highest order and mockery of the democracy, of some members of this hon Legislature, to deny the fact that a call for sanctions and disinvestment to be imposed against South Africa, is a great cause of our present financial constraints.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M R MZOBE:  It would be grossly irresponsible of our brothers and sisters in the ANC camp, to deny the fact that their act of making this country ungovernable, is responsible for the anarchy that prevails in this country today.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order please!

MR M R MZOBE:  The people of South Africa must now be informed of the fact that it is the ANC led National Government through its National Minister, Professor Sibusiso Bengu that is responsible for the retrenchment of temporary employed teachers, which is the first of its kind in the history of education, and will shortly affect some of the other public sector employees.

Mr Chairman, the African National Congress failed dismally to honour its promises.  It is no less than His Excellency, the State President Dr Nelson Mandela who promised the South African electorate that there would be 10 years of free education.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR M R MZOBE:  These promises did not materialise.  Today we see teachers who are the breadwinners of their families being retrenched by the same Government that made such promises.

It is now incumbent upon the South African electorate to decide whether they are prepared to accept the same deceit, once again, during the 1999 Provincial and National elections.  The people of South Africa must be warned that once bitten twice shy.  The electorate must be made aware of the fact, that it is the duty of the Central Government to allocate sufficient funds to provinces in order that they may execute their functions effectively.

This would avoid the chaotic situation that we experience in education presently.  Sir, hon members of the Provincial Legislature, it is my strongest contention that the people of South Africa will only feel a touch of democracy, only if, and only when autonomy is granted to provinces.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!  May I interrupt the speaker please.  Let us take the point of order.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Chairman, I refer you to Rule No 54, where a member is not to be interrupted while he is making a speech.  Mr Chairman, we are not getting interjections or anything from that side.  A continuous cacophony of sound, every time someone says anything they do not like.  I ask you, Mr Chairman, to please keep an eye on it and rule if necessary. 

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR M R MZOBE:  Thank you, sir.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Mrs Cronje.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Chairperson, the hon Mr Tarr seems to be losing his stomach for politics.  He has repeatedly been complaining in this House during this sitting.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  That is not a point of order, Mr Chairman.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order please! 

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Chairperson, the hon Mr Tarr did not take a point of order either.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we hear the point before I make a ruling.

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  The hon Mr Tarr also did not take a point of order.  Members on this side of the House have the right to interject as long as it is not outside what is normally accepted as parliamentary bounds.  I submit respectfully, that they have not done so, and if the other side is so squeamish that they cannot be members of Parliament, then they should not make themselves ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Where is the point of order?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Chairman, that is not a point of order.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order!  I am giving a ruling.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Which rule did we speak under?  Rule 54.

AN HON MEMBER:  Mr Tarr is speaking rubbish.

AN HON MEMBER:  You are speaking rubbish.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I am giving my ruling on the matter.  Hon members, please, we have said time and again in this House that members may heckle, but please not in such a manner that the person cannot talk.

AN HON MEMBER:  Point of order, Mr Chairman.  Rubbish is unparliamentary.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we all respect that Rule.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order please!

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hon Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we hear Dr Sutcliffe please.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hon Chair, on a point of order.  Could you ensure that people in fact debate points and not read speeches, because when they read speeches we are trying to encourage them ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Is this a point of order?

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  This is a point of order, because the rules say do not read your speech.  So do not allow them to read their speeches.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please! Order please!  I am ruling on this matter.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Mr Chairman, on a point of order.  The hon Sutcliffe here should actually have raised that matter before the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee read his speech.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order please!  Can I stop discussion on this matter.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  On a point of order, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we hear Baba Mkhwanazi.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Mr Chairman, both sides of the House are out of order, in the real word "out of order", because the Chairperson is not even given the opportunity to rule.  It is chaotic.  It is out of order.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you for rescuing me there, Mr Mkhwanazi.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can I say something please.  We have agreed, we have said it time and again that people should not heckle to such an extent that the member cannot speak.  I have been calling for Order! Order!, but I did not think that the member who was on the floor was disrupted to the extent that he could not make his speech.  That is why I tolerated what the members were doing, because even on the other side there was heckling as well.  But on the issue of reading of speeches, I think we have discussed  that point time and again.  I do not want to talk about it, because the Rules do state that members should not read from their speeches, but members have been reading speeches in this House.  At this point the hon member has taken 6,34 minutes of his time.  He is left with three and a few seconds.  Could you please proceed.

MR M R MZOBE:  Thank you, hon Chairperson.  The people of South Africa, I say, must be warned that once bitten twice shy.  The electorate must be made aware of the fact that it is the duty of the Central Government to allocate sufficient funds to provinces in order for them to execute their functions effectively.  This would really avoid the chaotic situation that we are experiencing in education presently.  Sir, hon members of the Provincial Legislature, it is my strongest contention that the people of South Africa will only feel the touch of democracy once autonomy is granted to provinces.

Finally, sir, it is against this background that I appeal to the Central Legislature to consider the devolution of power from the first, second and the third spheres of Government.  I thank you, Mr Chairman.  I support the budget.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, hon member.  In terms of my amended list, the hon member Mr Rajbansi will take the floor for nine minutes.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I notice that the 1999 election campaign has reached this chamber, and if they continue like this then the beneficiaries will be on the point of ...

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  I rise on a point of order, Mr Chair.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Can we hear Mr Edwards on the point of order.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  I have the speakers' list here.  Mr Rajbansi has six minutes, and not nine.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  In terms of my amended list, he has nine minutes.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  I believe the names have been switched around.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Chairman, as I indicated to the table, there was a swop over between Mr Nel and Mr Rajbansi, since he had to leave early.  The time swopped with them.  Mr Rajbansi does not take Mr Nel's time.  Mr Nel has nine minutes, Mr Rajbansi has six.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Well, the list I was given indicates that Mr Rajbansi has nine minutes, and Mr Nel six.  I do not know what is happening.

MR A RAJBANSI:  I am grateful.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  But if that is the case, Mr Rajbansi will have six minutes.  You have taken only 12 seconds of your time so far.

MR A RAJBANSI:  The hon Mr Edwards of the National Party is correct.  But in any case, in those six minutes I can push in a 100 minutes of the National Party points.  [LAUGHTER]

Mr Chairman, I want to express our appreciation towards the hon Minister and the Department, and especially a very hard working Portfolio Committee for the excellent task they have performed.  We must not lose sight of the fact that we had very wise words from the hon Mr Haygarth, who is well-known for financial administration when he was the former Chief Executive of Durban.  We have a conflict between what is laid down in the Constitution on national norms and national standards, and what the hon Mr Haygarth quoted the hon Minister of National Education, who said that things were going to be budgeted-driven.

I express the wish that the teacher strike will be averted.  This is not a strike by SADTU, it is a strike which is supported by practically every teacher organisation in this country, and I believe practically every teacher organisation in the country. I heard on the radio the other day that the Afrikaans Teacher Organisations have also decided to join SADTU.

I want to appeal to the hon Minister to take the question of the new found actions of fraud very, very seriously.  We must suggest that for those who still want to perpetrate crime in the face of the Good Governance programmes initiated by the Cabinet, we must consider the Arab system of justice.  I will not go into much detail.  The hon Mr Meer in his next contribution might suggest what the Arab system is.

I want to deal with another aspect of the Minister's newly allocated function, and that is the gaming industry.  The hon Minister was quite correct when he expressed the concerns on behalf of the horse racing industry.  There is no doubt about the fact that the casino industry is going to have a tremendous negative impact on the racing industry.  I want to suggest that we examine this in two ways.

When you go to the racecourse and if you look at the industry as a whole, it has not changed.  We need black African empowerment in the racing industry.  Once we start black African empowerment the racing industry will improve to such an extent that it might dwarf the casino industry.  I want to suggest to the KwaZulu-Natal Racing Services, and the hon Minister, and the Department to look into this.

Secondly, I notice in the Minister's speech that the off-course tote facility is actually carrying the racing industry, in spite of the fact that the on-course betting has declined.  Attendance at the courses has declined, but the off-course tote turnover has increased by 20%.  I want to suggest that the Off-course Tote Board, and those who are in charge of restructuring the bookmaking industry, seriously examine taking racing to the masses.

I want to give you an example, and I do not say this is happening now.  There are six off-course totes in Chatsworth.  The manner in which authorities were granted was not on merit, it is who you know and what you know etcetera.  Of the six off-course totes in Chatsworth, four have been allocated to one family.  Four to one family.  I hope that this type of nonsense on the part of the Tote Board will cease to exist.  They are not a law unto themselves, they exist as a result of provincial or national legislation.

But coming to the casino industry.  The hon Minister indicated that he is meeting with the Chairperson of the National Gambling Board, who is present in the House today.  I want to very strongly advise that after much deliberation, after many public hearings and inputs from the relevant organisations and institutions, the Portfolio Committee, the Cabinet and the Provincial Gambling Board, agreed on a set of rules in respect of Site and Route operators.  We must consider this against the background, that for both the Provincial and National Government the promotion of SMMEs are afforded a very high status.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  One minute left.

MR A RAJBANSI:  We must not do anything to destroy the small businessman in this industry.  We are very appreciative of the fact that the hon Minister indicated that the draft regulations for bingo is ready.  I want to also suggest that there are forces in this Province who want to grab the monopoly in the bingo industry.  May I suggest that we look at granting licences to certain organisations that want to improve the social conditions in our society.  May I suggest, for example, in Durban, let us try to give bingo licences to those governing bodies who want to operate bingos for the promotion of education, for meeting the shortfalls in the schools, either on an individual or regional basis.

I want to say, Mr Chairman, I might be taking leave, I know Dr Sutcliffe was trying to delay my participation.  I am a horse owner.  My horse is running tonight, and I want to declare this interest.  Dr Sutcliffe might come in with some interjections.  I cannot give any tips, my horse is badly drawn.  If it loses that might be the reason.  Thank you.  [LAUGHTER]

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Sorry, hon Chair.  Can I ask him a question?

THE CHAIRPERSON:  No, his time is over.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  The problem with his horse is it needed a majority hind, not a minority front.  [LAUGHTER]

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Next to speak is the hon member Mrs Mkhize, for 10 minutes.  Oh, she is not in the House.

AN HON MEMBER:  Yes, she is not feeling well.  She just went out.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  I will move on then to the next speaker.  Mr I C Meer, who will speak for 15 minutes please.

MR I C MEER:  Mr Chairman, the Finance Portfolio Committee presented its report to this Legislature, whose responsibility it is, and it is interesting that the debate on the budget as a whole has repeatedly raised certain matters which require correction.

Before I continue, I want to compliment the hon Minister of Finance for his expected high standard of presentation to this House.  I want to say that as far as this Portfolio Committee is concerned, and individually I am concerned, we will give him as much help as we can to see that the finances of this Province as they are fairly high, is kept at the highest possible level for the admiration of the whole country.

We are not a poor country, and let us understand our collective responsibility to South Africa as a whole, of which we are an integral part.  Let us not repeatedly create the impression that there is conflict between other parts of this country and ourselves.  That is the wrong approach in this period of reconstruction and development.

The total amount of money that is raised at present in South Africa is sufficient to meet all our needs.  The difficulties are created in respect of KwaZulu-Natal for two separate reasons.

One, R40 billion towards which we make a mighty contribution goes towards the payment of national debt, interest alone.

Secondly, this particular Province has for a very long time been treated like a Cinderella Province, and as the Chairman of the Finance Committee has pointed out, we are annually being upgraded and no one can say that in the last allocation the R17 billion was not in keeping with what is required of this Province.  But what we can say is that there is a big backlog that has to be dealt with.

In that situation, let us also admit, economists who are not wedded to this particular economy, which is only 200 years old, it is known as a capitalist system, even the Pope had to point out when he spoke in Havana, that while he wanted greater liberty in that country, that capitalism was making the poor poorer.  He said that.  A very important statement coming from the head of the moral values for which human beings stand.  Here there are other economic systems older than 200 years, which say that taking or giving of interest is totally unacceptable and a great sin.  [LAUGHTER]

We may laugh at it today, but the day will dawn when humanity makes adjustments and we will say that, as a modern writer on History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward   Gibbon has given this masterpiece to us, there are valuable additions to that finding.  They say the Roman Empire collapsed for only one reason, and that was the giving and taking of interest, and we may find again that even the greatest super power that the world has may fall just as the tigers of the East have become lambs.  [LAUGHTER]  Great power can also become a lamb if we do not check this particular evil which exists.

I am not going to enter into an argument as to who created this debt.  If that R40 billion is directed back to us, then we would get about R6 to R8 billion out of that for this Province and we would not have a single problem with education or any of the other departments in which we are running short.  So that is a fundamental approach.  Please let us not use the argument which is fallacious, that somebody at the top level is doing us down.  Put yourself at the top level and you will be able to do no better.  

It is wrong in fact to refer to our history of how the liberation movement developed.  I was party to it.  We suffered and made sacrifices, and I do not want people who made no sacrifices to stand up and say: "You are doing this wrong, and you did this wrong, and you did that wrong".  We collectively brought about a position which enables each and every member of this Parliament to be with us, whether they were our oppressors or whether they were part of the oppressed community of South Africa.  We not only liberated the oppressed, but we also liberated our own oppressors in the process of creating a democracy.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR I C MEER:  In this situation I want this House to take into account very carefully that this Portfolio Committee came to you with a unanimous consensus report.  I want to warn you against one very powerful factor which goes against democracy, and that is to call for self-censorship.  There was a move that this report goes back to that Committee to censor it.  I will not be party to self-censorship.  The South African press that existed when I became a journalist in 1937, a large number of those were wiped out because of self-censorship.  One of the most important of those papers was the Rand Daily Mail, which died, not because somebody killed it from outside, but from within.  Self-censorship destroyed that paper.

We on that Committee, and as a member of it I want to assure this House that we will not stand for self-censorship.  When we presented that report, and the Minister has not criticised it, nobody has criticised it, that report was like a judgment of a superior court given to you, and our duty was to do so.  From the moment that report was tabled in this House, the function of this Committee came to an end.  The latin words, pity the Speaker is not present, he is my leader as far as latin phrases go, he would have said readily, "Yes, Mr Meer, I agree with you.  You became functus officio".  You cannot ask that body now to go and review its own findings.  It is not allowed.  It is illegal.  It is out.  What has now happened is that this report has been presented, and if there are comments on it then this House must correct it, if there is anything that they want to correct.  Because again, the tyranny of the majority can perhaps wipe out what has been achieved by this Committee collectively, and democracy has often been defined as not only the tyranny of the majority, but very often as happened, it was a tyranny of the minority in the days of the classical period.  In the modern period, democracy can be a tyranny of the majority.

Every aspect of our expenditure requires to be carefully considered.  Every aspect.  Is there a single person who can honestly stand up and say in this House that we have been sufficiently frugal, that we have wiped out all forms of corruption from every department?  We cannot say that.  Until we achieve that, collectively we have a responsibility.  It is my final concern to assist the Minister, because the buck does not only stop with him, it stops with all of us because he is our Minister.  He is not a Minister of only a political party, but he is a Minister of this House.

In respect of that matter, I want to raise a very small point, because if you put the pennies in the right place, the pound will look after itself.  I received on three occasions postage stamps that have come by post.  One came with the Provincial Gazette, it came from the Province.  No letter to say by whom it was  sent, no individual name there, no individual department, it did not say how many stamps were sent to me.  I could not read the letter and say whether the stamps were right in terms of what was said, I do not know if somebody who opened it in my office whether he pocketed half and gave me only half.  I do not know if the person who posted it from here took half and pocketed half.  This type of activity must cease.  I could not go to the right person.  I received it three times.  It might have been that somebody may have sent it to me six times.  There was nothing to say this is the first instalment or second instalment, they did not even say what I must do with the postage stamp.  They assumed that I had some knowledge that you stick this on an envelope before you put it in the post box.  [LAUGHTER]  But it did not say so.

I raised the matter with the hon the Minister himself, and I said tell me who sent these stamps.  And if this little thing can go wrong between somebody here and myself, how much wrong is going on in so many different departments, when nobody knows what the amount of the cheques are that are sent out, what the amount of the cash is that is sent and the receiver does not, not the Receiver in the sense of the person who chases you for tax, but the person who receives the amount does not know what is going on.  If we can put this right at our level, we have got a hope of putting other things right.  On the BBC there was an important coverage that in Pakistan, unlike us here, there are ghost schools.  Schools for which money was given and the schools were never built, and in those schools there are 25 teachers who do not exist.  So a ghost school, ghost teachers, where does it stop?  Stop the postage stamps and correct ourselves and we will be able to correct others.  This is a very important task that lies ahead of us.

I am certain that money will be raised from the casinos.  I am certain.  I wanted to say what I wanted to say on casinos at ~Ulundi~, and all the pressure from the prospective licence seekers ceased on me.  At least I was free after that.  I say it is a great sin, and this is my personal view.  About this matter we must be very careful.  I want to just give one warning.  The effect of gambling on our schools, the effect of gambling on our society, is a matter which we must carefully pay attention to while this extra form of revenue is made available.

In the United States of America the increasing number of small insolvencies have been fully investigated.  The majority of those small insolvencies are due directly to the fact that people connected with those businesses got involved in that type of activity which brings quick returns, just as those economic systems which prohibits the taking of interest, that system also prohibits gambling, and regards it a sin.  So although this is my personal opinion on a matter which I have expressed before on this side of the House, it does not place any restriction on the expression of your individual opinion, and as such I have freely been saying that I am totally against this great sin, which results in such tremendous havoc.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR I C MEER:  I appeal to the House, that where this Committee has acted in the interest of the Province as a whole, without taking into account what amount of additional votes you can bring to a particular political party, that it is in that spirit which we require, it is in that spirit for which we are elected, and if that spirit prevails then only we can really give the assistance which the Minister of Finance requires from us.  We can then say when we meet again after a year, when we review our position, we can say we are proud and prouder of the achievement of this House.  We are proud that the head of that is a Minister who has been able to listen to us, and has been able to also listen to us on the question of casinos and how this is a sin. He has been able to listen how postage stamps should not be sent without the name of the sender being furnished, and we can then go in with the twin race horses, frugality and efficiency, and then we will win all the races.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Meer.  Next to speak is the hon member Mr Nel, who will speak for nine minutes.

MR W U NEL:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  The previous hon member, the distinguished hon member Meer, ended by referring to the twin race horses as frugality and efficiency.  Indeed if we ride those two horses we will get a lot further on the money that we have.

But as I rise, I know that I do it at the end of a debate which is about a Government in crisis.  I am also rising with the knowledge that it is not just this Provincial Government that is in crisis, but also the National Government that is in crisis.  The Departments of Justice, of Safety and Security, Correctional Services, and with the pending election I am sure also Home Affairs, to name but a few, I am sure are facing a very severe crisis in the current financial year.

To return to our Province of KwaZulu-Natal, the budget estimates tell the very sad story of a provincial administration in paralysis.  Very much like a mouse before an approaching snake.  It recognises the pending disaster, but in that last moment is unable to take evasive action.

What should we do?  Of course, we can point out that our crisis is the product of a bankrupt inheritance from a previous dispensation.  We can also say, and we have to admit to ourselves, that it is the product of missed opportunities, window opportunities for growth in the last four or five years since April 1994 which we have simply squandered when we have grown our economy at about 2% to a maximum maybe of 3%, if we were lucky, when it should have been 6% to 8% easily achievable in the favourable climate that existed there.  Had those opportunities been taken, we would have been here spending twice as much money from the taxes that we have raised from this economy of ours, and then that foreign debt that the hon Mr Meer refers to could be honoured without stressing our budget.  It will have to be honoured despite the stresses of our budget because we dare not renege on our debt, much of which I must point out is domestic debt, not foreign debt.

Sir, but the crisis is also the product of an ambivalent Government, National and in the Province, which has been fiddling while Rome burns, and not taking the unpopular steps that we should have taken, the tough steps, the discipline in finance.  But also the simple discipline of extracting an honest day's work out of the tens of thousands of people who work for this Province.

It is not a happy day which brings the Democratic Party to oppose the budget, a budget that we believe has got the wrong priorities, and a budget that is unfair to our Province in particular.  But lastly, also a budget that I regret to say in our judgment is going to be overspent in this year in spite of all the undertakings, is going to be overspent by a billion Rand unless, sir, the Province receives an adequate retrenchment tool, and on top of that tool is then prepared to take the unpopular political step of implementing that tool, and using it.

Sir, I must congratulate the hon Minister on the addendum to his speech, and on the honest and blunt way in which he put the problem.  That is refreshing indeed.  We have for several years highlighted from these benches the fundamental flaws, and done so again this year.  Today the Minister of Finance, on behalf of our Provincial Government, puts the cards squarely on the table.

The Minister says to us that expressed in percentage terms, this Province spends 92% of its budget on personnel, transfer payments and fixed costs, and only 8% on productive service delivery orientated activities.  The result is that schools have no books, hospitals and clinics have no medicines, despite the fact that we have built a hundred of them, roads are full of potholes, there is deteriorating infrastructure, shabby buildings, no capital expenditure and no fixed investment.  That is a sorry state of affairs.

I have calculated that, aside from the fact in the current budget, as the Minister points out, R1,5 billion of the R17,9 billion is the only bit of money that is available for books and medicines and roads.  If we had maintained the ratios that existed in 1995/1996 where only 47,1% of our budget was spent on personnel costs, compared to the 60,2% now, if we could have spent this year 47,1% as we did in 1995/1996, then instead of the R1,5 billion we would have had R3,8 billion for bricks and mortar, and books and medicines.  About two and a half times of what we have now.

The Minister goes on and says:

	Yet in the 12 months, 30 April 1997 to 30 April 1998, the number of civil servants in KwaZulu-Natal increased from 169 079 to 183 338, an increase of 14 259!  In the nine provinces as a whole the numbers for the same period increased from 832 000 to 900 000, an increase of 68 000 (in round terms).

Sir, that is the crux of the problem.  The growing bureaucracy in our country, and in particular in this Province.  That is why we are in a state of paralysis.  But enough of the growing bureaucracy.

I want to issue a challenge to the Government on transformation.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR W U NEL:  There are at this time civil servants, particularly since the hon member asked, particularly the Central Government and the ANC.  We hear a lot about transformation, and it is undoubtedly true that we need urgent measures to create advancement opportunities for people who were previously disadvantaged, either because of their sex, their race or disabilities, and something has to be done about that.  But, sir, at this very time there are civil servants who are working in crisis situations even to the point of damaging their own health, and we know that.  There are teachers who are grappling to teach up to six grades and 50 pupils all at once, in some isolated rural schools, and doing their very best against all the odds to ensure that the pupils are not disadvantaged.

At the very same time, we have wardens at the Pietermaritzburg Prison, of whom an official report in October 1996 said that even if they went on strike it would make no difference because very few of the members were actually working anyway.  There are also headmasters and teachers of schools in this Province who are hardly at school at all, many having second jobs or businesses, but still being paid by the Education Department.  There are some headmasters who are chairs of Regional Councils for which they are handsomely paid, together with motor cars and other perks.  
AN HON MEMBER:  And overseas trips.

MR W U NEL:  Yet, sir, they appear to have little conscience about the impact of their absence on the administration of the schools at which they are supposed to hold headmaster's positions.

Sir, this is the other kind of transformation that is required.  The transformation of addressing the simple challenge of requiring an honest day's work from the tens of thousands of people currently paid by this Province.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  One minute left.

MR W U NEL:  Which are by no stretch of anybody's imagination are doing an honest job.  That is the transformation that would have a more dramatic effect on this Province and the poor people who are looking for delivery than any other thing, and it would cost us nothing.

If we had discipline in the Pietermaritzburg Prison, the prisoners would be rehabilitated, using them to clean up their own filth in their own environment at no cost.  We can do it with the current budget.

Talk of transformation is all hot air, if the Government pays no attention whatsoever to these very basics.  Ministers who are unable to recognise these shortcomings and do something about it should be replaced immediately.  A civil service, even in this Province which is a regime that protects the lazy and the slothful, and victimises those who are conscientious and hard working is the first thing that we need to transform, sir, then our budget will get much further.  I thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Nel.  Next on the list of speakers is the hon member Mr Hamilton, who will address the House for 10 minutes.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Mr Chairman, can I start by congratulating our Minister, and congratulating the Portfolio Committee and its Chairman on a very difficult job and a well done job this year.

Mr Chairman, let us face it, we all know it and we have all said it, there simply is not enough money in South Africa, in the tax base in South Africa, to meet the increase and the demand for goods and services that we as Government in South Africa are expected to deliver.  We sit with reducing tax revenues because we have a contracting economy.  On top of that, we have a low tax morality.  A poor record of catching tax delinquents and evaders.

The first thing I would like to say, Mr Chairman, when the Receiver of Revenue in Durban estimates that up to 50% of people carrying out a business function in Durban do not have a tax number, something is very wrong in the State of Denmark.  What we also need to do when we catch tax delinquents is put them in gaol.  Put them in gaol like they do in the United States, in Germany, in Holland.  You are more scared to commit a tax fraud there than to commit murder.

On top of that, it is unlikely we will meet Minister Trevor Manuel's growth projections for this coming year of 2,5%.  We may be as low as 1,5%.  The run on the Rand which we are experiencing is caused by one, the jaundiced eye with which the world is now looking at developing economies, and that is as a result of the Asian crisis of course, we know that, but it is a fact of life, and the Russian crisis.  And what makes us doubly vulnerable,  is the lack of savings in our country.  Our currency is very vulnerable because we are dependent on inflows of hot money to make us clean.  And yet, Mr Chairman, what do we do?  We tax on your earnings.  We then say to you we want you to save.  You put your money in the savings account and what do we do, we tax you on that.  What is wrong with us?

AN HON MEMBER:  Shame.

MR A J HAMILTON:  It is a shame.  Whoever said that, it is a shame.  If we had decent savings in this country our currency would not be experiencing the runs it is experiencing now.  I am suggesting that we find a way to reward savers.

AN HON MEMBER:  No, you do not understand it at all.

MR A J HAMILTON:  I do understand it, with respect to the hon member, I do not need a lecture from him.

AN HON MEMBER:  Let us have a debate on that one.

MR A J HAMILTON:  Can I suggest that what we need to do, and I know it is out of context, but I speak for it because it is important, that we should reward the savers and mortgage bond repayments are savings.  They are actually increasing the stock of valuable assets in this country.

Mr Chairman, furthermore, if the markets do not settle down and recover, there will almost certainly be an increase in the interest rates, with disastrous effects for any growth at all in our economy, and even less tax to distribute next year to do even more work.

I want to reiterate what has already been said in this House, what has been said by the State President, by our own Premier and by the Minister.  The State is not an employment agency.  There is only one thing to do and that is to reduce our staffing levels, to cost no more than the 85% that our Minister has referred to today.  Doubling our discretionary is part of our budget.  Doubling it.  It is absolutely unbelievable that in the situation that Governments in South Africa find themselves, that there should be 68 000 new employees in the provinces.

Mr Chairman, we need to privatise as many functions as possible in Government, and in so doing be more efficient and reduce our staffing numbers.  A prime candidate to start with is the Province's fleet of vehicles and concomitant service and repair facilities which are a potential nest of crime and corruption.  We all know it.  Let us get rid of it.  The Premier has already started things in that area, but there is a big potential pay off for us, as well as reducing our staff numbers.  A motion was tabled in this House on my behalf this morning to this effect.

In addition, Mr Chairman, everywhere that we find corruption and fraud, where it raises its ugly head, it must be ruthlessly cut off, and the culprits be prosecuted and gaoled, or better still, banished to the South Pole, because they are traitors.  They are traitors to our people, to the people that do not have school books, that do not have teachers and that do not have schools.  They are being shamelessly exploited by corrupt officials, and by corrupt private sector people as well.  For every corrupt official there is probably a corrupt private sector man.

The Premier's hotline is a wonderful tool.  It has been a great success, and I would like to suggest that that should be strengthened.  Public participation and awareness on this opportunity to help put our country on a strong road should be encouraged, and possibly the introduction of rewards of 10% or 20% of recovered goods and recovered cash should be given to these people.  That way we will make every criminal terrified, because they will know around every corner someone is waiting to tell on them.

One thing is certain, Mr Chairman, major staff reductions must take place and for this to happen we need the long promised retrenchment tool which the Central Government is promising to give us.  They need it too, as much as we do.  So let us get it on the table and let us get on with the job.

I would like to see pressure brought to bear on the Minister of Finance to fully embrace the FFC's recommendations on the equitable distribution of tax revenues between provinces.  This is vital for us.  There are terrible imbalances.  We know there are difficulties, but let us start.  Perhaps, Mr Chairman, the Minister might be able to negotiate our debt repayment terms over three years instead of what appears from his briefing, and very wonderful briefing he gave us last night, it appears we are expected to wipe this debt out in one year.  Maybe we could hopefully extend that over a three year term.  But at the end of the day, Mr Chairman, what is wrong with South Africa is we are not growing our economy.

Governments have failed to give a vision of the future to our people.  We can extend.  There are certain key industries, and certain key situations that we should be targeting to grow and create jobs.  The most obvious one is tourism.  Year after year after year, long before this Government, I have looked at the tourist industry and wondered to myself what it is about Governments, if they really believe in job creation, that leads them to treat the tourism industry as some kind of a Cinderella.  There is no better opportunity to grow our economy to develop jobs on a massive scale, and SMMEs, than through the tourist industry, and increase our tax base at the same time.  It affects every walk of life in the economy.  It brings confidence.  It brings visitors who come and look at our country and say, "Hell, this country is wonderful.  The crime we hear about is not so bad.  Let us come and have another look and see if we can invest here".  That is how it happens.  First come the tourists and then come the trade and then comes the investment.  Why are we not putting it as a priority?  Why R64,7 million to market our country internationally for tourism when that is the one industry that will give us jobs and SMMEs that we all say we believe in?

I do not want to go on about tourism because we have heard it ad infinitum, but let us for God's sake get down and do something about it.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Two minutes left.

MR A J HAMILTON:  There are some encouraging things, Mr Chairman.  Some of us will have noticed this morning, that our world level of productivity, measured against world economies, we have actually improved slightly.  We have gone up from 44th place to 42nd place, but the exciting thing that has happened is that our small SMME sectors has rocketed up to 25th place from down in the 40s.  That shows you what small business can do.  But, Mr Chairman, small business must prosper and small business must also pay its fair whack of tax.  So we must catch them for that.

Mr Chairman, I would like to take the opportunity of once again complimenting our Minister and the Portfolio Committee, and supporting the budget.  Thank you

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  Next on the list of speakers is the hon member Mr Mkhwanazi, who will speak for six minutes.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Ngiyabonga, Sihlalo.  May I congratulate the Minister and the Chair of the Portfolio Committee on their detailed speeches, although here and there as politicians they did put in some squibs, but on the whole their speeches were level and very positive.

Mr Chairperson, in this debate there are a few common issues that are repeated, what do you call them, phrases or sentences.  We are talking about servicing the national debt which is R40 billion.

AN HON MEMBER:  It is more than that.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Well, it is more than that.  I am told that that R40 billion is not even paying for the debt we are servicing, it is only paying the interest.  Instead of us quarrelling amongst ourselves here, I urge that we consider where this debt came from?  Why was this debt incurred?  What concerned me also, and my idea was that we should do what Comrade Castro did, and tell the people whom we owed the money to, to go to hell.  But then I was corrected.  I was told, "Oh no, we do not owe the money to America and England, we owe it to ourselves".  
HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  We owe it to ourselves.  It is our own debt because the people who created this debt were very, very clever.  There is an English word,.  [they were crooks.  I do not know how to say a crook, in English].  

They were cunning, because instead of borrowing money abroad to oppress us, to buy arms to kill our people in order to maintain ~Apartheid~, they took the very poor people's money and borrowed it.  So we are now held up hand and feet, because there is no way we can tell them to go to hell.

Have we gone to the trouble to find out what was done with that money [What is that money used for]?

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  As a result, we are being underfunded.  This Province is worse, but the whole of South Africa is being underfunded.  As the hon Mr Meer said, if that R40 billion were to be used by us now, we would not be in the position in which we are.

We must accept the fact that we are underfunded and let us do the best we can with what we have.  It is no use us lamenting about being underfunded.  What we have we must use it, as they say in English, cut your suit according to the cloth you have.  Can we please do that instead of quarrelling and shouting amongst ourselves?  Perhaps if we sat down together we could find a solution.

I want to ask the Minister, how are we going to get out of this, because if we are underfunded we are going to overspend.  Yes, there is corruption, there is fraud and so on, but for the very fact that we are underfunded, we are bound to overspend.  It is a contradiction in terms.  I want to ask the Minister.  How, Mr Minister, are we going to finally get out of this morass?  Because if we are going to borrow, it means we are going to incur more debt.  If we increase the taxes everybody is going to cry.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  One minute left.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Oh, thank you.  The only thing we can do, is fight tooth and nail to get rid of corruption and to get rid of the fraud.  People found guilty of fraudulent activities should be sent to gaol, those people  [Africans, those people should be arrested], and the corrupt people must be dealt with severely.

AN HON MEMBER:  Chop their hands off.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Well, unfortunately we cannot chop their hands off, but we must send them to gaol.  Not what is happening at present.  They use the same money to pay bail, the same money they have stolen.

MR W U NEL:  And they keep some change.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  And they keep some change.  Another thing that we must get rid of is indiscipline.  We must deal with indiscipline.  Where there is no discipline there will be no order. 

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time is up.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  I thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  I wish to call upon the hon member Mrs Ford, to address the House for 10 minutes.

MRS O E FORD:  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  Through you to the hon Minister, Mr Peter Miller, my condolences to you, sir.

AN HON MEMBER:  Condolences?

MRS O E FORD:  Condolences, on your new portfolio, that of Finance.  When I have heard what has been said in this House today, you have got one heck of a job ahead of you.  It is an enormous task you have, Mr Minister.  Firstly, I would like to assure you of the support of the members on this side of the House.

Social welfare, that is a sore point.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MRS O E FORD:  Social welfare.  As I mentioned in my speech on Friday, on the Welfare budget, the increase so generously given by the National Minister is another unfunded mandate.  What will happen, I wonder, if the savings the Department manages to make in the re-registration of pensioners, and the clamping down on fraud is not enough to cover the cost of the increases?  Is this what the ANC Government is trying to do, I wonder?  It will be a lovely election chant, would it not?  "See, the KZN IFP led Government cannot even pay your pensions".

In an article which appeared in Business Day on 24 November 1997, the Finance Minister's spokesperson, Jennifer Wilson, was quoted as saying:

	The current formula for Finance was based largely on population.  It did not, for example, take into account a health crisis in provinces faced with a high HIV infected population.

As we are all aware, Mr Chairman, our Province is riddled with HIV and AIDS.  As far as the population is concerned, I can tell you, sir, and for that matter, anyone else who cares to listen instead of talking, that when it comes to correct population figures the last census leaves much to be desired.  I know, as I am sure everybody in this House knows, of some people who were not counted.  In my small town there were a lot of them that were not counted.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Read the census and then comment.

MRS O E FORD:  If this happened in one small town, through you, Mr Chairman, to Dr Sutcliffe, how many other people were not counted?  They do not exist as far as the numbers are concerned.  And when you fly to ~Ulundi~ you pass over hundreds and hundreds of homes that, I believe, an aerial count was taken, how can you say how many people are actually living in a house?  It is absolutely ridiculous.  It is another thumb suck of the Government.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MRS O E FORD:  Really, therefore, when the figures were released and the population of KwaZulu-Natal recorded at a lot less than the number previously recognised, it is no wonder that our share of the cake is shrinking, instead of growing.  I ask you, Mr Chairman, how do you control people?  Through their back pockets.  Through the money that they get, that is how and that is what the whole thing is all about, is trying to control our Province.

The hon Minister gave us figures in his address which are appalling.  How on earth are we as a Province to function, I ask you?  He mentioned retrenchments, Mr Chairman, and I can see the hair standing on end of those members of the unions.  I sincerely hope that what the hon Minister said has sunk into those thick skulls.

We hear that departments like Health have stopped the supply of tea and coffee to the medical staff in hospitals.  I do think that this is a very noble thought, but shudder to think of some poor staff member, particularly a doctor, not being able to think clearly, and thus making an error of judgment, purely and simply because that doctor did not have a regular dose of caffeine to help him through the long duty hours, some of them without pay.  We have heard in this House, Mrs Cronje complain about the lack of coffee, and she does not go to make those sort of judgments.

Instead of penalising staff members in this manner, I would suggest that the reports are presented in a brown paper wrapping.  That sort of a style, rather than each department trying to outdo each other in the presentation of glossy magazines.

AN HON MEMBER:  Hear! Hear!

MRS O E FORD:  And when I say glossy, I mean glossy.  Mr Nel could not even write on his, he had to borrow a pen from me.

AN HON MEMBER:  A ballpoint.

MRS O E FORD:  It was with relief that we read in the media on 16 April that the hon Minister Miller advised that we are now solvent, or we were then solvent, albeit for a short time, and despite him saying it would be difficult to maintain this situation.  I am sure he has our full support in his endeavours.

In closing, Mr Chairman, and I am sure you are all very pleased that I am closing, I am not taking my full time like you did, because it is the last day today, and we would all like to get home.  We get a little bit tired of looking at funny faces.  I would like to ask the Minister what he foresees the future to be when, as so often happens in homes around the country, at the end of the year there is more year left than money?  Thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mrs Ford.  I do not see Advocate Bawa in the House.  So I will skip him and call upon the hon Dr Sutcliffe, to address the House for 10 minutes.  Sorry, Mr Volker please.  Nine minutes.

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Chairman, let me first of all commiserate with the hon the Minister.  He has been given a very onerous task.  Basically we wish him well, because the success of his task is most important to this Province.  Therefore we believe it is necessary that he should have our good wishes in hopeful success.

Mr Chairman, a democratic society invariably provides for a Parliament or Legislature that is made up of a Government that is responsible for the wellbeing of all its citizens, and also for representatives who constitute loyal opposition.  The National Party sees itself as part of this loyal opposition that has a duty to participate in an effective parliamentary responsibility of ensuring that there is GOOD GOVERNMENT.  We want to be part of GOOD GOVERNMENT.  We want to ensure efficient administration.

Democratic Government does not presuppose that Parliament should be a mutual admiration society.  As loyal and enthusiastic citizens of this Province we, as National Party members of the Provincial Parliament are fully supportive of the principle; the need and the urgency that there should be equity in the formula on which the funding of the needs - especially the social service needs - of our people, of all our people is calculated.  

We believe that equity has not been achieved.

We must, however, point out that GOOD GOVERNMENT also presupposes that we, as Legislature, and especially the Provincial Cabinet, that has the duty and responsibility to be the decision taking political heads of the various departments, must ensure that there is efficient, honest, capable and cost effective administration.  Ultimately, the buck stops with the Cabinet and the Premier as head of the Cabinet.

Their additional responsibility is commensurately recognised and remunerated.  It is their duty to be hands-on involved in ensuring a well run and honest administration.  It is not their task to be decorative wall flowers in their rather lavish offices, I am referring to the hon Minister of Economic Affairs, nor should it be their prime duty to be fulltime political functionaries within their respective party structures, or to meddle in the Government affairs of their political colleagues in other provinces.

Now that we have debated the various budget votes, and are now discussing the Finance budget, I must point out that this budget debate has not been structured to wrap up the overall discussion to the comprehensive budget picture.  We are therefore left with the alternative to raise overall issues in this "finance" vote discussion.  It is, or should be the responsibility of each department and each Minister to ensure that there is proper and efficient financial discipline within each department.  If, however, there are departments and less than efficient Ministers that do not ensure financial discipline, then it is ultimately the responsibility of the Department of Finance and its Minister to exercise such discipline.

GOOD GOVERNMENT requires that we should ensure that the respective administrations should acknowledge and respect the law.  When a budget has been discussed and approved by Parliament in Cape Town and by the Provincial Parliament in KwaZulu-Natal, and thereafter been signed by the Premier, it becomes a law of the Province.  It is a law as binding as any other law.

The time for organised disobedience campaigns, which were part of the ANC's strategy, and which have developed into an ongoing culture of non-payment of municipal services, should be over.  The ANC bush fighters are now occupying offices of responsibility as Cabinet Ministers and top civil servants.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR V A VOLKER:  The attitude which we heard in this House when the Minister of Hospital Services said that there is no way in which the services by his Department could not be provided, because the needs of the people required that the services should be provided.  He appeared to be of the opinion that the budget, in other words the law, could be ignored with impunity.  The result was that, by his own admission, his budget was overspent by 20% or some R700 million.  In a hearing of the Public Accounts Committee in ~Ulundi~ recently, a senior official of his department stated that they were precluded from appointing capable financial managers to that department, because there was a general moratorium on the appointment of staff.  Can members imagine that a general moratorium that is imposed by the Cabinet so as to ensure the uncontrolled escalation of personnel, can be interpreted to mean that essential financial management staff should be left vacant, irrespective of the consequences.

What were the consequence?  It resulted in a budget overrun by that department by R700 million.  The attitude of the political head - the Minister - appeared to be that the budget can be ignored, because the needs of the people demand that the services be provided.  Their problem is an over-expenditure of hundreds of millions, and now they want to save on tea bags.  They appear to be going to pot, even if it is a teapot.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Two minutes left.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  You need to go and smoke your pot.

MR V A VOLKER:  Thank you.  For us, as National Party of this Legislature, to consider approving this budget, we need to be satisfied that there is a genuine commitment to address these and other problems.  We need more than fine sounding verbal indications of the wish to address these problems.  As part of the loyal opposition in this Legislature, we need to get evidence of effective steps being implemented in each department, and especially in the overall financial control of the respective administrations so that wasteful and fraudulent expenditure can be eliminated.

It is, however, also a fact that approval of the budget would result in a further financial crisis for this Province, a crisis of potentially unmanageable proportions, unless there is a concomitant implementation of financial discipline and the eradication of the large scale fraud and corruption in many departments, and in the collusion of officials with private businesses to rip off the respective departments.  I believe that Ministers know what I am referring to.

We have suggested the appointment of either a Minister or a senior official of provincial expenditure, with the necessary authority to exercise ongoing control over the expenditure of each department before it is committed, rather than in retrospect, as the suggested monitoring committee would do.

Because of our support for GOOD GOVERNANCE, we would support the budget if sufficient evidence was available, that the budget as it has been presented would be capable of being implemented.  We would dearly love to be able to support the budget, but a responsible analysis of the budget, read together with the National Minister's straightjacket agreement, does not convince us of the probability of achieving the said target.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  The hon member's time is over.

MR V A VOLKER:  It would therefore be less than responsible of us to support the budget.  I thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you.  I do not see Advocate Bawa in the House.  So I will call upon the hon Dr Sutcliffe to address the House for 15 minutes.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Thank you, hon Chairman.  What has worried me about today's debate, in the finance section, here is that we have sat here, and quite frankly there have been a number of people who I would classify as a whinging bunch of whimps, woolly-headed whimps, talking about issues of a so-called crisis in this Province.

I do not think there is that form of a crisis.  Yes, there may be areas that we need to look at and reflect on, but what I want to do, today, is to talk about three aspects of that crisis that we are faced with.

The first, the hon Dumisani Makhaye referred to it as a crisis of achievement, because that is first and foremost the issue we are dealing with here.  This budget now is serving the needs of all the people of this Province, whereas the same amount of money pre-1994 was used to serve primarily 40% of this Province.  That is going to create a crisis.  It is not something that we should treat in a negative way, we should say that we have achieved things, and as a consequence of that achievement we are going to have issues around education, issues around welfare, issues around health.  But that is a crisis we should be proud of.

The second crisis we have, is a crisis of the negotiated settlement.  I would take issue with the hon MEC of Finance, who stands here and says the problem is the growth in numbers of personnel in this Province.  In fact, if you look at this Province and nationally, we have only increased by about 8%, people employed in Government, and yet their responsibilities have increased by more than 50%.

If the hon MEC had have stood up and said, "My analysis of personnel in this Province indicated that our problem is that the structure is wrong, we have too many chiefs, and far too few people at ground level", I would have supported his issue.  
If you look at the breakdown of personnel costs, it is not the number of personnel, it is actually the fact that a huge amount, more than 50% of the resources on personnel go to less than 10% of the personnel itself.

The issue is not to look at numbers and say we are going to solve things through retrenchments.  The way we will solve things is by beginning to give that responsibility properly, seated at higher levels of authority, but then make sure those people perform.

A second part of that crisis that we had of a negotiated settlement was the result of not having a State borne out of one liberation movement who conquered the oppressors.  Unfortunately part of that negotiated settlement was that those who were the oppressors got something in that deal.  That deal was we could not retrench.  As much as we put on the table during the negotiations in 1993/1994 that we wanted the power to fire, we wanted the power to ensure that we could restructure the civil service, we were not able to do that.

Let us not bemoan that fact.  Let us also seat it where it belongs.  Those oppressors are the ones who created that policy.  The second crisis is a crisis created through the negotiated settlement, but none of us would want to go back to a pre-1994 period.

The third aspect of that crisis is the crisis of transition, because you cannot restructure those budgets overnight.  We can sit and bemoan the fact that Western Cape gets far more money than they should.  That is a fact.  But the issue is that you cannot restructure that in one foul swoop.  You have communities there dependent on issues, and we as a country have to realise that transition means exactly that.  It is a movement from one oppressive, ~Apartheid~, racist order to an order which is democratic, which will ensure that everyone gets access, that will be equitable and will be efficient.

When we deal with that issue of the crisis, let us put it where it belongs.  A retrenchment tool is not going to solve the problems.  Restructuring the civil service will.  Creating a culture that public servants are there to serve the people of this Province is far more important than any retrenchment tool. I would really urge, that the MEC in responding, is going to in fact concede to that issue.

There might well need to be retrenchments in particular cases, but let us talk about that in a targeted manner.  When we have covered everything else, we can then focus on areas where there clearly are a surplus of people, supernumerary posts that clearly cannot be accommodated.  But let us not try and fool ourselves by saying that in fact that is going to be the panacea that we require here.

What I would suggest as the second broad area, is that in listening to the debates over the past three weeks, there is only one minor amendment that really has been put before this House to the report that was tabled to this House.  That was where in the report it referred to the agriculture money in one section as an allegedly unauthorised expenditure.  Later on it referred to that as unauthorised.  Clearly it is the Auditor-General and this House that will ultimately determine whether that was unauthorised or not.

Not one other issue of substance has actually come forward to say that what the Finance Committee proposed and suggested in fact was nonsense.  Yes, we might complain about some of the wording.  We might complain about things, but there is not one other aspect here.  Indeed we cannot even report to this House yet a supplementary aspect involving Works, because that matter is still to be dealt with by the Executive.  We realise that there still is quite a serious issue to be addressed there.

There is nothing in this report, I would argue, that this House has heard from any of the departments that has actually said this report is incorrect.  Yes, there might be reports that have been developed, but certainly not tabled to this House or any Committee of this House.  And if there was, we would have heard that, but we have not.  If you look at all the speeches that we have had, they have not focused on the document before this House.

I would really say that the very inappropriate resolution that was put forward, yesterday, by the hon Chief Whip of the majority party is really a resolution we should not even tolerate here.

Firstly, to actually say that it instructs a committee to amend something where there are no amendments that have even been proposed in this House, no amendments of substance and to instruct, that is not the language of a Legislature.  But what we should be saying is that these issues that were raised, every one of which can be backed up by documentation, and I am willing for some of the MECs in this House, and who are not in this House to actually study that documentation properly, because what disturbs me is that they come and report on a report where they, I believe, are in fact being misled by some of their officials.

I would urge that this House does adopt that report, because that report should begin to be a resolution.  That performance audit that the hon Dumisani Makhaye suggested, that next year when we come back and reflect on this year, we can say these points have been addressed.  These we need to take forward, these issues in fact have not been addressed.  I would urge that at some point in today's proceedings the hon Premier in fact moves the adoption of that report.

The last issue that I would like to deal with is really to say where to now?

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  The one issue that we should be addressing at today's session is to say what do we need to do for the rest of this year.  We are clearly in a year where politics and elections are going to be the order of the day, but one thing we must ensure is that in each of those departments that we as a Legislature have responsibility for monitoring, for oversight of and that we are ensuring that we are keeping within that budget.  Because it does not matter what political party takes over, and it will certainly be the ANC after 1999, we want to ensure that it is taking over, having dealt with this transition.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  You have finally woken up.  [LAUGHTER]  We want to ensure that that Government, that ANC Government takes over having ensured that this transition is complete.  A transition that we were all collectively part of, that it has been a job well done.  I would urge that in this year we ensure that this budget stays within its means.

The ANC is a responsible party.  We are not a party that is going to simply say because the majority party cannot even muster enough individuals on its own side to ensure that it gets 50% support for this budget, we as a party of principle are going to ensure that we support this budget today.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  We are not a party that supports the old order, as we will see towards my left there, although they are far to my right in terms of their politics.  We are a party of principle that says we will take those responsibilities, we will move into that future, we will move into 1999 and we will become the Government of this Province.  Thank you, hon Chair.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Dr Sutcliffe.  I have pleasure to call upon the hon Minister to reply to the debate.  Minister Miller please.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Yes indeed, Mr Chairman, Sutcliffe the propagandist, but he comes up a poor second to Makhaye, the Pele-Pele, I tell you.  [LAUGHTER]

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Do not worry, you will get your turn.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  The hon Chairman of the Portfolio Committee, and I thank him for his behind the scenes contributions in this particular field, emphasised two points which I thought were worth noting.

The one of course, was that the recognition of the fact that we are not getting equitable funding must not be used to cloud the issue that the funds we have got must be managed properly.  I want to say that there is no one on this side of the House that would dispute that, and I doubt whether there is anybody anywhere in this House that is making a greater effort than our Premier in particular, and the Executive to try and make sure that we do manage our funds as best we can.

It is true that we have learnt a lot of things about where we went wrong before, but of course the first step in trying to put those kind of matters right is to have the humility and the intellectual honesty to in fact concede where mistakes were made.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  That is one of the things, and on our side of the House I want to say that we are fully prepared to do that.  I also want to give the assurance that the problem between the Department of Works and its client departments in regard to exactly where the funding that each says they have paid actually lies, is receiving the intense attention of the Executive and of my Ministry.  This is in a sense a very interesting conundrum and we are going to have to come up with some kind of solution which I am afraid is going to cost substantial money.  From where we are going to get it I do not know.  But then I guess that is one of the things that makes life interesting.

The hon Aulsebrook also spoke about the success of the anti-fraud campaign.  I want to say, yes indeed, it has been successful, but the interesting thing is, that as we have come up with a number of successes, so in fact we have realised that we have only touched the tip of the iceberg.  I want to make a special plea to every member in this House.  It is our bounden duty as the elected Legislature of this Province, everyone of us, irrespective of party affiliation, to actually commit ourselves to lead the anti-fraud and corruption fight in this Province.  Nothing does more to take the food out of the mouths of the hungry, and take the services away from those that need it more, than to have the very people who are supposed to be providing these services first benefitting themselves, and so doing at the expense of those that should be receiving the benefit. 

I have illustrated today how little of our budget is in fact left for the provision of services, and yet interestingly enough it is that little portion that is bearing the brunt of the fraud and corruption.  People do not steal each other's salaries.  There are people that register of course, as the hon the Minister of Welfare has indicated, for pensions that should not be getting them.  So some of our transfer payments are going missing, and I do not believe, although it is possible, that on the fixed cost elements in our budget that there is much room for corruption.

In fact, it is in the discretionary portion of our budget where fraud and corruption is rife, and so I do plead again as it is my theme of a bipartisan/multiparty approached to handling this problem.

I am particularly glad that the hon Mr Aulsebrook mentioned that the cautious approach to the institution of our gaming industry in the Province is paying dividends, and he also mentioned of course the advantages that will accrue to us when we establish this particular industry properly.

But I want, in the context of what Mr Aulsebrook said, to comment on what the hon Mr Meer said earlier today.  We seem to forget sometimes when we are discussing this industry, that the gaming industry is the perfect industry for taking money from the poor, the many, and giving it to the few, the rich.  That in fact, unless the gaming industry is properly regulated, and properly controlled, it becomes a blight on our society.  There is no point in having a gaming industry which simply sets about recirculating money which already exists in an economy.  This does not add value to that economy at all.  A gaming industry must be such that it is able to introduce new money into an economy, be it from other parts of your country, or preferably from outside your country.

Therefore, what you establish must be world class, must see type of facilities.  It is only under those circumstances that there can be a nett profit from establishing a gaming industry.  I am appalled to see in one of our neighbouring provinces where a licence has been granted, that the temporary casino has been established in a complex of buildings which also houses the biggest food supermarket in that particular area.  I have personally seen people, with the money that must be spent on the monthly grocery bill, being tempted to go into the casino on the way and ending up taking home half the groceries that they should have taken.  That to me is not a gaming industry, that is plain extortion of the poor and gullible who, because they are poverty stricken, are always hoping that they might just hit it lucky and so be able to free themselves from the strictures of poverty for the rest of time.

The hon Mr Haygarth, in his inimitable fashion as always, talked about technical issues to do with financing.  I want to say, sir, that it is indeed true that if you have internal check systems, and there is collusion between he who is doing the checking and he who should be checked, then an internal check system collapses entirely.  So, for example, in the experience that I have personally had, where you have got the person who authorises false S&T claims actually getting a payback for every false S&T claim that he authorises, then of course you have got an internal check system which has collapsed totally.

Therefore, I reiterate the fact that part of the internal audit process and part of the work of that professional team that we have appointed is going to be to check on those who should be implementing the internal check systems.  I am afraid that we have to concede that in certain areas in our administration this problem has become almost endemic.  It has become so wide ranging that in fact we might eventually have to just clear out the whole system and start again in order to break this cycle of fraud and corruption.  People have become accustomed to it.  It is part of the benefits of employment.  It is no longer a crime, it is a fringe benefit.  I just want to assure this House certainly, that there is enormous consensus, particularly in the Executive on this issue and I would hope that we will get a 100% support of the Legislature in this regard.

The warnings against deficit budgeting are taken to heart.  I wish to assure the hon Mr Haygarth, that I support the fundamental and very basic issue, that one staff's according to ones budgetary principles.  It is trite to repeat that, but interestingly enough it is something that has to be repeated many times when the issue of overstaffing comes up.  It is a matter of a huge mystery to me, and I am sure it is a mystery if I look to my colleagues on my left and to the Premier, it is a mystery to us all that in a situation where a clear moratorium on employment, a clear instruction had been given, that we find ourselves in a 12 month period suddenly with 14 000 more people than we had.  14 000 more people at 30 April 1998 than we had on 30 April 1997.

It is almost with despair that I hear the words of the hon Dr Sutcliffe when he says that retrenchment is not part of the solution.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  INTERJECTION.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  What worries me a great deal on this issue is that, in my view it is too few managers and too many people who are not being supervised properly, that is the problem rather than a top heavy staff structure.  The interesting thing is that it is absolutely clear that the bulk of this employment is taking place at a level which in the present rules is authorised by lower management.  It is taking place amongst general workers, and drivers, and that kind of level.  That is where the huge numbers have grown.  It is something we are going to have to look at, and I will expand on that a little more as I go through my reply.

The hon Mr Rajbansi, may Minority Front run last, says we must take fraud very seriously.  That we know.  He also commented on the horse racing industry and he made some suggestions in regard to empowerment in this industry.  I want to assure you that the leaders in this industry are taking this very seriously indeed.  The whole question of the casino industry and the question of the commencement of Site and Route operations is subject to the promulgation of national regulations.  I hope that in the next 24 hours or so I will in fact get further information.  It gives me great pleasure to recognise the fact that the Chairman of the National Gambling Board has been listening to this debate and we will be meeting afterwards to discuss a number of matters that affect this particular issue.

It is also always a pleasure to listen to the hon Mr Meer.  I think I can say on behalf of every member of this House that we listen to him with great affection.  We also recognise him as one of the intellectual giants of this House, and he normally would not have been in the ANC, not a person with that kind of brain.  [LAUGHTER]  The fact was that circumstances, and I acknowledge that, forced him to be there.  But he had two very, very important things to suggest to us, two very important issues.

He said if we are frugal and we are efficient, if one is frugal and works hard one can overcome all problems and perhaps that is exactly what we all should do.  I do want to say, because this is a matter of ethos and of basic fundamental religious principle which I acknowledge and I respect that.  I do not think some of my beloved hon friend Mr Meer's economic principles would actually work.  But be that as it may, the fact of the matter is that he is always a man who is worthy of listening to, even if he has got a bee in his bonnet about somebody who sent him some stamps.  I do hope and believe that the management of the Legislature will take that to heart, because I do believe that it is the Legislature that sends him stamps from time to time for his parliamentary correspondence.  I am not making that as an accusation.  The warning that we must be very careful about how we allow the gambling industry to proliferate, is taken to heart most sincerely.

The hon Mr Nel made the statement that one of the greatest mistakes we have made in this country is that we have missed the opportunity to grow our economy.  I share that sentiment 100%.  I also want to say that it is indeed a problem that we have to face when we try and extract an honest day's work out of the people that work for us.  You know, they once said that outside a very important Legislature, they had to put in robots to control the traffic.  The robots had in particular to control the cars driven by those arriving late from crashing with those that were leaving early.  [LAUGHTER]

It is this kind of syndrome that we have to try and eliminate.  If in fact the hon Dr Sutcliffe meant by restructuring that we have got to sort this kind of problem out, then I share the sentiment with him.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  INTERJECTION.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Earlier in this debate, in summing up the initial debate, I had something to say about the misuse of the word "transformation".  The hon Mr Nel gave us another perspective in that regard, because if in fact one of the things we have to do is to transform our society to really stop protecting the lazy and slothful, and stop victimising the hard working and energetic, then transformation will be a worthwhile concept.

The hon Mr Hamilton spoke on a few macro economic and tax issues.  I thought the idea of a reward for reporting corruption has merit, and perhaps we should pursue that, and perhaps your particular Portfolio Committee on Economic Affairs might come up with a firm proposal.  It is true that we should do our best to embrace the FFC recommendations.  But as I warned before, in everything we do, we must make sure that the basic premise from which we come is correct.  We cannot dispute the figures that were given to us by the Chairman of the Portfolio Committee when he indicated how our budget had grown from the 1994/1995 year to date.  It is a fact that our budget has grown faster than some of our competing provinces.  Nonetheless, that does not make it any more comfortable to have to try and deal with our backlog situation.  I think there is consensus in this House that if we can get equity faster than the envisaged five years, then why should we not attempt to do that.

The hon Baba Afrika, Mr Mkhwanazi, spoke about the cunning people who had conned us into debt.

AN HON MEMBER:  Order!

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  People are calling order and I cannot see what is going on.  He spoke about these cunning people, and I want to say that all of us, particularly that side of the House where they might be tempted not to support it, must remember that nobody is making a greater effort right now than the National Minister of Finance to bring down the deficit before borrowings in the budget.  That of course is part of the reason why we are having a difficult time right now.  But what I am particularly concerned about is the fact that we on this side of the House detect a wavering in the commitment of the comrades that are found amongst you.  All we say, do not weaken at this stage please.  Do not weaken Khabazela.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Do not weaken.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  INTERJECTION.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Because the fact of the matter is that in the national context our future is inextricably tied to yours and you have got to have the guts to make the decisions.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  INTERJECTION.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Right.  Mrs Ford commented on unfunded mandates.  For those hon members that were not present at the briefing that I gave to members of the House last night, and I must say I was sad that there were so many empty chairs on that particular occasion, I want to say that we have a commitment that we will not pay for unfunded mandates, and if in fact Mrs Ford can substantiate that we are paying for an unfunded mandate, I would like to get more detail of that.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Finally, as I draw to a close, I want to discuss the issue of Mr Volker.  It might in fact be a political tactic at this present time not to support the budget.  I do not think it is a very constructive tactic.   You might be wishing to say at the end of the day that, "We told you so".  It will not be a very clever thing to do.  I can say, "I told you so" too.  I know what is going to happen.  The fact of the matter is we have got a budget, we have tried our very level best to split the funds as evenly as we can.  Not supporting the budget is not going to get me any more from the Department of State Expenditure.  I would have appreciated a more constructive approach.  Let us leave it at that.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  What worries me a great deal, and it came out, however, in the contribution by Mr Volker, was that, besides the contribution made by the hon Dr Sutcliffe, nobody has really risen constructively to the challenge that I made in my speech concerning our need to change the ratio from 92:8 to something more favourable.

Perhaps it is my scientific training rather than some kind of airy-fairy philosophical arts approach to these things.

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  I am a pure scientist.  [LAUGHTER]

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Can anybody in their sound mind dispute those facts?  How can anybody in their sound mind dispute the facts, that if we were to change the ratio from 92:8 to 85:15 we would double the amount of money that we can spend on our people, on education, on health.  I really ask for a multiparty/bipartisan approach to this.  I really ask that everybody in this House now, in the interests of our Province, stop trying to score petty points and let us make it the resolve of this entire House that we must get the retrenchment tool.  I will concede the point that with retrenchment must go restructuring.  Of course, that is taken for granted.  But it does concern me that by our silence we might be ignoring the challenge.

May I just close by saying that the hon Dr Sutcliffe started his contribution by talking about woolly-headed whimps, and I looked up at him immediately.  I thought was it not fortunate he had just had a haircut otherwise he would have fitted that description perfectly.  [LAUGHTER]

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Maybe you need a haircut.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  I probably do, I probably do.  I have not got a lot of fundamental disagreement with the cliche "crisis of transition", and all that kind of thing.  The problems are too many chiefs and not enough indians, etcetera, etcetera.  I have already indicated that if anybody can identify a problem in our financial affairs and in our budget that deserves more attention than the fact that we have got to deal with the fact that our personnel numbers grew by 14 000 last year and we did not even know it was happening.  We did not even know it was happening.  I plead for this House to have the will, not only to attend to this, but to reverse this trend.

I thank everybody for participating in this debate, and I formally ask this House to support the budget vote of the Department of Finance, vote 6.  I thank you.

MR B H CELE:  You have not commented on Mzobe.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, hon Minister.

MR B H CELE:  The Minister did not comment on Mzobe's speech.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order, Mr Cele.  I recognise Dr Mkhize.  Can we hear.

DR Z L MKHIZE: (Minister of Health):  Thank you, Mr Chairman.  I just want to rise on Rule 74 (2), to clarify something which I believe needs to be clarified.  That is the issue of the over-expenditure.  It is not correct that it was caused by the fact that the Finance Director was not appointed.  It was caused in fact, more by the fact that we had plans to expand the service from 1995/1996, 1996/1997.  I did explain that in the budget speech.  Secondly, the Finance Director was not appointed, not because of a moratorium, but because of the delays in the Public Service Commission, and we actually had lost that to two other provinces.  But the particular member, if his party is actually disappearing because we have just walloped them again last week, he should not blame us for his delayed memory.  He should have raised this during my budget debate.  Thank you.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  That brings us to the end of the Committee of Supply Stage.  At this point in time I will hand back to the Speaker of the House to deal with the rest of the items on our Order Paper for today.

	THE BUSINESS OF THE COMMITTEE SUSPENDED AT 14:59
	THE BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE RESUMED AT 15:01

THE SPEAKER:  Can we have a report from the Chairman of Committees please.

THE CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  Mr Speaker, I wish to report that the Committee of Supply has concluded its work, and we are pleased that we have done so.  Thank you very much.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  I am glad to hear that the Committee of Supply has completed its work and discussed all the votes, I take it without amendments.  What is now left for me is to present to the House each vote. 

But before doing so, let me take this opportunity.  I have here before me a request from the Amnesty International in Pietermaritzburg.  They have requested the members to sign as an acknowledgement of this particular day today, which is internationally recognised, where members are asked to sign this book.  I will circulate it for each member to sign.  Can I ask somebody to give me a pen in order that I can sign it.  I will then pass it to the Premier.  Thank you.

The votes have been debated.  Let me take this opportunity therefore.  Vote 1 for the Premier, I put the question.  Are you sure you are approving of it or are you in doubt?  Can I for the second time put the question again.  I notice that Bheki Cele is opposed to the vote.  

VOTE 1 : THE DEPARTMENT OF THE PREMIER - PASSED

VOTE 2 : THE PROVINCIAL PARLIAMENT - PASSED

VOTE 3 : THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE - PASSED

VOTE 4 : THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND TOURISM - PASSED

VOTE 5 : THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND CULTURE - PASSED

VOTE 6 : THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & AUXILIARY SERVICES - PASSED

VOTE 7 : THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - PASSED

VOTE 8 : THE DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HOUSING - PASSED

VOTE 9 : SOUTH AFRICAN PUBLIC SERVICES - PASSED

VOTE 10 : PROVINCIAL SERVICE COMMISSION - PASSED

VOTE 11 : THE DEPARTMENT OF TRADITIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS 	  - PASSED

Vote 12, Transport.   That is to do with the Minister of Transport.  I put the question.  I thought the Minister of Transport was promising that from henceforth there will not be any fines if we exceed the speed limit on the road.  [LAUGHTER]

VOTE 12 : THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT - PASSED

VOTE 13 : THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE - PASSED

Finally, I put the vote of Works, No 14.  I put the question.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Yes.

MR R M BURROWS:  I call for a division on this vote.

THE SPEAKER:  On which one?  On Works?  Please, Mr Burrows, is it on Works that you call for a division?

MR R M BURROWS:  Yes, sir.

THE SPEAKER:  Do any other members support Mr Burrows?  Actually there should be four people supporting Mr Roger Burrows on a point of division.  Four people.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, presumably you will call for members who will support a vote on this matter to rise so you can see whether there are four.

THE SPEAKER:  But there cannot be a division.  All I can ask for to satisfy Mr Burrows, will those who support the motion stand up.  Stand up, those who support the motion.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  In terms of the Rules, the division will take place if there are at least four members who support the request for a division.  Do we have four members?

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, I believe more than four members do support the calling of a division.

THE SPEAKER:  I beg your pardon?

MR R M BURROWS:  I believe that more than four members do support the calling of a division, and as I indicated to you, if you would request the members who would support the calling of a division to rise.

THE SPEAKER:  Those who call for a division please rise.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!   It does appear that in terms of the Rules there are more than four people who want this division, and I will therefore call for the doors to be closed and the bells to be rung for three minutes.  I will request the table staff to count the votes.

BELLS ARE RUNG FOR THREE MINUTES

MRS C M CRONJE: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, on a point of order.  Do I have to take my ~Inkatha~ Freedom Party application form for membership with me when we go over there?  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Not only must you take the form.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!  This is a very important request.  The hon member wants permission to cross the floor, and I ask her to do just that.  It will be better for her to do so, and she already has an application form.  She will not be interfered with in the exercise of her discretion.  In that event, you will become a member of the IFP.  You have that right, Madam.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, while the bells are ringing, it is just to suggest a procedure for the division.  You will remember the last division we had, Mr Speaker, it was rather chaotic with members standing here.  It was difficult to count them.  During a division the members should be seated, Mr Speaker, so they can be readily identified and counted.  No, it can be done, Mr Speaker.  What I would suggest is that the members opposing this vote should be seated immediately to your left which is where Mrs Cronje and the hon Minister of Economic Affairs is.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Let us get this thing clear.  The request of the Chief Whip is serious.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  I am trying to assist, Mr Speaker.  The members opposing this would be seated immediately on your left.  A gap would then be left of one seat and the other members would be seated around that side of the House.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Yes, Mr Edwards.

MR B V EDWARDS: (Whip):  Mr Speaker, I am sure it would be a lot easier if those who are against the vote, who are in the division could rather stand behind their seats and the others can remain seated and those against will stand.  It will be far easier to count them then.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Let us have order.  No, no, no, Bheki Cele, let us have order in this House.  Let us have order for goodness sake.  This is a suggestion which I think is correct.  Those who oppose this will come and stand here and can be counted.  Those who support this will sit down.  It is a pure arithmetical calculation to find out those who support the vote, and those who oppose the vote.  I will therefore start at the opposite side.  May I request those who oppose this vote to stand and be counted.

AN HON MEMBER:  They must count the spot here.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  It is none of your business to decide that.  May I request my table officials to count those who are opposed to the vote.  I will request the Chief Whip and the Whip of the ANC to count those members.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS AND LAUGHTER

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  Will the two Whips tell me now how many are in opposition to this vote.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Mr Speaker, lest I be identified ... [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Order please! Order please!  I wish to assure the hon member for the PAC that as long as he is sitting and not standing, there is no chance of him being counted amongst those who are dissenting to this vote.  You will have to count those who are sitting down as well.  I suppose those who are standing can now sit down.  I am sure they have counted those who are in favour of the vote.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!  

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Hon Speaker, could I also request that we have a vote on the merger?

THE SPEAKER:  I beg your pardon?

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  Could I respectfully request that we have a vote on the merger?  [LAUGHTER]

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, were such a vote to be won, would the hon member who has just spoken abide by that decision and agree?

THE SPEAKER:  I ask for order please when I announce the results of the division of the House.  Those that are against it are 11, and those that are for it are 58.  

VOTE 14 : DEPARTMENT OF WORKS - PASSED

We will therefore proceed.  It is now my pleasure to present to you the Appropriation Bill.  The Appropriation Bill amounts to about R17 911 861 000.  My arithmetic is not all that good to know the difference between billions, and millions, and trillions, and quadrillions.  I therefore put the question on the KwaZulu-Natal Appropriation Bill.

MR R M BURROWS:  I call for a division please, Mr Speaker.

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Yes, they call for a division.  Are there four people who are calling for a division?

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Burrows.  In that event, it is a repeat performance.  We will therefore proceed.  Let the bells ring and the doors be closed.  Will the people who are against the Bill as it is, stand up as they did a little while ago please.  I will ask the Whips to do the counting for me.

THE BELLS ARE RUNG FOR THREE MINUTES

HON MEMBERS:  INTERJECTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  Order! Order! Order please!  I will request the hon members to stand up so that they can be counted, and I ask two Whips ...

AN HON MEMBER:  Mr Speaker, we must use a hammer to count them.  [LAUGHTER]

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!  I will request the two Whips to do the counting.  I take it that the hon members who were standing may now sit down.  Surely the two Whips must have taken note of how many there were.  There is no point in them standing all the time.  Assuming they have been able to count the rest of the members of the House.  I will await the results.  The results of this count are as follows.  Those against are 11, and those for the Bill to be passed is 58.  So the Bill is passed.

KWAZULU-NATAL APPROPRIATION BILL, 1998 - PASSED

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much for that.

MR P M MILLER: (Minister of Finance and Local Government):  Can he read it into the record please.

THE SPEAKER:  The Secretary please read the Bill.  Yes, that is very important.

THE SECRETARY:  KwaZulu-Natal Appropriation Act, No 6 of 1998.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  That disposes of 8.3.  We are therefore, in terms of the Order Paper back to 8.4.  That is the report of the Public Accounts Standing Committee.  I have a list of speakers.  I suggest that we proceed with that right away.  

8.4  REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS STANDING COMMITTEE

THE PREMIER:  May I suggest, Mr Speaker, that there is no need for this debate, because we accept it.

THE SPEAKER:  Mr Volker please.

MR V A VOLKER:  Mr Speaker, if the Premier indicates that he accepts it, it is important that we nevertheless take note of the important implications of these recommendations by the Public Accounts Committee.  I am quite happy not to have an extensive debate on that, but I feel that it is important that we should not just formally accept it, but in fact take note of the implications.  In doing so, I would point out very briefly, I will not take my five minutes, I would point out that Resolution No 71 merely provides for the authorisation of unauthorised expenditure of R58,420 million in the Department of Education for the 1995/1996 period.  It is only 1% and it was probably more in the next financial year.  It must be authorised otherwise it remains a suspense account.  I wish to point out that if it remains a suspense account and is not followed up by a Bill introduced in this House, it will remain in suspense, and that is contrary to the Legislative requirements.

As far as the second item is concerned, Resolution No 72, that was also unauthorised expenditure.  It is a reduced amount in Social Welfare of only R293 708.

Resolution No 73 is important in that there are four departments, the Department of the Premier, the Department of Education and Culture, Department of Health and Department of Social Welfare that failed to submit vouchers for certain expenditure.  There is a prescribed procedure.  If vouchers are not available then it is necessary that Treasury orders be obtained.  They should be applied for and submitted to audit by the accounting officers.  If that is not done, then the regulations of the KwaZulu-Natal Exchequer Act have not been met.  The proposal here is if those Treasury orders are obtained, then we can accept that that expenditure can be authorised.  If it is not obtained it must be referred back to the Public Accounts Committee.

As far as item 74 is concerned, there is also an important aspect relating to item 74.  In the pre-1994 election there was unauthorised expenditure identified by the Auditor-General to the extent of just in excess of R105 million.  That expenditure has not yet been authorised.  In November 1996 this House agreed that we should recommend that it be authorised.  Since November 1996 legislation is outstanding that this be authorised.

Because this expenditure was prior to 1994, the suggestion now is that in view of the absence of legislation to provide for this, let us try the alternative route.  Let us refer this to the National Public Accounts Committee, and that it be dealt with at national level, because it was before this Legislature was established.  Then hopefully we do not have to provide for this expenditure in our financial accounts.  If, however, the National Public Accounts Committee do not accept that responsibility, it will have to come back to us.

There is a final aspect, Mr Speaker, and that is that the Public Accounts Committee wishes to express is serious concern at the unsatisfactory state of financial affairs within various departments as a result of the moratorium on filling vacant posts.  It therefore recommends that key strategic posts within the internal audit, the finance, the financial management disciplines of all departments be filled, and request that the Minister of Finance submit a progress report to Parliament on this issue within three months.

I want to point out it requests, it does not demand.  There has been different wording in other committee reports.  I do not want to read out the whole recommendation, but I would urge members to read that.  Having indicated what the issues are, I would be happy to accept the assurance by the Premier that there is acceptance of these recommendations, and that there will be a concomitant implementation in that legislation will be brought before this House to authorise unauthorised expenditure.

THE PREMIER:  Well, this is part of the process of good governance, and legislation will be prepared to deal with this matter.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  That therefore disposes of 8.4.  A request was made here that the Order Paper was lacking in that it did not provide for the questions.  At the end of the Order Paper the questions will now be put.  
 
MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, I am wondering whether you do not need to put that report and we adopt it formally.

THE SPEAKER:  To complete the issue which Mr Volker has so ably and understandably put forward and apprised this House of what the implications of it are, it is now my pleasure to put this resolution to the House as it is.  The "ayes" have it and therefore it is obligatory that this legislation be introduced in time to honour this resolution which this House has accepted.

REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ACCOUNTS STANDING COMMITTEE - ACCEPTED

DISCUSSION ON QUESTIONS

THE SPEAKER:  I will now proceed with the questions that have been put forward, to complete the day's Order Paper.  Question 81 for oral reply.  Mr Burrows asked the Minister of Education and Culture.  Well, I need not read the whole question.  I will ask the Minister to reply.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, my officials have provided me with the answers.  I am not satisfied with the answers, and I have referred the matter back for consultation.  I will provide the hon member with a written reply.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Minister.  We shall therefore proceed with question No 82, which was also put by Mr Burrows to the Minister of Education and Culture.  The hon the Minister.

DR V T ZULU: (Minister of Education and Culture):  Mr Speaker, my answer will be the same as to No 81.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.

MR R M BURROWS:  Mr Speaker, may I indicate that the Minister did discuss this matter with me before the House, and I agreed that I would accept the written replies as soon as possible.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  That solves that problem.  Finally, question No 83 put by Mr Hamilton to the Minister of Transport.  The hon the Minister of Transport.

MR J S NDEBELE: (Minister of Transport):  Mr Speaker, I think it should be indicated that this question has just been handed to me now.  I normally respond properly and timeously to questions.  I should also be given an opportunity to work on it.  I am not a spin doctor.

AN HON MEMBER:  INTERJECTION AND LAUGHTER

THE SPEAKER:  I want to assure the hon Minister of Transport that he is not a doctor, spin or non-spin.  [LAUGHTER]  The hon Mr Hamilton.

MR A J HAMILTON:  I accept the Minister's proposal and I would like to have an answer as soon as possible.  Thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  In that event, this is the end of the day's proceedings.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Mr Speaker, there is still one item that we need to deal with.  It will take the House a very short period, and it relates to the motion under item 9 which appears in my name.  Mr Speaker, we on this side of the House have listened to the persuasive arguments of the woolly-headed Dr Sutcliffe.  [LAUGHTER]  And arising out of that we ...

DR M O SUTCLIFFE:  INTERJECTION.

THE SPEAKER:  Order please!  Can we hear the Chief Whip please, without any interference.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  Arising out of that, Mr Speaker, we would wish to withdraw this motion, and formally put the report of the Finance Committee to this House.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you.  Thank you, that solves that.  Before we adjourn the House, I will call upon the Premier to make such announcements as he may have.

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  We would need to vote on that, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  We need to vote?

MR M A TARR: (Chief Whip):  We need to vote on acceptance of that, Mr Speaker.

THE SPEAKER:  Oh, well in that event, thank you, Mr Chief Whip.

	Motion:

	That this House takes note of the 1998/1999 Budget Report of the Finance Committee tabled on 12 May 1998, and having considered the report in terms of Rule 134, hereby resolves:

	that the report be referred back to the Finance Committee, and they be instructed to table an amended report dealing with various concerns raised during the Committee Stage on the Budget Debate, such report to be tabled at the next sitting of the House.

THE MOTION AS GIVEN NOTICE OF BY MR TARR - WITHDRAWN

THE PREMIER:  Excuse me, Mr Speaker.  What the Chief Whip was saying was that he was withdrawing his motion, and then he requested that the report of the Finance Portfolio Committee be put to the vote.  That is what we will be voting on, on the report.

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier.  In that event I shall put the question.

HON MEMBERS:  Microphone.

THE SPEAKER:  Oh, thank you.  In that event, I shall I put the question on the Finance report as suggested by the Chief Whip .

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON FINANCE - ACCEPTED

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  Anything further, Mr Chief Whip?  Thank you very much.  May I take this opportunity to thank the House for the marathon sitting that we have had.  I did not hear any breaking of chairs as happened somewhere far off in Cambodia and other places.  I wish to thank the members.  I hope we will continue behaving in the manner we have been, and continue to be an example to all the Parliaments in which I have been in this country.  Keep it up.  The dignity and the decorum of the House must be maintained at all costs.

Finally, before I adjourn the House, has the Premier any announcement to make?  The hon the Premier.

THE PREMIER:  Thank you, Mr Speaker.  We cannot have a cocktail party after the budget from Finance, as much as we would have loved to have had one.  Of course, if the savings are possible at our next sitting we certainly will have a big cocktail party.  I hope that the departments will have achieved and realised significant savings.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE PREMIER:  What remains is to thank you, Mr Speaker, for your gentlemanly yet strong leadership of this House.  We thank you, and we wish you well until our next sitting.  I request the co-operation from all the parties and all the portfolio committees because we all have a job of work to do.  Thank you.

HON MEMBERS:  Hear! Hear!

THE SPEAKER:  Thank you, Mr Premier. 

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  On a point of order.

THE SPEAKER:  Well, I will give the opportunity, not because it is a point of order, but I will give you an opportunity to say what you have to say.

MR J D MKHWANAZI:  Mr Speaker, I want to take this opportunity on a point of order, although it has not been made, that one of the members fell ill yesterday and he is in hospital.  We wish him a speedy recovery.  That is Mr Bhengu.  I thank you.

THE SPEAKER:  That is an unopposed motion I take it.  Anybody opposed to that motion?  Nobody.  The House expresses its feelings about our colleague.  The House will adjourn until further notice, sine die.


	HOUSE ADJOURNED AT 17:39 SINE DIE


