31 OCTOBER 2007                                      PAGE 1 of 89

                        WEDNESDAY, 31 OCTOBER 2007




The House met at 15:05.

The Speaker took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment

of silence for prayers or meditation.




                                Cluster 3


                  Information and data on farm evictions

411. Mr A H Nel (DA) asked the Minister for Agriculture and Land

31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 2 of 89

        Whether her department has any information and data on farm

        evictions other than the Nkuzi report of 2005; if not, why not;

        if so, what are the relevant details?                    NO2636E


I have been asked by the Minister to assist today. The wording of

the question by Mr Nel is whether the department has any information

and data on farm evictions, etc. The problem is that those terms are

quite vague and indistinct both with regard to information and to


Information is really facts or principles different and

distinguishable from those that are incorporated in formally

organised branches of knowledge; and the same goes for data, which

is detailed information of any kind. It‟s as wide as the veld of

South Africa. The same goes for evidence. I‟ve listed around 15

meanings of the word. The short answer is that I‟ve already answered

this question on 12 September in response to a follow-up question by

the hon Nel. Thank you.

M A H NEL: Mevrou die Speaker, dit lyk vir my asof die agb

Adjunkminister nie nou vandag antwoorde wil gee nie, want hy was

laas keer baie seker van sy feite oor hoeveel mense afgesit word en

wat hy met daardie mense wil doen. [Tussenwerpsels.]
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 3 of 89

Ek wil u herinner aan die Nkuzi-verslag, waarin hy sê, dat van die

5,8 miljoen mense wat plase verlaat het oor daardie 21-jaar-tydperk

is 1,6 miljoen afgesit. Dit is anders as wat die Minister gesê het.

Ek het baie simpatie met mense wat hul werk of hul huis verloor, en

ek kan hul probleme verstaan. Wat die Minister egter vir ons moet

sê, omtrent hierdie mense wat van die plase af gegaan het – en hulle

is van die plase af as gevolg van sekere goed wat die Adjunkminister

se regering gedoen het – wat het die regering gedoen om daardie

maatskaplike verpligting wat dit het ingevolge die Grondwet aan te

spreek ten opsigte van behuising? Of is die boere die enigste sektor

in die ekonomie wat daarvoor verantwoordelik is? Baie dankie.

(Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr A H NEL: Madam Speaker, it seems to me that the hon Deputy

Minister does not want to answer the questions today, because last

time he was very certain of his facts about how many people have

been evicted and what he wanted to do with those people.


I want to remind you of the Nkuzi Report in which he said that out

of the 5,8 million people who had left farms over that 21-year

period, 1,6 million were evicted. This is contrary to what the

Minister has said. I heartily sympathise with people who have lost

their jobs or homes and I can understand their problems, but what

the Minister has to tell us regarding these people who have left the
31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 4 of 89

farms – and they have left the farms because of certain things that

the Deputy Minister‟s government has done – is what government has

done to address the social responsibility it has in terms of the

Constitution regarding housing? Or are the farmers the only sector

in the economy responsible for that? Thank you very much.]


it‟s of course your ruling but I‟ve got the text of the previous

answer here. I could read it again out of Hansard. It has been

answered. Apparently the member just wants a discussion around this

matter. I can respond to that, but it‟s your decision whether I

should again read the answer I gave a month and a half ago.

Apparently Parliament has got time for that. [Interjections.]

You see, the problem is that we have a certain grouping in this

country which seems to be in favour of these types of evictions.

We‟re struggling constantly with the official opposition because

they seem to support these evictions. In Afrikaans we could call

them “hierdie uitsmyters” [these chuckers-out] who are always trying

to take the discussion further.

MR M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: We had a great

deal of fuss last week about question time. I think that, generally

speaking, there has been a kind of willingness on the part of all

parties to take questions seriously. This Deputy Minister today

again is making an absolute joke of question time and of this
31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 5 of 89

particular question. I would urge you to rule that Ministers

generally should take this seriously.

The SPEAKER: I don‟t think we need to rule again on the question of

the seriousness of questions. The hon Deputy Minister is of the view

that he has already tackled the question. However, he was in the

middle of further engaging on the issue. So, please finalise your

point, hon Deputy Minister.


Speaker, I could continue with this argument. We are sitting with

the problem that we have got section 25(5) and (6) which we must

give effect to. Now there‟s a constant resistance in some quarters

against the criminalising of illegal evictions.

As I said in September, the Nkuzi Report is the only statistical

report available which contains an empirical review on this matter.

Until we have something else proving something different, we cannot

just give bits of unproven information out and say that is what

we‟re bringing to Parliament. The opposition should respond to the

Nkuzi report because they are supporting these evictions by those

quarters in the agricultural unions, who are supporting this process

of cleaning up the black spots.

Allow me to read to you a sentence or two from the Constitutional

Court‟s decision during this year about this fundamental problem
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 6 of 89

with which we are engaging. The Constitutional Court said the

following in their judgment. They start here with their argument and

state that the farmers were expected to be the direct agency for the

achievement of racist state objectives.

Then the Constitutional Court judge continues:

  It must be added that the government policy of abolishing tenancy

  was not simply driven by callous economic motives, etc, to grab

  cheap black labour, nor was it merely a push to replace feudal

  forms of reductive relationships. It was part of the grand

  apartheid design. Its notorious objective was to eliminate any

  vestiges of black land rights in what was designated as white

  South Africa. The goal was to cut any residual legal ties those

  identifiable black families and communities had with identifiable

  pieces of land.

Now, the basic premise and objective of our whole land reform

programme against this resistance to vested tenure rights and

acknowledging tenure and insecure tenure is to stop all kinds of old

apartheid apparatchiks from continuing with the removal of these

people and communities in the so-called white agricultural areas.

That is the strategic objective which we had and I can assure you

that we will continue doing what is right in this respect with

undeviating steadiness of purpose. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 7 of 89

MRS B M NTULI: Madam Speaker, the challenge for the department is to

be able to distribute land to the previously-disadvantaged and in

the process develop nation-building and reconciliation and avoid

shallow and narrow politics about the issue.

Now, as the Minister has been responding, there is a facility that

the Minister talked about the other day, to make accessible to

farmworkers and dwellers in farming areas to enable the evictees to

report their cases. How accessible will those facilities be to those

farm dwellers to make sure that there is alternative land for their

settlement? This is a problem - dumping people just about anywhere.

It is a violation of their human rights and a creation of socio-

economic problems. How is that facility going to be accessible to

these farm dwellers and evictees? Thank you, Madam Speaker.


better question! [Interjections.] [Laughter.] Of course, it comes

from the ANC, you see. [Laughter.]

The Department of Land Affairs is in the process of establishing -

and it is quite advanced too – this land rights management facility

that will address evictions and other human rights violations on


Let me just say, our fundamental purpose is to protect and develop

our exports. We don‟t want any inconsistency with our human rights
31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 8 of 89

culture on the farms in South Africa because that will really cause

a problem overseas. It will hinder investment. We must be able to

say this product and that product are human rights compatible. Yes,

that is the formula. You can‟t escape from that. That will promote

South African agriculture.

In cases where illegal evictions are reported to the Department of

Land Affairs, the department will submit an urgent court application

for an order to reinstate the evictees. The department also works

with municipalities to secure temporary shelters while long-term

solutions are sought.

The Minister for Agriculture and Land Affairs, on 21 October 2007,

as has been reported in the media, launched the Land Rights

Awareness Campaign as well as the Land and Agrarian Reform Project

in Rawsonville here in the Western Cape. The main objective of this

Land and Agrarian Reform Project is to improve access, to focus more

sharply on an increase in access in accordance with the

Constitution, as stipulated in section 25(5), and to make processes

easily available.

There is a call centre number, but unfortunately I don‟t have it

with me. I will have it circulated among Members of Parliament. With

this facility we can assist both farmers and farm dwellers – we

shouldn‟t talk only about farmworkers, because this is about farm

dwellers who are evicted – to facilitate the resolution of their
31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 9 of 89

disputes, firstly, through mediation and, if necessary, we will

assist in having the people‟s cases taken to court.

This temporary call centre will operate with free and easy access to

the Department of Land Affairs for those who need to report any

cases of abuse and to know about the procedures to be followed in an

eviction situation.

We must look at the situation as a whole. We mustn‟t allow people

just to go on as they want to. And it is not all the farmers, there

is a very big percentage of farmers and companies who are extremely

responsible. That is true.

In fact, I have a problem with these people who jump out of these

kraals, and they must know they cannot get away from it. You know

what has happened with restitution. We are working on cases of

people who were evicted in the 1930s and 1960s. History doesn‟t

forget it. Don‟t do this. It is my plea so that we can strengthen


Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Madam Speaker, I think I can assure the hon

Deputy Minister that there is nobody in this House who is in favour

of illegal evictions. But what the hon Deputy Minister is doing is

to cast doubt over the farmers as a whole, because he says we have a

certain grouping in favour of those evictions. “A certain grouping.”

He calls them “uitsmyters”. [chucker-outs.]
31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 10 of 89

Now, I would like to ask him to identify that certain grouping,

because if you don‟t identify it, you are casting doubts on all the

farmers in South Africa. That is very unfair. You must identify that

certain grouping. Last time you said, amongst other things, “My

broer, ons sal hulle werk. Ons sal hulle plase vat ...” [We will

work on them. We will take their farms ...] [Interjections.]

Who are you talking about? Are you talking about all farmers?

[Interjections.] Tell us who you are talking about, because you are

casting doubt on the integrity of the farming community of South

Africa. [Interjections.]


yes, I expected hon Van der Merwe to react in that way by

generalising. I‟m not generalising. No, we‟ll take it case by case.

You see, the problem is this: If you go and look at sections 5 to 7

of the Extension of Security Tenure Act, Esta, the idea was to

create a land rights culture. It expected too much from the bad

guys. In other words, a gap was opened to them.

Let me tell you, for example, about services. The Esta legislation –

and I think it was drafted too idealistically in this regard –

expects an agreement to be entered into between the farm dwellers

and the farm owner. Now of course, the farm owner just doesn‟t go

into an agreement and when the contract for employment is ended he

just cuts the water, the electricity, the access, or he says they
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 11 of 89

should go around to another entrance 4 km from where they are. In

other words, it is inhuman conduct that we are talking about.

It is a very small percentage, hon Van der Merwe, less than 2%. Some

say only 1% of these cases formally reaches the courts. It is about

a practice and we can only stop that practice if we have co-

operation from all the parties. There is one party on the other side

of the House. Let me be honest. Who does something among the

communities? Who goes and supports the downtrodden like the ANC

does? It is the ID. They do that [Interjections.] Sorry I couldn‟t

hear that. [Interjections.]

Ja, Patricia werk onder die mense. Dit is die waarheid. Om die

waarheid te sê, ek het dit nie teen die wit kommersiële boere wat

hard werk om ‟n bestaan te maak nie. Hulle doen dit nie. Dit is soms

baie georganiseerd. Ek noem hulle die apparatchiks van die ou

apartheidsregering, wat nog oral sit. Hulle is die probleem.

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Wié is hulle?


name hier noem nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] Koos van der Merwe en mnr Nel!

[Gelag.] Ek maak darem nou sommer ‟n grappie, maar julle weet waar

julle vandaan kom. [Tussenwerpsels.] Ja wel, ek gaan nie nou name

noem nie.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 12 of 89

Kom ek formuleer die probleem vir u een maal: U sien, ons probleem

in Suid-Afrika is dat landbou die minste getransformeerde sektor is

van alle ekonomiese sektore in die land. Ons sit met ‟n klomp

truslaers in landbou. Ons sit met mense wat nie alleen truslaers is

nie, maar u daar anderkant moet asseblief nie met die gespuis op die

put gaan sit nie, u kan dalk inval.

Mnr D V BLOEM: Mevrou die Speaker, op ‟n punt van orde: hoekom voel

mnr Koos van der Merwe so skuldig as die Adjunkminister praat van

hierdie regse, verkrampte boere wat nie wil luister nie? Hoekom voel

hy so skuldig? (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Yes, Patricia works among the people; that is true. To tell the

truth, I am not against the white commercial farmers who work hard

to make a living. They are not doing that. Sometimes it is very

organised. I call them the apparatchiks of the former apartheid

government that are still sitting everywhere. They are the problem.

Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Who are they?


going to mention names here. [Interjections.] Koos van der Merwe and

Mr Nel! [Laughter.] I am only kidding, but you know where you come

from. [Interjections.] Yes, well, I am not going to mention names.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 13 of 89

Let me formulate the problem for you once: You see, our problem in

South Africa is that agriculture is the least transformed sector of

all the economic sectors in the country. We have a number of

restraining influences in agriculture. We have people who are not

only restraining influences, but those of you over there should

please not join the riff-raff on the pit, you might just fall in.


Mr D V BLOEM: Madam Speaker, on a point of order: Why does Mr Koos

van der Merwe feel so guilty when the Deputy Minister talks about

these right-wing, narrow-minded farmers who don‟t want to listen?

Why does he feel so guilty?]

The SPEAKER: Hon member, that‟s not a point of order.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Mevrou die Speaker, kan ek darem net sê, die

Adjunkminister het nou self uit daardie put gepraat waarvan hy ons

gewaarsku het.

As ek net na die vraag kyk, is dit doodeenvoudig oor waar die

inligting is op grond waarvan ons planne moet maak om hierdie

probleem op te los, want die kwessie van uitsettings is belangrik.

Dis nie almal wat daaraan deelneem nie. Ons wil weet wie die mense

is wat dit doen sodat daar opgetree kan word, maar daar is aksies

hier aan die gang.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 14 of 89

Punt bly egter, dit lyk my al wat die Departement van Grondsake het,

is hierdie een verslag. Hulle het geen ander verslae nie, en vir die

res werk hulle op hoorsê-getuienis om wilde beskuldigings te maak,

soos wat die Adjunkminister nou hier aangaan, soos hy ook in sy een

toespraak gemaak het.

Vertel ons miskien ‟n bietjie meer van jou “ethnic cleansing”

[etniese suiwering] en waar is die basis waarop jy daaroor praat? Ek

sal dit graag wil hoor, want dis ‟n beskuldiging teen die

boeregemeenskap wat juis bereid is om te probeer help, maar elke

keer kom u en sê dinge hier van hierdie vloer af wat al die

welwillendheid wat daar is weer ongedaan maak. U moet ophou daarmee!



Speaker, vir dr Van Niekerk se hulp. (Translation of Afrikaans

paragraphs follows.)

[Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Madam Speaker, may I just say, the Deputy

Minister has just spoken from that very same pit he warned us of!

If I look at the question, it is simply about where to find the

information on which we need to base our planning to solve this

problem, because the matter of evictions is important. Not everyone

has a part in this. We would like to know who these people are who
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 15 of 89

are doing this so action can be taken, but there are actions taking

place here.

The fact remains, it seems to me that all the Department of Land

Affairs has is this one report. They have no other reports, and for

the rest they are working on hearsay evidence to make wild

accusations, as the Deputy Minister is doing here, as he has also

done in one of his speeches.

Maybe tell us a little more about this ethnic cleansing and on what

basis you are talking about that? I would like to hear that, because

it is an accusation against the farming community who are in fact

willing to try and help, but you come along every time and say

things from this platform that once again undo all the existing

goodwill. You have to stop doing that! [Applause.]


Madam Speaker, for Dr van Niekerk‟s assistance.]

Before I answer that, let me just give the toll-free number which

the department has sent through to me. Here it is. The Land Rights

Awareness Campaign‟s number is 0800007095 - a lot of zeros.


No, hon Van Niekerk! You see, let me put it this way. I quoted to

you the decision made by the Constitutional Court, and this is
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 16 of 89

fundamentally the same process that is happening when people are

evicted in this inhumane way.

Yesterday, I spent the whole afternoon in Pniel near Stellenbosch at

the NCOP‟s sitting in the Western Cape. For the whole afternoon,

speakers after speakers were telling us about the inhuman treatment

and evictions that were happening on the farms in a large area in

the Western Cape.

Mr R J KING: Dis jy wat hulle aangery het! [It‟s you who drove them



farmers giving their point of view there. Why not? It was an open

event. [Interjections.] No, this was the NCOP that had arranged the

meeting there. It‟s in the papers every day. Now, if we wanted to

make a case in every one of these instances, you‟d need a huge

facility. You‟d need to engage the police because when it‟s in the

courts, then it‟s a question for Justice.

Ms A M DREYER: Mevrou die Speaker, op ‟n punt van orde: ek wil net

graag weet of die res van die ANC-kabinet nie skaam kry vir hierdie

Adjunkminister nie. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Madam Speaker, on a point of

order: I would just like to know if the rest of the ANC Cabinet are

not ashamed of this Deputy Minister. [Interjections.]]
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 17 of 89

The SPEAKER: No, hon member, please. I don‟t like these points of

order, which are clearly from the word “go” not actually points of

order. Hon Du Toit, please finish.


Speaker, that you must be bothered by that nonsense. [Laughter.] You

know, you can kill me, but you can‟t hurt me anymore.

[Interjections.] I‟m used to these personal attacks and they don‟t

do anything to me.

Now let me formulate these attacks. They are actually what the

Germans would call elegante Unsinn - it is fashionable nonsense.


The fundamental problem is that we must look at these activities -

the empirical activities of eviction. What idea is underpinning


Dr J T DELPORT: Madam Speaker, I rise on a legitimate point of

order: Is it in order for the Deputy Minister, when a clear and

concise question was put to him by the hon Van Niekerk, to talk

about everything but not give an answer to the question?

The SPEAKER: Hon member, it is actually not a point of order. Please

finish your answer, hon Du Toit.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 18 of 89


the answer has been given and the hon Van Niekerk understands very

well what I‟m saying.

Mr M J ELLIS: Madam Speaker ...

The SPEAKER: If the answer has been given, then that‟s fine.

Mr M J ELLIS: Sit down!

The SPEAKER: Hon Deputy Minister, you may then take your seat and we

can proceed to the next question.



             Progress made with updating Asset Register

391. Ms N D Ngcengwane (ANC) asked the Minister of Public Works:

     (a)What progress has his department made with updating the

     Asset Register and (b) how are assets verified where there are

     no records?                                               NO2614E

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Thanks, Speaker, as well as the member

who had asked the question that should have followed, for your
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 19 of 89

understanding. I requested that I be released because of a function

I have to attend.

Hon Ngcengwana raises an issue regarding how far we are, as a

department, with updating the asset register. Maybe before answering

that question, it is important for me to indicate to hon members

that this is not an easy matter. It is a matter that we are

grappling with, given its challenges.

We are tasked with ensuring that time and again we update our asset

register, particularly on disposals. We also have to ensure that

between Land Affairs and ourselves we are able to confirm the data

that we have with regard to assets that belong to the state.

In terms of the work that we have been doing since 2005, where the

department embarked on an asset enhancement programme, we have

indeed moved forward. We are seeing progress, albeit small. One of

the things that we have done through this programme is to collect

and research basic land information per property, whether improved

or vacant, against the information of the Deeds Office.

We are trying to also link our IT systems so that whatever happens

in the transactions in terms of the Deeds Office, we are also able

to capture it. Also, when we do disposals once an asset has been

registered, we are able to monitor it and update our asset register.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 20 of 89

We are also measuring floor areas of buildings occupied by national

departments who are our clients. We are also establishing and

verifying the occupancy of the identified stands on properties and

comparing them with the user information of the movable asset

register. We have also been trying through this programme to capture

all servitudes or service right permits affecting the relevant

properties that are owned by the state.

We have also tried through technology, again particularly using

digital cameras, to capture the front and side elevations in

particular of the improvement work that we have been doing. So,

these are some of the elements around which we are trying to enhance

our records in terms of the asset register. As I have said indeed we

acknowledge that this is not to the satisfaction of all of us and I

am sure of the hon members.

The second question relates to the first one but specifically asking

how we are dealing with those assets that may not be accounted for.

We have identified certain departments that are critical where we

would need to verify certain assets and whether they still belong to

the state or maybe such records have not been properly captured in

for instance Foreign Affairs in respect of international assets.

This also applies to the SA Police Service because as you would know

some of those departments operating in the far-flung areas were

given accommodation by the state. There is a matter that was raised
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 21 of 89

last year when I had just started on assets that belonged to the

state but were subleased by some officials particularly around


So the Department of Defence is one such department that we have

identified as a partner in trying to deal with information. We have

also been working with the provinces, particularly in terms of some

of those properties that were under the TBVC states. The other issue

as you would recall is that in the beginning of the year during our

budget speech, we indicated that we will also try and put a system

in place such as a call centre where people who know of the state

assets that we may not know about can actually call.

I must also say that even though we have not finalised the issue of

the call centre, we have actually had a lot of people writing to the

Minister indicating that, “I am staying on your property, and these

were the circumstances ...“ - whatever the circumstances may be ...

“so, can you please assist in the regularisation or can this

property be disposed of to me?” That has also helped us to capture

some of the information on the unaccounted - for assets. That we

have done had before. Thank you.

Ms N D NGCENGWANE: Madam Speaker, I want to firstly say thank you

very much to the Minister for the response.

Okokuqala, Mphathiswa ndicela impendulo yakho ingakumbi malunga

nezakhiwo ezathi zatsha, ezinye zonakala umzekelo, kwii-ofisi
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 22 of 89

zaseMthatha kwiSebe leMisebenzi yooLuntu ezathi zatsha emva kowe-

1994 ingaba iimpahla ezazilapho zakwazi ukubhalwa phantso zonke na.

Kwaye uluntu olukula ngingqi lona lwabandakanywa kangakanani na.

Okwesibini, ingaba sinayo indlela youthintela into enjengaleya

yokutsha okanye ukonakala kwempahla karhulumente kwaye ngawaphi

amalungiselelo ento enokuthi yenzeke (backup system) esinawo ukuze

singaxhomekeki kwi-ofisi karhulumente yokubhaliswa kwempahla (deeds


UMPHATHISWA WEZEMISEBENZI YOLUNTU: Mama uNgcengwane ndingatsho ukuba

ndicela uxolo ngoba khange ndiwufumane umbuzo ujoliswe nqo

kwizakhiwa zaseMthatha, mhlawumbi ke andizikukwazi ukuphendula

kwangoku. Ndiza kucela ukuba undivumele ukuba ndiphinde ndiye

kuyijonga impendulo phambi kokuba ndibuyele kuwe.

Kodwa ke manditsho nje ukuba ezinye zezi zinto ingakumbi ukukhuselwa

kwezakhiwo zikarhulumente esijongene nako sifuna ukuba kungabikho

sakhiwo sikarhulumente esingenazo izicima-mlilo, ukwenzela ukuthi

ukuba kukho into eyenzekayo njengokutsha sikwazi ukuwucima

singalindala zicima-mlilo. Zikhona ke nezinye izinto esizenzayo

ukukhusela ezo zakhiwo.

Mhlawumbi manditsho nokuthi xa kukho umonakalo owenzekileyo endaweni

ingakumbi kwezi zakhiwo zikarhulumente apho kukho imfuneko yokuba

sithethe noluntu ukubuza okanye ukuva ukuba ingaba bona babone ntoni
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 23 of 89

na. Loo nto iyenziwa noxa ingenziwa sithi sodwa ikwangumsebenzi

wamapolisa, athi nawo asincedise ekujongeni ukuba loo monakalo

wenzekeliyo ubangelwe yintoni na. Ndiyabulela. (Translation of

isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)

[Firstly, hon Minister, I would like to have your response,

especially regarding the issue of the buildings that were burnt down

and the others that were damaged – at the Mthatha offices, for

instance, at the Department of Public Works – which were burnt down

after 1994. Was it possible to record all the equipment that was

there? To what extent were the local people involved in the process?

Secondly, do we have a mechanism for preventing something like this

from repeating itself – the burning down and destruction of

government property? What back-up system do we have to ensure that

we are not dependent on the government‟s Deeds Office?

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Hon Member I would like to apologise

because I did not get a question that referred directly to the

Mthatha buildings. I may not be able to reply at this point. I would

like to have your permission to go back and find the answer and then

come back to you.

However, I would like to point out that with regard to some of these

things, especially the burning down of government buildings, what we

envisage is a situation in which not a single government building is
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 24 of 89

without fire extinguishers, so that when something happens, such as

a fire, we are able to extinguish it without having to wait for the

fire engines. There are other things that we also do to protect

those buildings.

Let me also say that whenever damage occurs in a particular area,

especially in government buildings, if there is a need for us to

communicate with the local community to find out what they have

seen, we do that, even though we are not the only ones who will do

this. It is also the duty of the police, who also help us to

determine the cause of the damage. Thank you.]

Mr S E OPPERMAN: Speaker and Madam Minister, the updating of the

asset register must be an ongoing process. So, I believe the asset

register is a living document. In the latest report of the Auditor-

General it was pointed out that additions and improvements to the

value of more than R400 million were not reflected in the asset

register. My question is: Is there a dedicated team with a dedicated

budget to deal with this challenge, and if there is why are they not

doing their work and if not, why not? Can you just respond to that?


Mr P J GROENEWALD: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order as I

want to know as far as the interpreting services go, why all the

other languages are translated, except Afrikaans. Is there a

problem? Can we solve it, please.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 25 of 89

The MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS: Madam Speaker, with regard to the

specific matter you are raising that relates to our audit report -

particularly in our annual report, which indicates a challenge

regarding the unaccounted - for registration of some of those assets

that have been improved, it is a matter that we have noted and we

are going to deal with. As to a dedicated team, we did not have, but

as part of the plan in ensuring that we indeed manage our assets in

a way that is satisfactory not only to ourselves as government and

legislatures, but also to all South Africans, we are actually

investigating that matter.

As you say, that an asset register is a living document, because if

you sell an asset you have to update the register to indicate how

much asset you now have that are remaining. But you also need to

ensure that you do put the value of what revenue you might have

received out of the sale or the disposal of a particular asset.

So, I would agree that indeed as a department we need to consider

having a dedicated team that is going to deal with that matter.

Obviously it is not going to be a dedicated team that is outside the

asset management unit. It would have to be within it but

specifically focused on the management of our as a state assets.

Thank you.

        Prognosis for ACP-EU economic partnership agreements
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 26 of 89

382. Mr S J Njikelana (ANC) asked the Minister of Trade and


     What is the prognosis of economic partnership agreements

     between the African, Caribbean and Pacific, ACP, group of

     countries and the European Union in the context of the December

     2007 deadline?                                            NO2101E


Speaker, South Africa was not legally obliged to participate in the

ACP-EU EPA partnership negotiations and had we taken a narrow view,

we simply could have continued with our existing free trade

arrangement with the EU under the Trade, Development and Co-

operation Agreement. Our decision to engage with the EU through the

EPA process arose from our commitment to the promotion of regional

integration in Southern Africa.

Our concern was that the EPA process had already divided SADC with

several SADC members opting to negotiate the economic partnership as

part of a different configuration while Tanzania, Angola,

Mozambique, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland had opted to

negotiate as part of the SADC-EPA group.

Further, we were concerned that if a separate deal with Botswana,

Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland was made while South Africa

maintained the Trade, Development and Co-operation Agreement it
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 27 of 89

would entrench the anomaly that currently exists where SACU shares a

single common external tariff but would have separate trade

relations with the EU.

We have devoted considerable time and human resources to the SADC-

EPA process since 2004 and have played a direct role in shaping and

negotiating the approach of the SADC-EPA configuration, both at the

strategic and technical level.

Our prognosis is that the negotiations on trade in goods have

progressed well and that we are on course to conclude these

negotiations by the December 2007 deadline which is linked to the

expiry of the WTO Waiver on Cotonou Preferences.

Our main concern is with the EC‟s insistence on expanding the scope

of the EPA negotiations to include legal obligations in a host of

new issues, including services, investments, competition,

intellectual property rights, government procurement, labour and

environmental standards. We recognise that these issues are

important yet complex matters while we are convinced that the human

capacity, policy and institutional prerequisites that are necessary

to engage do not yet exist in SADC.

We have therefore proposed a co-operative arrangement with the EC in

dealing with these issues postponing any decisions to negotiate

binding commitments in these areas until the region has built up the
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 28 of 89

requisite capacity, policy and legal frameworks. This must be at

least a medium-term process.

Our view is that the EC is pursuing a mercantilist and commercially

driven set of negotiation objectives, particularly with regard to

the new issues. This is in line with its new global trade strategy,

which has identified a need to pursue regulatory issues beyond

tariffs in enhancing market access for EU firms.

In a series of public statements the EC has sought to portray South

Africa as negative and obstinate in resisting its objectives. This

is entirely unconstructive and has complicated the negotiation

process unnecessarily. Thank you.

Mr S J NJIKELANA: Chairperson, I thank Deputy Minister Davies for

his informative response. One takes note of the fact that there

obviously are good and positive areas in the prospects that are in

the trade and goods, but one also takes note of the concerns of

expansion on legal obligations. My question is linked with the

concerns that are brought in by the EC as well as the fact that

there seems to be lack of unity amongst the SADC members.

My question is: What role would South Africa play in unifying the

SADC members so that they have a common position throughout the

process of negotiations, particularly as what seems to be happening

is that there is a drive by Europe to shift away from the
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 29 of 89

developmental character as espoused in the Doha Round? What role

would South Africa play to unify the SADC members, in particular?

Thank you.


Chairperson, well, as I indicated in the main reply, we have devoted

considerable efforts and we have very much played a leading role in

defining the common positions. The positions which we have as a

SADC-EPA region are indeed the common positions of all of us. We

have gone through debates.

The biggest concern, particularly of Botswana, Swaziland and

Namibia, is that if we don‟t conclude the process by the end of this

year, what could happen is that they might find themselves trading

on worse terms with the EU whilst taking on board reciprocal

obligations through their membership of the customs union and

through the application of the Trade, Development and Co-operation

Agreement to them.

I think that we have devoted considerable attention to this and that

we now have a common position that is more or less, as I have

described it, that on the new-generation issues - particularly the

regulatory issues - what is available now is co-operation but

legally binding obligations would be something only for the medium

term. Thank you.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 30 of 89

Dr P J RABIE: Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister, thank you for your

very informative first answer. You mentioned that the EU has got a

sort of a mercantilistic approach towards the ACP union, and I agree

with you. Something else which is of great concern is the

agricultural subsidies, especially in the EU, because many of the

Caribbean and African countries are one-product-export agricultural

economies. What is your view? Do you think that the EU will pursue

their present policy of agricultural subsidies or do you think that

they will minimise their agricultural subsidies, specially on a wide

range of products? Thank you.


Chairperson, I should just make it clear that the view we have that

their position is mercantilist and commercially driven on the new-

generation issues arises from text that was presented to us in the

negotiating process in Walvis Bay a few months ago. It is linked

very much to a paper entitled Global Europe in which the EU has

identified the need to address these kinds of issues in order to

make market access a much more real phenomenon.

As far as agricultural subsidies are concerned, these are not

directly on the negotiating agenda at the moment. What is on the

negotiating agenda for direct benefit to South Africa is the

enlargement of access in terms of reduction of tariffs for a range

of agricultural products and fishing products, which were treated

badly under the Trade, Development and Co-operation Agreement.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 31 of 89

The question of subsidies has been discussed at the multilateral

process in the WTO, where I am afraid to say not enough progress is

being made on this, but the hon member is quite right that these

subsidies, both export, and production subsidies, are a major

disadvantage to the developing countries. Thank you.

Mr S N SWART: Thank you, Chairperson. Hon Deputy Minister, arising

from your response and in view of the delay in the ACP-EU talks as

well as the delay in the WTO‟s stalled Doha Talks, do you not

consider it advisable for us to go ahead with our own trade reform

in order to boost our export competitiveness and productivity?

This, particularly following Minister Manuel‟s Budget Statement

yesterday to the effect that –

  ... to boost economic growth beyond 6% in coming years, it is

  crucial for South African companies to take advantage of market

  access and systematically expand market share.

This is in the light of the view that high rates of protection

reduce the profitability of exports relative to domestic sales.

Thank you.


Chairperson, the National Industrial Policy Framework and the

Industrial Policy Action Plan identify particularly the need for us
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 32 of 89

to reduce tariffs on inputs for downstream manufacturing industries

that are going to be prioritised. So, we are indeed engaged in such

a process.

We are also engaged in discussions about the possibility of making

some further simplifications to the tariff book. But the discussion

we really do need to have is that if we are going to make further

adjustments in tariffs that we identify as necessary, are we going

to make them in the context of trade negotiations such as ammunition

a war chest for us to negotiate our concessions on the other side -

or is it something which should happen unilaterally? That debate is

still ongoing. Thank you.

Mr L B LABUSCHAGNE: Thank you, Deputy Minister. Just looking at the

nature of the question that seems to be about a broad economic

participation between the ACP group of countries, I appreciate it

that your reply was obviously very specifically directed and related

to our Southern African – our SADC – areas.

Could I just ask: Is there a commonality of approach on behalf of

all the ACP countries in the negotiations with the EU or are the

interests too diverse to talk about a fairly common approach in this



think there was a debate about the role of the whole ACP
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 33 of 89

negotiations versus the regional negotiations. It is unfortunate in

many respects that the regional negotiations had developed a

momentum which outpaced the all - ACP process. But there are

interactions from time to time and some very common concerns are

beginning to emerge and these are around things which are not that

directly of interest to South Africa perhaps; but they are around

things like aid for trade, support for making adjustments that arise

from the entry into our free trade agreement and so on.

I am not actually at this moment in a position to say how far each

of the other five EPA regions are in terms of concluding the

process. But there is an enormous pressure and I think that we need

to understand that this enormous pressure came after a very slow


We, in SADC, put forward our proposal to the EU in March 2006 and we

received a response in March 2007. So it was very lacklustre, very

slow for a while, and now the momentum has been picking up but

everybody is under the same pressure to conclude by the end of

December, otherwise many countries will find themselves trading on

worse terms with the EU than they do currently. Thank you.

The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): Order! Before we move to the

next question, a point of order was raised earlier about the

interpretation services by hon P J Groenewald who expressed regret

at the unavailability of the Afrikaans interpretation. We have an
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 34 of 89

explanation that due to the Taking Parliament to the People by the

NCOP in Paarl area, which is a dominantly Afrikaans-speaking

constituency, quite a number of interpreters had to be deployed into

that particular function and activity and therefore we don‟t have a

full service available in Parliament. We do apologise for that. That

is the explanation that we received. It is not at all because the

language is being undermined.

Mr P J GROENEWALD: Thank you, Chairperson. I accept that and I

propose that you employ more people who can interpret into


The HOUSE CHAIRPERSON (Mr K O Bapela): We will look into that

matter. Thank you.

Use of land transferred by way of land reform for housing instead of


416. Mr P J Groenewald (FF Plus) asked the Minister for Agriculture

     and Land Affairs:

     (1)     Whether the Department of Land Affairs is paying attention

             to the phenomenon where commercial and other agricultural

             land which was transferred to beneficiaries by way of

             restitution and land reform is not being utilised for
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 35 of 89

             agricultural purposes, but rather for housing; if not, why

             not; if so,

     (2) whether her department has introduced measures to prevent

             the loss of agricultural land in this way; if not, why

             not; if so, what measures?                          NO2643E


of the answer to the question is as follows. The department has not

come across the matter referred to in the question. However, if you

look closely at land beneficiaries that were restored under the

restitution programme, indeed part of the land - small parts

normally - they try to select nonviable agricultural portions that

can be used and is being used for housing for the claimant


This speaks for itself, that land reform beneficiaries may reside on

the farm on pieces that are planned and allocated for residential

purposes. There may be instances where you have this result on

account of seasonal farming and grazing, but it must not be mistaken

for the abandonment of agricultural activities as perhaps implied by

the question.

Secondly, in respect of land transferred under the restitution

programme, an agreement will always be made under section 42(t) of

the Restitution Act which clearly defines the use of the restored
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 36 of 89

land. We also have so-called quality of life surveys during which in

the recent past about 70% of these farms were visited, and there‟s

clear evidence of agricultural activity in at least 70% of the areas


It is important to note that the problems which beneficiaries are

encountering are identified in this process. Let me just say that a

problem of changing agricultural use for other purposes is not just

a question of land reform and restitution. On a far bigger scale it

really happens in the commercial agricultural field and I think we

must take a closer look at it.

There is a piece of legislation very far advanced in its

preparation. I‟m talking about the so-called Land Use Management

Bill as well as the Sustainable Use and Protection of Agricultural

Resources Bill where, for example, you can have some measures in

place when someone changes the use of a farm from agricultural use

to land for game farming or other residential purposes – you see it

happening everywhere. I think the substance and principle of this

matter of retaining our agricultural land as far as possible, taking

into account other uses, is of importance. Thank you.

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Voorsitter, Suid-Afrika is nie `n

landbouvriendelike land nie. Wat ek daarmee bedoel, is dat die

weersomstandighede en alles wat daarmee gepaard gaan, asook die

grond in Suid-Afrika, nie baie gunstig vir landbou is nie. As ons
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 37 of 89

nou weer in die media kyk, dan word daar bespiegel dat rentekoerse

kan styg omdat voedsel 25% van die inflasiemandjie opmaak en dat die

verbruiker nie daaroor beheer het nie.

Voedselsekerheid in Suid-Afrika is van uiterste belang. Ek wil vir

die agb Adjunkminister sê hy moet `n bietjie gaan kyk wat sê die

Grondeisekommissie. `n Ondersoek van dié kommissie het gevind dat

uit 324 plase wat spesifiek was vir landboudoeleindes, slegs 47%

daarvan weer aangewend word vir landbou.

Ons kan nie in Suid-Afrika bekostig dat waardevolle kommersiële

landbougrond aangewend word vir iets anders as vir kommersiële

landbougrond nie. Die agb Minister sê dat daar wetgewing oppad is,

maar ek wil vra: is hulle werklik ernstig om na die breë prentjie te

kyk om te verseker dat die bestaande kommersiële landbougrond vir

voedselsekerheid in die toekoms behoue sal bly? Dankie.


skerp kante van u reaksie; ons moet ... Nee, man, ek komplementeer

jou in die proses. Nee, u weet ... (Translation of Afrikaans

paragraphs follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, South Africa is not an agriculture-

friendly country. What I mean by that is that the weather conditions

and everything that goes with it as well as the soil, are not very

conducive to agriculture. If we look at the media, it is again being
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 38 of 89

speculated that interest rates can rise because food comprises 25%

of the inflation basket and the consumer has no control over this.

Food security is extremely important in South Africa. I want to tell

the hon Deputy Minister to take a look at what the Land Claims

Commission says. An investigation from this commission found that

out of a group of 324 farms, which were specifically set aside for

agriculture, only 47% of it is being used for that purpose.

South Africa cannot afford to use valuable commercial agricultural

land for any other purpose. The hon Minister says that legislation

is on its way, but I would like to ask: Are they really serious

about looking at the bigger picture to ensure that commercial

agricultural land will be preserved for future food security? Thank



from your sharp reaction; we must... no, I am complimenting you in

the process. No, you know ...]

Let me just communicate the fundamental problem. The fundamental

problem is to raise our production, especially of agricultural

exports. The problem in that regard is that unskilled labour is not

engaged to the extent that it should have been in the agricultural

31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 39 of 89

We have the problem that, as you correctly said, South Africa is an

extremely complex and difficult agricultural environment, but the

question is: Could it provide the jobs and exports which we would

need? Only 19% of South Africa receives more than 750mm of rain per

year and that makes it tough. But you know there are very good

results in some countries which are dry, like most of South Africa.

But that is our fundamental worry – to get more unskilled jobs in

agriculture. In that respect we need everyone in South Africa to

commit himself in this regard.

We don‟t know why, but I remember that it was said that there must

be something else that is preventing this growth of unskilled labour

in the intensive sectors that should have been growing far more than

it is. I think, to be really honest, what we should do is step up

the post-settlement support of beneficiaries in South Africa, either

of land reform restitution or whatever programme further more and it

should be a sympathetic type of support which mustn‟t stop on the

day when the land is handed over. I can assure you that quite

advanced research has been done with aid from overseas on this

matter of settlement support and it is effective.

Restitution is especially paying attention to this matter. You know,

we sit with the beginning years‟ results of restitution which we

should go look at again and revitalise a lot of these projects and

in the process we really need the support of commercial agriculture,

and they are giving it. It is just here and there that there is a
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 40 of 89

problem. We have got the knowledge and if we really address this

seriously, South Africa can grow considerably, both in our

production as well as giving previously disadvantaged people access

to agriculture. Thank you.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Thank you, Chair.

Adjunkminister, dankie vir die antwoord. U het weer eens net om die

probleem gepraat. Die kern van hierdie probleem is dat mense deur

hervorming en restitusie grond kry. Hulle moet daarop `n lewe maak

en daar is sekere gebruiksaanwysings vir daardie grond. As gevolg

van `n klomp faktore is hulle nie suksesvol met die landbou nie en

dan verval die grond en op die ou einde word dit gebruik vir

bewoning en vir ander doeleindes. Nou is die vraag: tot watter mate

neem die Departement van Landbou kennis van hierdie storie? Watter

interaksie is daar? Lê die verantwoordelikheid by u of by die

provinsie om die nodige kundigheid te gee?

Daar is baie van daardie gevalle wat u besoek het; ons het hulle ook

besoek en ons is ontsteld oor die agteruitgang wat ons oral gesien

het as gevolg van `n gebrek aan kennis, `n gebrek aan opleiding en

`n gebrek aan voorligting. Dit is wat nodig is om daardie projekte

reg te kry. Ons wil almal hê dat dit moet slaag. Dit sal nie slaag

as jy net met groot fanfare grond gee en daarna nie die nodige

ondersteuningsmaatreëls gee sodat mense wat nie altyd die kennis het
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 41 of 89

nie, met verloop van tyd die kennis kry en dit sinvol kan benut. Dan

sal die probleem opgelos word. Wat doen u hieromtrent?


u net met my saamgestem. Baie dankie. Ons moet hierdie ondersteuning

verhoog. Dit is presies wat ek vroeër genoem het wat die “land

rights management facility” [grondregte bestuursfasileit] gaan

bereik. Die integrasie en koördinering tussen die funksies van die

nasionale landbou departement en die provinsiale departemente is

fundamenteel tot die sukses in dié verband. Dit gaan redelik goed

wat daardie integrasie betref, maar dit is detail-tipe koördinering

wat moet geskied. Ek verwag besonder baie van die nuwe plan wat die

Minister nou aangekondig het, en wat in werking gestel word en reeds

ver gevorder het met hierdie koördinasie, om hierdie ondersteuning

te gee.

Dit is nie net `n kwessie van opleiding nie, maar ook ‟n kwessie van

mense wat vir drie generasies ontneem is van kontak met die landbou.

Dit moet weer opgebou word. Dit is mos nou waaroor ons saamstem. Ons

gaan dit doen en ons het dit al baie gedoen. Daar is baie

suksesvolle projekte. En daar is mislukkings. Dit weet ons almal,

ons was daar. Hulle moet ook reggemaak word. Dit vra moeite en

geduld en dit vra ook geld.

Ek kan u verseker dat die regering bereid is om daardie geld

beskikbaar te stel, maar jy kan nie net geld na die probleem gooi
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 42 of 89

nie. Jy moet ook stelsels daarstel en dit het al aansienlik verbeter

oor die afgelope ruk, veral sedert 1999. Ons sal die punt bereik.

U weet dat met restitusie in `n land soos Kanada vat dit gemiddeld

tussen 13 en 15 jaar om een restitusie-eis af te handel.

[Tussenwerpsels.] Ja, maar julle het nie geluister nie. Die punt is

dat in Suid-Afrika het ons so baie so vinnig gedoen dat ons nou

hierdie haakplekke moet aanspreek. (Translation of Afrikaans

paragraphs follows.)

[Hon Deputy Minister, thank you for your answer. You have once again

avoided the issue. The core of this problem is that people are given

land on the basis of reform and restitution. They have to earn a

living on that land and there are certain instructions for usage of

that land. As a result of many factors they are unsuccessful in

terms of agriculture and the land deteriorates after which they end

up using the land for residential and other purposes. Now the

question is, to what measure does the Department of Agriculture and

Land Affairs take note of this situation? What interaction is there?

Does the responsibility of supplying the necessary skills lie with

you or the province?

There are many such cases which you visited. We also visited them

and we are upset about the widespread deterioration we saw that was

due to a lack of knowledge, a lack of training, and a lack of

agricultural extension. This is what is needed to get these projects
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 43 of 89

on track. We all want them to succeed. It will not succeed if you,

with great fanfare, give people land and then don‟t give the

necessary support so that people who sometimes lack knowledge, will

in time acquire this knowledge and be able to utilise the land

suitably. Then the problem will be solved. What are you doing about



actually you simply agreed with me. Thank you. We need to increase

this support. This is exactly what the land rights management

facility will achieve as I mentioned earlier. Success in this regard

is fundamentally based on integration and co-ordination between the

functions of the national and provincial departments of agriculture.

Integration is going relatively well, but there has to be detailed

co-ordination. I expect much of the new plan that the Minister

announced. It has already been implemented and has made a lot of

progress with co-ordination and providing support.

It is not only a question of training, it is also an issue of people

being deprived of contact with agriculture for three generations.

This must be built up again. This surely is what we agree upon. We

are going to do it and have already done so often. There are many

successful projects; and there are failures. We all know that

because we were there. They must also be rectified. It takes effort,

patience and money.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 44 of 89

I can assure you that the government is willing to make the money

available, but you cannot simply throw money at the problem. You

must set systems in place and this has improved considerably,

especially since 1999. We will reach the point.

You know that in a country such as Canada, it takes between three

and 15 years to conclude a restitution claim. [Interjections.] Yes,

but you were not listening. The point is that in South Africa we

have done so much so quickly that we now have to address these


We must address the problems and assist all these beneficiaries to

become successful on the farms. We agree with that. It is all just a

question of having it done in detail. Thank you.

Ms C NKUNA: Chairperson, I came to sit by the microphone, that is

why it reflects the hon Nxumalo‟s name.

Chairperson and hon Deputy Minister, I thank you. Hon Deputy

Minister, arising from your initial response, would you agree that

rural areas do need human settlement with the necessary

infrastructure to be provided for by the department? I am referring

to those areas with low agricultural potential. The reason is that

not everybody who would like to leave the rural farming areas wants

to go to the urban areas. I thank you.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 45 of 89


yes, indeed, you see our approach should not just be handing over

land, but it should be a developmental approach in the rural areas

so that we look at the whole problem. It is about roads, businesses

being established, schools and health. It is not just a single just

problem of land. Land is just part of implementing a whole rural

developmental approach. We are always talking about this. This is

exactly what Ms Nkuna is talking about.

If you just think of establishing new towns in rural areas where the

services can be provided, it takes a lot of effort and co-operation

between national, provincial and especially local government. We

must get local government more involved in land reform and

participation when we do land restitution.

That has always been the policy, but the municipalities in those

faraway rural areas are sometimes not really capacitated and we must

grow them, because in the end these settlements undertaken with

national housing, national transport, provincial housing and local

government, are an extremely difficult developmental implementation

project that we are busy with.

It is going so much better at the moment. We‟ve got the provinces

co-operating. We have got a lot of the other municipalities in rural

areas supporting the government‟s drives for development in these

rural areas. It is just that it is a big country and there are areas
31 OCTOBER 2007                                   PAGE 46 of 89

that can produce much more. If you go and look at the areas north of

Port St Johns ... [Time expired.]

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Thank you, Chairperson.

Agb Adjunkminister, daar is ‟n onderskeid tussen die probleme van

restitusie en grondhervorming. Restitusie het gewoonlik die gevolg

dat daar meer mense op die grond is as wat daardie grond gewoonweg

kan dra, sodat daar ‟n ander probleem bykom.

Die advies wat hierdie mense kry, by ‟n paar van die projekte wat ek

besoek het in hierdie verband, wys dat daar nie genoegsame hulp kom

om bloot net die gemeenskap te orden nie. Ek dink daaraan moet

aandag gegee word. Wat doen u daaromtrent?

Oor die hervorming gedeelte is ek bly dat die Minister van Finansies

aangekondig het dat geld beskikbaar is vir meer

voorligtingsbeamptes. Ek hoop dat daardie voorligtingsbeamptes van

daardie aard sal wees wat u hiervoor gaan aanwend en dat dit nie net

mense is wat met blink motors rondry en eenmaal ‟n week of eenmaal

‟n maand ‟n projek besoek nie, maar tussen mense gaan bly met die

nodige kennis om die ding te doen, want dan sal ons daardie probleem

oplos. Op die oomblik is dit deel van die probleem. (Translation of

Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 47 of 89

[Hon Deputy Minister, we have to differentiate between the problems

of restitution and land reform. Restitution usually results in there

being more people living on the land than the land can bear and that

leads to an additional problem.

The advice that these people are given, as I have seen at a number

of these projects I have visited, shows that there is in sufficient

assistance to organise the community. I think attention must be

given to this. What are you doing about it?

I was happy to hear that the Minister announced that money would be

made available for more agricultural extension officers. I hope that

those extension officers will be employed in the role that was

created for them and that they won‟t be people who drive around in

flashy cars and who only visit a project once a week or once a

month; that they will live among the people and share their

knowledge because that is how the problem will be solved. At the

moment it is part of the problem.]


would just like to thank the hon Van Niekerk for supporting these

governmental initiatives regarding stepping up extension services,

especially the budgetary assistance for money paid over to provinces

and creating a programme of extension.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 48 of 89

Extension must just also be understood in this wider developmental

perspective. I can assure you they shouldn‟t drive around in big

cars. They need little “bakkies” to get out there and indeed live

among the people. That is exactly what the government wants and we

thank you for your support in this regard.

Let me just tell you that restitution inherently of course is very

difficult, because it is a matter of rights being restored and it is

not a question of looking at what the best developmental objectives

are. What we are trying consistently is that we have got staff in

restitution commissions in different provincial offices who apply

their minds solely to the support systems and try to create

facilitation with the provinces and the municipalities. This is done

exceptionally well. Our problem is there are a lot of old projects

and those community property associations from before 1999, and this

will be revitalised. Thank you for your support.

Progress in revising formula to determine contributions to Southern

                       African Customs Union

388. Ms N R Mokoto (ANC) asked the Minister of Finance:

     What progress has been made in revising the formula used to

     determine (a) South Africa‟s and (b) other countries‟

     contribution to the Southern African Customs Union?       NO2608E
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 49 of 89

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, the current Southern African

Customs Union agreement was negotiated to conclusion in 2002 and

implemented with effect from 2003. In December last year, we gave

verbal notice and in January this year we followed this up with a

letter to ask that we evaluate the content and application of the

formula, and so this is work in progress.

The situation is a rather complex one because the formula is made up

of three components. The first is the customs, the second is an

excise component and the third is a developmental component. But in

order to arrive at the allocations, the key variable takes into

account the dependence on intra-Sacu trade, so that countries that

are more dependent on Sacu and neighbours for trade get a higher

share of the formula.

In consequence, the following percentages apply in respect of

revenues. In Botswana 22,8% of the budget this year is from Sacu, in

Namibia 34,5%; in Lesotho 50,3% and in Swaziland 57%. We don‟t think

it is sustainable. We don‟t think it advances development in this

way and that is why we‟ve asked that the formula be re-evaluated in

its application. Thank you.

Ms N R MOKOTO: Chairperson, thank you, hon Minister for the

response. I just want to check with you, in view of your response,

what are the likely reviews or changes that you intend proposing to

the Sacu council to be held this year in December. Specifically,
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 50 of 89

what are the positive and negative benefits that this will have on

the current trade and industrial relations we have with the

neighbours in the SADC region? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, I don‟t want to anticipate

what this may lead to. Part of the difficulty when you are

negotiating like this, is that people are sitting with an agreement

in hand. If one looks at the terms of the present agreement per

capita, the contributions to people of Swaziland as a result of the

operations of this intra-Sacu trade formula is R5,16; Botswana R4,46

and Namibia R4,43. If you look at the allocations to South Africa‟s

provinces it is R4,07 per capita. So, there is something

fundamentally wrong in the formula. That‟s what we have to correct,

but we enter the discussions from a position of disadvantage.

There has been a measure of industrial polarisation. The point about

this is that the customs union is the oldest in the world and it‟s

now in its 97th year. We negotiated this formula against the

backdrop of the 1969 formula that was exceeding these advantages.

Our position to the executive secretary of Sacu and to the rest of

the member states is that the pendulum has swung too far in the

other direction.

The entire position is unsustainable, but I don‟t want to pre-empt

what‟s clearly going to be a very difficult round of discussions to

try to bring the situation back to something that is more
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 51 of 89

sustainable, which is, less dependence-producing but also something

that would advance the development of our neighbouring states. Thank


Mr S J F MARAIS: Chairperson, I just want to point out to the

Minister that the SADC free trade agreement that would come into

effect will obviously influence the whole viability and going

forward with Sacu. Does this SADC free trade agreement provide for

these consequences, on Sacu specifically, of the potential loss of

custom income to these other countries and if so, what will the

effect be on the current Sacu trade relations and if not, when will

this be done and how do you foresee the concerns of other countries

will be provided for?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, the point to start off with

this is that we have a very high level of economic integration with

Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia and Swaziland. In fact, if one excludes

Botswana from the equation for a moment, then with the other three

countries we have a common monetary area, so the rand is traded and

in each of these countries - where they normally have their own

currencies, each of those is paid to the rand.

In the common monetary area all decisions are joint decisions. One

of the issues that is being raised in the Commission for Mediation

and Arbitration is that they ought to have something on the

decisions of the monetary policy committee at the Reserve Bank.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 52 of 89

I don‟t think it is a viable proposition, but what is also in the

agreement is that traditionally the Board of Tariffs and Traders,

now called the Internal Trade Administration Commission of SA at the

Department of Trade and Industry has set the tariffs for the common

external tariff. As a consequence of the new agreement, we now have

an organisation. The Secretariat is based in Windhoek for Sacu and

the Secretariat is meant to ensure that the responsibility for

setting a common external tariff moves from Itac to a regional


But there is a very high level of integration. This facilitates the

work with SADC in the context of the free trade area. Again that

agreement is struck and there are some countries that have made the

commitment to meet the obligations of the free trade area but are

hanging on because they don‟t have alternative revenue sources.

As it happens, the finance Ministers are meeting at Lusaka on

Wednesday next week to explore that discussion and to examine how we

can take it further. But at the same time there‟s a very strong

approach in SADC to work towards a SADC-wide customs union. That is

a very difficult stage to reach and there is still a margin of

disagreement between our approaches, which would say, here you have

five countries who have developed together and grown together.

There might be other countries that can join them in the fullness of

time, others may be able to join later. There is an alternate view
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 53 of 89

that we are arguing against, that we should move immediately to

establish this customs union by 2010.

We must also remember that the customs union is grandfathered in

terms of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade because it is as

old as it is, and when we negotiate trade agreements we don‟t do it

as a sovereign South Africa, but on behalf of Sacu. So, this is

quite a complex relationship, but we have to take all of that into a

larger regional economic community in the context of SADC. Thank


 Progress regarding review of Motor Industry Development Programme,

       and plans to ensure certainty for local motor manufacturers

412. Dr P J Rabie (DA) asked the Minister of Trade and Industry:

       (1)   (a) What progress has been made by his department

             regarding the review of the Motor Industry Development

             Programme (MIDP) and (b) when will the review be


       (2) whether his department has any interim plans to ensure

             optimum certainty for local motor manufacturers who are

             vying for export-orientated manufacturing contracts; if

             not, why not; if so, (a) what plans and (b) what are the

             further relevant details?                           NO2637E
31 OCTOBER 2007                                                    PAGE 54 of 89


the    Department       of     Trade   and    Industry      or   DTI,    has    completed    the

review       of   the       motor   industry    development        programme,       which    was

initiated         in   mid    2005.     Between     July    and    September      this    year,

Minister Mpahlwa met with industry role-players to communicate the

findings of the review report. In addition, they have been advised

that    a    government        task    team   has    been    appointed      to    oversee    the

drafting of the new programme with a clear, demonstrable and optimal

level of support to the industry. The task team will be working

closely with Professor Anthony Black, who has been appointed by the

department to assist with the architecture of the new programme.

In    the    Minister‟s        two     previous     meetings      with    the    industry      he

addressed their uncertainties regarding their planned investments.

While the current level of support and the current programme will

continue until 2012, the department intends to effect amendments to

the    Motor      Industry      Development         Programme,     MIDP,       focusing   on    3

fundamental pillars: firstly, regulating the programme in a manner

which will ensure compliance with international trade obligations;

secondly,         consideration        for    continuation,        the    productive      asset

allowance         as    a     competitive      investment         support      instrument      to

facilitate much needed investment for the assemblers of vehicles as

well    as    component        manufacturers;         and   lastly,      the     deepening     of

localisation, with a stronger focus on component manufacturing. I

thank you.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 55 of 89

Dr P J RABIE: Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister, one of the great

success stories is our motor development programme. I think we have

attained a fair degree of success with this. Deputy Minister, many

of the motor companies are international, multinational, and so


During the visit by the Portfolio Committee of Trade and Industry to

Belgium, great concern was expressed because Ford was thinking of

relocating its factories from Belgium to Germany. I believe that

Volkswagen is relocating from Germany to Hungary and quite a number

of other European manufacturers are moving to Russia. My question to

you is: Is the government considering any tax concessions to ask the

local manufacturers to expand and provide employment in our country?

I thank you.


Chairperson, the answer to the question is obviously yes. We agree

with the hon member that the Motor Industry Development Programme

has been a success. We understand very clearly that it is a highly

competitive industry and decisions are taken not just to move from

different parts of Europe, but whether to come to South Africa as

opposed to other parts of Asia, or something like that.

We are well aware of that and as I put it, we need to give a clear,

demonstrable and optimal level of support to the industry. The major

disadvantage we face in South Africa is our distance from major
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 56 of 89

markets. We need to be able to provide incentives so that people

could come here. In our national industrial policy framework and

industrial policy action plan, we have identified an objective of

doubling the production of motor vehicles in this country from 600

000 units to about 1,2 million.

Also, as I indicated in my answer, what we are looking at is to give

much more emphasis than in the past to the motor components

manufacturing industry, which we think could be much more labour-

intensive, and also becoming increasingly globalised. Many of our

motor components manufacturers are actually finding opportunities to

supply components to final assemblers in many parts of the world as

well as in South Africa. I thank you.

Prof E S CHANG: Thank you, Chairperson and Deputy Minister. Deputy

Minister, the Motor Industry Development Programme for the motor

industry started in 1961. It requires that local motor components to

be 50% and increased gradually to 66% in 1994. In 1995 it made a

radical change to calculations of local content. It allows the car

assembling factories to use other market-imported motor components

and for this to be counted as local content.

Furthermore, those with the custom tariff, chapter 98 - import motor

components duty could be offset by RCC, which means that the

components should be competitive in our country. Seventy per cent of

local components in our car assembling factories are reliant on
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 57 of 89

imports. The South African motor industry imports the components

from its mother company and its affiliates, plus they export the car

back to the mother company and its affiliates.

Therefore, since the raw material resource is in the hands of the SA

car assembling companies, the Department of Trade and Industry

should act more firmly and aggressively to talk to those motor

people to bring in their components to be manufactured in South

Africa. At least with quick delivery, we will shift the money cycle

and get the cost down. I thank you.


Chairperson, the first point I will make is that the way of

supporting our motor components manufacturing sector in SA is

definitely not the way it was done under apartheid where there were

tariffs of well over 100%. That option is just not available to us;

even if it was desirable or not.

What I am saying is that partly in the Motor Industry Development

Programme, the MIDP itself, and also in the customised sector

programme for the auto sector, there will be a big emphasis on motor


The emphasis will not just be the production of motor components for

use in the production of vehicles in South Africa, although that is

clearly a very important part of it; because we are also finding
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 58 of 89

that there are many opportunities for our motor components

manufacturers to supply car production, which takes place in Europe.

They have been active in trade missions that we have had in Eastern

Europe, Asia and so on.

This is a big focus for us. It will have two legs – both productions

for the internal motor manufacturing and also for export into other

regions as well.

 Number of commercial farmers in South Africa currently, and number

                   of these guilty of illegal evictions

383. Mr J H van der Merwe (IFP) asked the Minister for Agriculture

     and Land Affairs:

     (a) How many commercial farmers are there in South Africa at

     present, (b) how many of these farmers have been found guilty

     of illegally evicting farm workers or occupants from their

     farms in 2006 and (c) against how many of these farmers are

     criminal steps accordingly pending?                         NO2324E


of course you won‟t have fun with this one. Thank you very much for

the question. The answer is that the Department of Land Affairs does

not have statistics on commercial farmers in South Africa for the

simple reason that maintaining such statistics doesn‟t align within
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 59 of 89

the mandate of Land Affairs; that is the mandate of Statistics SA.

They produce household surveys according to certain statistical


The (b) and (c) parts of the question is that criminal prosecution

is, of course, in respect of illegal evictions not the function of

the Department of Land Affairs; it is the function of the Department

of Justice, as you very well know.

The problem is that formal procedures in court on account of

evictions take a very long time. For example, I heard that cases

coming before court shortly have taken 10 years to prepare. But what

is coming from your question is that it seems to me that you are

also requesting that the Department of Agriculture must start to

have a register of farmers. In actual fact, we are eagerly awaiting

advice in this regard from the newly established advisory council

from the agricultural unions and hearing what their proposal is in

this regard.

If we have registered farm systems and data available that state

ownership and companies‟ shares in those, how many farm dwellers are

on the farm, what is the status of the BBBEE on that farm and the

agricultural enterprise, what the position is according to labour

regulations and labour contracts, and what the inspectors of labour

report we have, of course, a manageable system then we can give this
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 60 of 89

data very easily to Parliament and also execute control measures.

Thank you for the question.

Mnr J H VAN DER MERWE: Voorsitter, die waarheid is uiteindelik uit.

Die agb Adjunkminister en sy Minister beledig die boere gereeld in

hierdie Huis, by landbouplekke oral en gooi dan die grootste twyfel

oor die boeregemeenskap as sodanig.

Vandag sê hy: “Ek weet nie hoeveel kommersiële boere daar is nie. Ek

weet nie hoeveel van hulle mense uitsmyt nie. Ek weet nie hoeveel

word aangekla nie. Ek weet niks nie, maar hulle is „n klomp

terroriste.” Hy sê op „n keer: “Nee, my broer, luister nou mooi,

daardie mense wat nie wil hoor nie, gaan ons nie net in die hof kry

nie, ons gaan hulle grond onteïen”.

Dit is die taal wat die agb Minister teenoor die boeregemeenskap

gebruik, terwyl die boere in werklikheid „n uiters verantwoordelike

komponent van hierdie land is. Boere wat goed is vir hulle werkers,

wat sorg vir hulle werkers, wat vir hulle werk gee, wat vir hulle

kos gee en wat vir hulle medisyne gee. Die Adjunkminister en sy

Minister, wanneer hulle ook al „n kans kry, beledig net die boere.

(Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr J H VAN DER MERWE: Chairperson, the truth is finally in the

open. The hon Deputy Minister and his Minister often insult farmers
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 61 of 89

in this House, at places of agriculture and then cast a shadow of

doubt over the farming community as a whole.

Today he says, “I don‟t know how many commercial farmers there are;

I don‟t know how many of them remove people from their farms; I

don‟t know how many are reported. I don‟t know anything, but they

are a bunch of terrorists.” On another occasion he says, “No, my

brother, listen to me. Those people who do not want to listen: Not

only are we going to take them to court, we are also going to

expropriate their land”.

This is the type of language the hon Minister directs at the farming

community, while the farming community, in actual fact, is an

extremely responsible component of this country - farmers who are

good to their workers; who care for their workers; who offer jobs to

their workers; who feed them and give them medicine. The Deputy

Minister and his Minister insult the farmers whenever the

opportunity presents itself.]


hon Van der Merwe is just using the podium to grandstand, as we know

him very well. No, of course the statistics that we have available

were before this House quite often and the Human Rights Commission

has also delivered reports to the portfolio committee. I don‟t

expect you to know this but the Nkuzi empirical study is what we‟ve

got and then we‟ve a lot of cases but mostly evidence of the nature
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 62 of 89

that I have discussed in the first answer this afternoon. Thank you,


Mnr A H NEL: Dankie, Voorsitter. Ek wil net eers sê dat wat my en my

party aanbetref, is ons teen die “illegal evictions”. U praat van

samewerking en dr Van Niekerk het ook bewys dat samewerking gegee

sal word as die regte goed gedoen word. Ek lees in die koerante dat

AgriSA vir u en die Minister gevra het waar onwettige uitsettings

gedoen is, sodat ons daardie mense kan aantree. Hulle het geen

antwoord van u gekry nie.

U praat van die Nkuzi-verslag waarvan u die gegewens het. Dis hoe ek

dit verstaan het, maar daar is nog, Meneer. Die Adjunkvoorsitter van

die Nasionale Bemarkingsraad, prof Karaan, sê dat - en dis sy

syfers- vandat die regulering toegepas is, en ek sê ook, is ons nie

teen die regulering nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs


[Mr A H NEL: Chairperson, firstly I would like to say that as far as

my party and I are concerned, we are against illegal evictions. You

speak about co-operation and Dr Van Niekerk also proved that co-

operation will be given if the correct actions are being taken. I

have read in the papers that AgriSA had asked the Minister and

yourself where the illegal evictions took place so that the guilty

parties can be taken to task. They never received an answer from

31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 63 of 89

You speak about the Nkuzi report where you get your information

from. This is how I understood it, but there is more, sir. The

deputy chairperson of the National Marketing Council, Prof Karaan,

says that – and these are his figures – since regulation has been

imposed, and I also say this, we are not against regulation.]


noted that Hon Nel carefully formulates it that he is against

illegal evictions but I didn‟t hear him saying that he is against

inhumane practices on the farms. Could I just say that when you

interpret and say that we are insulting the farmers that what you do

not say is that we‟ve got great co-operation from the great majority

of the agricultural community in South Africa. Thank you.

Mnr P J GROENEWALD: Voorsitter, die agb Adjunkminister kom hier en

sê dat hy nie die syfers kan gee in terme van die aantal kommersiële

boere nie en hy kan nie die aantal syfers gee in terme van onwettige

uitsettings nie. Voorsitter, ek het in hierdie selfde raad vir die

agb Minister vir „n skriftelike beantwoording gevra en sy het syfers


Nou wil ek vir die agb Adjunkminister vra: Hoe kan die Minister die

aantal onwettige uitsettings verstrek? Terselfdertyd sê sy ook in

haar amptelike antwoord dat dit gegewens is waarvoor die departement

ook nie 100% voor kan instaan nie.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 64 of 89

Wie het die Raad mislei? Is dit die agb Minister deur daardie syfers

bekend te maak? Of is dit nou die agb Adjunkminister wat die Raad

nou hier begin mislei deur te sê hy kan nie die syfers voorsien nie?

Die probleem is, Voorsitter, as dit kom by die boere, dan weet die

agb Minister niks. Hy sê niks en hy hoor ook niks nie. As dit aan

die ander kant kom, dan hoor hy alles. Hy sê alles en hy dink hy

weet alles. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[Mr P J GROENEWALD: Chairperson, the hon Deputy Minister comes here

and declares that he cannot supply figures in terms of the number of

commercial farmers or the number of illegal evictions. Chairperson,

I asked for a written reply from the hon Minister in this very house

and she could supply figures.

I would like to ask the hon Deputy Minister: How can the Minister

give the number of illegal evictions, but also, in her official

answer say that the Department is not 100% sure that this is


Who has misled the House? Was it the hon Minister by making those

numbers public? Or is it the hon Deputy Minister who is misleading

the House by stating that he cannot supply the numbers?

The problem, Chairperson, is that when it comes to farmers, the hon

Minister knows nothing, hears nothing and says nothing. When it
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 65 of 89

comes to the flip side, he hears all, says all and thinks he knows

it all.]


have noted the empty rhetoric of the hon member.

Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Dankie, Voorsitter. U weet, dit help nie om

wollerig in die landbou te praat nie, want dan verloor jy en jy

hardloop weg van die werklike storie en dis nou presies wat jy

probeer doen. Ons probeer „n oplossing kry deur die statistiek in

die hande te kry, sodat ons by daardie punte kan uitkom waar

onmenslike optrede is en waar daar verkeerde uitsettings is.

Om dit te doen, verg „n gesamentlike plan. U hardloop net na een

kant toe. Het u al ooit daaraan gedink dat van die 60 000 boere wat

„n tyd gelede daar was, daar nou net 40 000 oor is. Dit het ook „n

implikasie in terme van die mense wat dan op die ou end sogenaamd

“ge-evict” word, maar nie op grond van omstandighede van slegte

hantering nie. Daar is „n klomp emosionele en werklike fisiese feite

op grondvlak, wat u in ag moet neem. (Translation of Afrikaans

paragraphs follows.)

[Dr A I VAN NIEKERK: Chairperson, you know, when it comes to

agriculture it doesn‟t help to be vague, because then you lose and

run away from the real issue and that is exactly what you are trying

to do now. We are trying to find a solution by obtaining the
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 66 of 89

statistics in order for us to get to the points where inhumane

treatment and illegal evictions are taking place.

In order to do that, we need a joint plan. You only run to the one

side. Have you ever thought that a while ago there were 60 000

farmers and now there are only 40 000? This also has an implication

in terms of the people who are supposedly being evicted, but not as

a result of being treated badly. There are a number of emotional and

physical facts on ground level that you have to take into account.]


indeed the number of farmers has gone down, mostly on account of

capital formation and because of agricultural world conditions. The

strange thing to me though is, while there has been growth in

commodities all over the world, growth in countries like Chile on

agricultural production and more employment of unskilled workers, it

hasn‟t happened in South Africa.

Ag, nee wat! Dis „n vermorsing van tyd. Dis nie waar nie. [Oh no!

That is a waste of time, it is not true.]

It is a difficult problem and I don‟t think the production in South

Africa is really where it should be. More people should be engaged

in agriculture and this excluding type of approach which we see in

practice should be stopped. We should look at having more workers

per hectare of production. But the strategy at the moment is - and
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 67 of 89

that is where those farmers who went bankrupt went out of farming -

the farms get bigger and bigger and it is only a question of cutting

the cost of labour force on the cost on the farms. So it‟s a matter

of getting bigger tractors, bigger implements while the whole

question of land right tenure is reduced to a simple labour question

which is actually ignoring the rights positions of the farm

dwellers. Thank you.

Mr M R MOHLALOGA: Chairperson, firstly I just want to state that

with regard to the Nkuzi report that was referred to at the

beginning, the department and farmers unions participated in its

conceptualisation and were approached for the questionnaire that was


In fact the department also sponsored the survey itself, therefore

in a sense the department can lay claim to the report. But, having

said that I just want to say that illegal evictions are what they

are - illegal and as a result they are a crime. It does not matter

whether there are 10 or 5 million. One illegal eviction is one too

many. Therefore the fight against illegal evictions on farms is not


My question is: Does the Deputy Minister think that it will be

important for farmers to see themselves as partners against illegal

evictions and that they must help expose, condemn and prosecute such

31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 68 of 89


wholeheartedly, yes. That‟s the only solution and that is why we are

trying all the time to get the opposition parties not just to say

formally that they are against illegal evictions but that they are

against the whole system and give us their support. We can only

succeed if this becomes a culture in South Africa.

I am pleading for that and there are huge amounts of support in

agriculture for this. This is the only future for agriculture. Let‟s

clean this matter out. Let‟s work together and stand together to

build agriculture and get the participation which is justifiable and

which the Constitution requires of us in South Africa. I am actually

saying: Please!

   Terms of, and parliamentary oversight regarding European Union

                         development aid grant

389. Prof B Turok (ANC) asked the Minister of Finance:

     (1)   What are the terms of the reported development aid grant

           of R10 billion received from the European Union;

     (2)   whether this grant has been reported to Parliament; if so,

           what provision is made for parliamentary oversight

           regarding the allocation and spending of this grant?NO2609E
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 69 of 89

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, the agreement with the

European Union was signed in Pretoria about three weeks ago. As is

the nature of these agreements, it will be brought to Parliament for

discussion and ratification shortly.

The agreement for the grant amount is 980 million Euros at a going

rate of around R10 to the Euro which is about R9,8 billion, and it

covers the period 2007-13. A total of 70% of the agreement deals

with issues of employment and social cohesion. The governance

element is 15% and the rest is broken down through a series of


Now, it‟s a strange kind of discussion to have because the agreement

which I have here is pretty detailed, and it tends to lend itself

more to a written question. It is very hard because you have to

really dig through and unless you have a symmetry of information, it

makes the discussion about this quite hard. I will certainly attach

it but perhaps through subsequent questions and after discussions in

one of the committees we could actually get into a greater level of

detail. Thank you.

Prof B TUROK: I welcome that reply and I do think that we need to

discuss it in the committee because I also have a copy of the

document here. It is detailed.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 70 of 89

We certainly welcome the funding, but the issue of development aid

has become very controversial internationally. Often, although not

in this case, strings are attached and there are all sorts of

conditions and often aid is based not on actual aid requirements but

on political considerations. Now, I am not saying it applies in this

case, but often it does internationally. So, parliamentary oversight

becomes important because of the political elements in it, and that

oversight should also be in the donor country as well as the

recipient country. I am personally in discussion with various people

in Europe about the question of oversight in Europe because people

in Europe are concerned.

So my question is this: It is very important that this money is

spent properly but in the RDP Fund financial statement for 2007, of

R1 billion received, R259 million was refunded to the donors. Can

the Minister help us in saying how we are going to ensure that this

R10 billion is properly spent, because the House must assist him in

ensuring that we do not refund R1 out of this R10 billion? That is

my question.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, this is what I am trying to

avoid. I don‟t know the extent to which the issues that the hon

Turok is raising are really follow-ups or whether they are entirely

new questions. I am saying that the matter must come here for

discussion. It is not as though there is a dispute about that. Let

me just for the record say that, to the best of my knowledge, there
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 71 of 89

is no donor assistance that is not politically driven. There has

never been and there is unlikely to ever be. It‟s an extension of

interests in this way, and we delude ourselves if we do not accept

that as a premise.

But, having said that, we are one of the countries that had the most

funds decommitted, which is a very Brussels-like word. The key

issues in the context of decommitment are as a consequence of the

fact that the negotiations with the EU or its member states happen

through a variety of different agencies. You would have, for

instance, an education department in a province negotiating a

particular deal for a few schools in the district in that province.

So, not everybody in the Education Department would be aware of it -

never mind the province. The Treasury picks up later that such an

agreement has been entered into.

The Presidency is much firmer on the fact that the Minister of

Finance can‟t delegate the responsibility of signing. So, it‟s a bit

of a headache to get to all of these agreements and sign them, but

the consequence of that is that we have a better information base

for what is happening in respect of this. The bulk of the

decommitments have happened especially in certain areas.

Perhaps somebody in this House is in a position to explain how you

can secure donor aid for a school building or upgrading programme

that will include water and sanitation and so on and then not spend
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 72 of 89

it. It is a complete travesty and when it is decommitted, you can‟t

get it back. By the time we discover this in the mill, it‟s much too


The difference about this agreement is that it‟s been carefully

negotiated with the team from the Treasury. It‟s a four-year

agreement, a multiyear agreement involving all member states.

Commissioner Michelle of the EU advises that it has never actually

happened in quite this way. It does give us a bit more leverage and

that is why I fervently believe that this matter should come to

Parliament soon. Even here, it‟s not a matter for an isolated

committee because the agreement, by its nature, is quite

transversal. We need a wide body of information about the agreement,

and that‟s one of the first among many safeguards that we should put

in place.

Mnr S J F MARAIS: Dankie Voorsitter. Minister, Suid-Afrika moet

hopelik iewers in die toekoms ook „n gewer van ontwikkelingshulp

word in Afrika, veral as ons „n prominente rol wil speel in wat ons

wil doen.

Ek stem saam met prof Turok dat die hele kwessie van

ontwikkelingshulp in die wêreld „n moeilike ding is en gewoonlik „n

ding is wat baie vingers en hande kry.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 73 of 89

Volgens u eie erkenning het ons „n groot tekort aan vaardighede en

kundigheid en word die feit ook in die meeste van die

gekwalifiseerde jaarverslae gereflekteer. Is u oortuig daarvan dat

ons die vaardighede het om hierdie ontwikkelingsskenking korrek en

konstruktief aan te wend, en sal u bereid wees om nie-

regeringsorganisasies en die privaatsektor, wat oor die kundigheid

beskik, te gebruik vir die doel? Dankie. (Translation of Afrikaans

paragraphs follows.)

[Mr S J F MARAIS: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, South Africa

must hopefully sometime in the future, we hope, also become a

supplier of development aid in Africa, especially if we want to play

a prominent role in what we would like to do.

I agree with Prof Turok that the entire matter of development

support in the world is a difficult thing and it is usually

something that grows many hands and fingers.

As you yourself have acknowledged, we have a shortage of skills and

expertise and this fact is also reflected in most of the qualified

annual reports. Are you convinced that we have the skills to use

this development donation correctly and constructively, and would

you be prepared to employ non-governmental organisations and the

private sector that do have the skills for this purpose? Thank you.]
31 OCTOBER 2007                                  PAGE 74 of 89

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chairperson, again it‟s a multifaceted

issue. I don‟t know where development or donor aid begins and ends.

I said earlier in response to a question that one of the components

in the Southern African Customs Union‟s formula is a developmental


So daar is „n ontwikkelingskomponent binne die doeane-unieformule.

Dit is al reeds daar en ons moet dit erken.

Maar bo en behalwe dit is daar ook die Afrika Renaissance Fonds,

waardeur ons dan redelike skenkings maak aan verskillende lande. Ons

help gereeld hier en daar met dinge soos verkiesings in lande. Ons

help ook tans in Guinea-Conakry met elementêre dienste, net om dinge

aan die gang te kry sodat ons seker kan maak dat demokrasie sal

seëvier. Daar is ook ander geleenthede, soos die skenkings wat ons

maak ten opsigte van die afskrywing van skuld van lande.

(Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)

[So there is a development component in the customs union formula.

It already exists and we have to acknowledge it.

But in addition to this there is also the African Renaissance Fund,

through which we also make reasonable donations to different

countries. We often assist here and there with things like elections

in other countries. Currently we are also assisting in Guinea-

Conakry with elementary services just to get things started so that
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 75 of 89

we can ensure that democracy will triumph. There are also other

opportunities like the donations we are making with regard to the

writing off of debts of countries.]

Yes, we are a reasonable donor country on the continent, but when it

comes to this size of donation for us as a country, we shouldn‟t be

arrogant in this context, and we can never look a gift horse in the

mouth. It is a miniscule component. It is 1% of the Budget.

It is small by comparison with what we deal with and if we are

capable of managing all of these funds - the hon Marais is a member

of the committee that gives us a hard time about what we do with

these funds as part of the accountability process - I don‟t

understand why this amount of money should not be part of the very

same accountability process. It is a small amount of money and I

don‟t see why we shouldn‟t be capable of dealing with it. I thank


Prof E S CHANG: Thank you, Chairperson. Minister, I must say that I

agree with you 100% that there are no free dinners. So, I don‟t know

how you got this 10 billion euros, but I must say we appreciate it

very much. My question is much easier: If you think I asked the

wrong question, then it is Ben Turok who is misleading me because

when I see his name, I only think about the fact that we sit in the

same committee. When I visited the EU, the EU Commissioner kept on

emphasizing that they will give 10 billion euros for small, medium
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 76 of 89

and micro enterprises. I am not so sure, hence my question may be

wrong, or maybe it is easy for you to tell me if this 10 billion

euros are what the EU Commissioner told us about, which was for

helping the SMMEs. I thank you.

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chair, it is and it is not small, medium

and micro enterprises. The emphasis in a large part of the programme

deals with, firstly, the second economy, and it has recognised this

as an enormously important issue. Attached to that is the sense that

you need to build a stronger bridge between the first and the second


Now, what we must recognise is that in the negotiation of a

programme like this, in many respects the programme at first level

is as good as the ability of the negotiators to convince the donors

to part with the money. To that extent, it has been done, and I am

saying that on 10 October I signed this agreement with Commissioner

Louise Michelle. It is a very recent thing.

However, the more important part is to ensure that we have the

agencies within government to be able to distribute the money and

account for every dime that is distributed, and that is the big

challenge. Especially when you are dealing with a highly informal

part of the economy, you need to ensure that you get returns.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 77 of 89

Some of the things we know are that if very poor people borrow

money, they pay it back with interest and the battle that they are

up against is the battle for access to the finances. You must have

competent agencies within government to be able to effect the

distribution and the collection because people don‟t want hand-outs.

The poor don‟t want hand-outs, they want a hand up; and that is the

role we have to play and if our officials are there and distribute

the money and then say ”Shame, we are not going to collect this

back”, you have actually failed the people who want their dignity

and empowerment and not hand-outs.

So I think that it‟s having a pool of money and being able to get

things done in a way that truly empowers people because this kind of

empowerment is real empowerment, if we utilise the resource


Prof B TUROK: Thank you very much, Minister; I am delighted to hear

what you are saying. The strength of this particular agreement is

that it is on budget funding whereas in the past a lot of donor aid

has been off-budget and, therefore, the Auditor-General and others

have had great difficulty in auditing the funds. This should not be

a problem, but because it‟s on-budget Parliament does have a special

31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 78 of 89

The question I would like to ask is: Will this money be identifiable

on-budget as distinct from normal revenue? If it is, how will the

parliamentary committees be able to identify it and do exactly as

you say, because there is an enormous amount of passion in this

Parliament for ensuring that the spending in the second economy and

small enterprise happens? Many of us are totally committed to that

but we need to be able to say that there is R10 million that is

dedicated to so and so and this is donor aid, and therefore, we want

to monitor it in a special way. Will that be possible?

The MINISTER OF FINANCE: Chair, if there is just 10% of the passion

that was in evidence in the last question that came close to the

biggest “broedertwis” [feud between brothers] I have seen yet, then

with just 10% of that passion, we are ok.

I think what we need to do is try and get the agreement onto paper

and see whether it‟s possible to have this matter discussed before

we rise this year. At the same time, we should work to try and get a

kind of below-the-line budget in the estimates of national

expenditure commitment.

The hon Turok spent too little time in the joint committees today

but one of the things that we discussed there is that I am agitating

now that, when departments ask for money and they get it in terms of

a chapter of the estimates of national expenditure, that they don‟t

say: “Give us R10 million.” Say what the money is going to buy. If
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 79 of 89

you are going to create jobs, say you are going to create 178 212

jobs and measure us against that.

That‟s the job of Parliament. You are not here to applaud us; your

job is to ask tough questions. Perhaps this is the starting point of

changing the oversight function of Parliament because the money is

there and we can put it below the line. We can even print it in a

different colour if parliamentarians want that. I thank you.

  Plans to improve state and safety of railways in preparation for

                   2010 Soccer World Cup Tournament

407. Mr S B Farrow (DA) asked the Minister of Transport:

     Whether, in the light of the decrease in the number of

     Metrorail trains and the recent report by the Railway Safety

     Regulator (details furnished), his department has any plans to

     improve the state and safety of railways in preparation for the

     2010 Soccer World Cup tournament; if not, why not; if so, (a)

     what plans, (b) how much will this cost and (c) what are the

     timeframes?                                               NO2632E

The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Chairperson, the answer to the question

is as follows: The Department of Transport approved a three-year

turnaround plan for the SARCC-Metrorail in 2006. In the first three
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 80 of 89

financial years from 2006 to 2008 we are focusing on stabilising the

operations of the SARCC.

This will then be followed by a recovery phase from 2011 to 2014,

where, we believe, we will start seeing the fruits of investments

such as a new rolling stock fleet flowing into the passenger rail

system. All rolling stock and infrastructure improvements are in

line with improving the rail service and also improving operational

safety. These initiatives are not undertaken in isolation, but in

constant interaction with the Railway Safety Regulator with a view

to ensuring adherence to rail safety requirements.

A central part of this turnaround phase is the roll-out of the

accelerated rolling stock programme addressing general overhauls and

upgrading of the fleet. The plan which is being implemented aims to

reduce the backlog of general overhauls and upgrades without

worsening the already ageing operational coach availability that has

been reported in the annual report of the SARCC last year. This

overhaul programme is being ramped up to reduce all these backlogs.

The aim is to do 700 coaches per annum between 2008-09 and 2011-12.

The costs of this programme are that in the 2008-09 financial year,

it will be R3, 091 billion and in the 2009-10 financial year it will

be R3,458 billion.

Regarding the 2010 Fifa World Cup, the Department of Transport

together with Metrorail are guided by government‟s overall strategic
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 81 of 89

approach which sees all these major contributions of the tournament

as being to leave a legacy of an improved public transport system

for South Africa, and in this instance the legacy must be an

improved passenger rail service.

There are many projects that are underway, and I have all the

details of the various projects that are going to be ready. I can

assure the hon members that by the time of the Confederations Cup in

2011, many of these projects will be ready and we believe that we

are going to be on track on all these transportation-passenger rail

systems. Thank you.

Mr S B FARROW: Thank you, Minister for your very comprehensive

response and my apologies for not being on that Khayelitsha Express

today. It must have been quite an exciting ride. But there is a

number of issues here that surround the state of rail and safety of

its passengers in particular and which could have an impact on 2010.

The ambitious programme that you gave us recently; I have been

trying to reconcile it with some of the issues that came out of the

annual report of SARCC.

There are two things that really worry me. The first is the fact

that we have a High Court ruling that relates to the safety of rail

travellers. Now, that particular High Court ruling has got some

minor matters associated with it. We still see trains running with

doors open and with windows missing. I can‟t believe that with these
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 82 of 89

thousands and billions of rands that we have had we can‟t generate

something to get that right.

Secondly, if you look at the aspects of our current situation, it

takes three months to refurbish a coach at a cost of about R4

million to R5 million. There are only five agencies that can

actually do that – coach manufacturers - in the country and they

need to refurbish something like four coaches a day to meet the

backlog. Can in fact your ambitious programme be a reality in

dealing with these matters? Thank you.

The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Well, the reality of the situation is

that this is not just a dream; we are already implementing this

programme. Only this morning we launched a new railway service

between Khayelitsha and Cape Town, the Khayelitsha Express, that

will reduce time of travelling by 30% to 38 minutes from Khayelitsha

to Cape Town station.

On the issue of the Constitutional Court ruling we are doing

everything to ensure that Metrorail complies with that ruling.

Amongst other things, we have introduced railway police in South

Africa. As we speak, there are more than 1 500 railway police

members who are being deployed to prevent precisely what Mr Farrow

has indicated today. We believe that by 2010 there will be more than

5 000 railway police members in South Africa to ensure that the

safety of passengers will be guaranteed.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 83 of 89

Mr J P CRONIN: Thank you, Chairperson. I am glad, Minister, that you

have mentioned the railway police. That is one of the great success

stories. The hon Farrow is of course quite right to say that there

are still many challenges in terms of safety and particularly

personal security on our rail system. But the railway police in the

few years that they have been in existence have made 40 000 arrests.

There has been a very, very significant decrease in crime on board

our trains. Fare evasions have come down massively. There is about

96% fare compliance here on the Cape Town system. All of these

things reflect on this.

The question I want to ask the Minister is: As we approach 2010, but

not just thinking about 2010, should we not also be thinking of the

railway police in a multimodel way? In other words, why should they

not be conceived of as transport police, as we see in other

countries, responsible for ensuring safety on all transport modes

and at interchanges and not just narrowly focused on rail?

The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Well, the appropriate Minister to answer

that question will be the Minister of Safety and Security. I am

aware that within the ANC there is a policy process that is aimed at

ensuring that there is one police service for the Republic of South

Africa and that will also be taken into account so that we have one

line of command in South Africa. How that will turn out, we will

know after December. But I am sure that we need to co-ordinate
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 84 of 89

activities in a manner that will ensure that transport safety is of

paramount importance.

I can indicate as well that a few years ago the government created

the Road Traffic Management Corporation and that entity also will

take into account the issues of safety and of compliance, especially

on roads. Thank you.

Mr S B FARROW: Thank you, Chairperson. Thank you, Minister for that

response. If I read your response correctly, you spoke about some

figures of R3,9 billion and R3,5 billion up and until 2012. Now,

effectively, it is a little bit different to what I have understood

is going to be allocated to the SARCC. I want to find out if the

funds you are talking about are going to be made readily available

to them in order for them to procure the coaches - which takes up to

four years, Minister - to be able to get them to land on SARCC?

This is in the light of the fact that I have mentioned earlier that

it is taking three months just to refurbish one coach and you need,

according to my calculations, to do about four coaches a day with

five companies. That doesn‟t seem to be possible. I am just asking

you whether in fact that has been taken into consideration. Thank


The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Chairperson, the amounts that I have

highlighted are not for the purchasing of new stock but are for
31 OCTOBER 2007                                PAGE 85 of 89

upgrading the existing stock. As I have indicated, in the next

financial year we will be spending about R3,091 billion to ensure

that there are 700 coaches per year that are upgraded. The amount is

accurate because other monies are dedicated, for example, for the

building of new railway stations and upgrading of railway stations.

Other portions of monies are for signalling equipment and other

related infrastructure.

Mr S B FARROW: Thank you very much, Chair. We have just recently

come out of the portfolio committee where SARCC and Metrorail were

present. I‟m talking about some of the issues that the SARCC face at

the moment. They use a ratio of 80% of coach refurbishment and new

coach purchases, and 20% that goes into signalling and your

pathways. Now if you try to take these and try to balance the

equation, my concern is, Minister, that somewhere along the line we

are going to have to bring new coaches in.

The refurbishment that you are talking about of 700 coaches per

annum is all very well. We‟ve got 4 500 coaches in the country, but

many of them are not in a position to be refurbished either because

of age or they have been burnt or destroyed previously. I am asking

whether we can get the new coaches in timeously with the money that

we have in hand and whether we can have assurances from you about

that. Thank you, Chairperson.
31 OCTOBER 2007                                 PAGE 86 of 89

The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: I now understand your problem. As I

indicated, there are various phases. The current phase is of

stabilisation that we cannot but ensure that the existing stock is

upgraded and refurbished. So, these monies that we are talking about

are going to be dedicated to this phase.

With regard to the other question you raised, we are in fact taking

a decision to recapitalise Metrorail. That is a separate process

that will begin early next year so that we can have a properly

equipped passenger rail service in South Africa. I am sure you will

agree with me that no matter how much we try to upgrade and

refurbish many of these are old technologies.

On Sunday I was travelling by train from Pretoria Station to

Atteridgeville. They were even using the 1950s technology of a

spanner to start the train. Even if you try to refurbish that

particular train it will remain a donkey. So, we need to make sure

that we equip it in the modern way. This is the second phase that

will begin next year.


The House adjourned at 17:12.


31 OCTOBER 2007                                                     PAGE 87 of 89


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

The Speaker and the Chairperson

1.   Draft Bills submitted in terms of Joint Rule 159

     (a)     Jurisdiction of Regional Courts Amendment Bill, 2007, submitted by the Minister of

             Justice and Constitutional Development. Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Justice

             and Constitutional Development and the Select Committee on Security and

             Constitutional Affairs.

National Assembly

The Speaker

1.    Request from Minister of Safety and Security

       (a)    Request from the Minister of Safety and Security for a committee of the National

              Assembly, in terms of section 51 of the South African Police Service Act, 1995

              (Act 68 of 1995), to consider the nomination of a suitably qualified person for

              appointment to the office of Executive Director to head the Independent Complaints

31 OCTOBER 2007                                                   PAGE 88 of 89

           Referred to the Portfolio Committee on Safety and Security for consideration and


2.   Membership of Committees

     (1)    The following changes have been made to the membership of Portfolio Committees:

            Agriculture and Land and Affairs

            Appointed:      Rabinowitz, Dr R (Alt); Singh, Mr N


            Appointed:      Zikalala, Ms C N Z (Alt)

            Environmental Affairs and Tourism

            Appointed:       Lebenya, Ms S P (Alt)


            Appointed:      Chang, Prof E S (Alt); Roopnarain, Dr U

            Public Enterprises

            Appointed:      Chang, Prof E S (Alt); Lebenya, Ms S P

            Science and Technology

            Appointed:      Chang, Prof E S (Alt); Rabinowitz, Dr R


            Appointed:      Dhlamini, Mr B W (Alt); Lucas, Mr E J
31 OCTOBER 2007                                                      PAGE 89 of 89


National Assembly and National Council of Provinces

1.   The Minister of Finance

     (a)   National Treasury – Consolidated Financial Information for the year ended 31 March 2007.

National Assembly

The Speaker

1.   Submission of Private Member’s Legislative Proposal

     The following private member’s legislative proposal was submitted to the Speaker on 12 June

     2007, in accordance with Rule 234:

     Legislative Proposal to amend the Constitution in respect of the current executive system (Prince

     M G Buthelezi)

     Referred to the Standing Committee on Private Members’ Legislative Proposals and Special

     Petitions for consideration and report.

To top