Hon Chairperson, hon Deputy President, hon Ministers, hon Deputy Ministers and hon members, let me start by thanking all members of the portfolio committee who participated in dealing with this legislation that we are discussing today. Our thanks also go to our Ministers and the Cabinet in general, who have allowed us to debate this legislation in our portfolio committee and here in Parliament today.
I must also thank all participants who came to the portfolio committee meetings to make presentations and voice their views. These were addressed, some were incorporated in the legislation itself, some were rectified, and so on. This means that we as the portfolio committee under the leadership of the hon Johnny de Lange welcome everyone who wishes to come and present their case in regard to legislation. Our legislation always works with public participation and we allow everybody, even the political parties we are working with, to participate.
I must say to the hon Thring, I should think you are the only member who is not part of this family, but we thank you for your input today. You are also welcome to make your input. Even if you are only making it here today, we accept it. In the cases that you alluded to here in regard to poor air quality management, I should think that is why we are discussing this legislation in this Parliament today, because we want to pass this legislation in order to prevent that.
I want to refer to the issues raised by the member of Cope when she spoke about the responsive data relating to penalties. It is through that in this legislation that the data collection will be in place during the implementation. We will get it. It will be transparent. Anyone who defaults, anyone who is engaged in pollution issues, will be brought to book. That is why you have this legislation today. Farming in Mpumalanga is affected by air pollution today. That is true. I know that you are referring to the Secunda area, which has many mines, as well as Witbank. What you are saying is true. I must say, however, that we in the portfolio committee, debated this and we gave this information to the administration in order for them to assist us in attending to all these problems. The legislation will give us more power in dealing with these forms of air pollution.
I am pleased to state that in the discussion in the meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Water and Environmental Affairs on 29 October 2013 the members of the committee unanimously voted to adopt the four amending Bills being debated in this House today. In addition, on behalf of the ANC, I propose that we adopt this Bill, that we support the Bill and its adoption in this Parliament.
Allow me to highlight a few items that arose during the deliberations on these amending Bills.
In the discussion on the National Environmental Management: Air Quality Amendment Bill, it was mentioned that there would be a provision for retrospective application of the law to companies that had been under the previous legislation. In some cases industries might have expanded their activities without an updating of the environmental impact assessment. Where no EIA was conducted, section 24(g) of the National Environmental Management Act would be applicable.
Where a municipality failed to provide a licence within the required timeframe, as was alluded to by the Minister and the chairperson, the new clause would allow for the member of the executive committee or the Minister to intervene. I should think that is a step forward, and it is a Bill that will give powers to the executive and the Minister in dealing with these issues.
With reference to the National Environmental Management: Integrated Coastal Management Amendment Bill, we were of the opinion that reclaimed state- owned land would have to be registered and that there should thus be a reference to the title deeds for that land.
In both state and other applications, the details of the funding should be included as part of the necessary information. This would prevent corruption. Furthermore, there did not seem to be any procedure to cover a pre-approval being ratified by Parliament.
Relating to the dumping of effluent, we were satisfied with the R5 million penalty, as contained in section 80, as some of the substances contemplated could be very poisonous. In extreme cases, this penalty might not even be enough. We did not think the fine could be increased, but perhaps the jurisdiction of the court could be changed in the most serious cases. If a person was convicted in a High Court, the limits in the legislation could be set aside and the court could set its own sentence. Ten years' imprisonment might even be insufficient. I thank you. [Applause.]