Certain Conventional Weapons Convention & Agreement on Trade Development and Cooperation: adoption

Meeting report

Certain Conventional Weapons Convention (CCW)
The Chairperson noted that the Committee had received detailed briefings on the CCW in the last two meetings. It had been agreed that the Committee would prepare a resolution which would then be processed through the parliamentary procedures.
The Chairperson read out the resolution, which recommended that the House, in terms of section 231 (2) of the Constitution, approve the said Convention.”

This was approved by Dr G Koornhof (ANC) and seconded by Mr K Mubu (DA).
Mr S Ngonyama (COPE) sought clarity about which entity had requested that the Convention be considered.
The Chairperson clarified that that the request had come from the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO).

Mr Ngonyama asked whether this point should not be noted in the resolution.
Mr Mubu pointed out that this was not necessary because it was known that all matters of an international would be referred to the Committee by DIRCO.
Dr Koornhof recalled that Parliament had passed the Certain Conventional Weapons Act 2008. This was domestic legislation and as a result, the Department of Defence and the Portfolio Committee on Defence had been responsible for processing the Act. However, because the CCW had international bearing, DIRCO and the Committee were involved.
Ms R Magau (ANC) said that this was the standard procedure and technique for reports of this nature, and all reports from section 231 (3) emanating from the confederations office for approval or ratification. The resolution did not refer to the ministry or the department which had signed the request.
The Committee accepted this explanation.
Report on Agreement on Trade Development and Cooperation (TDA)
The Chairperson read out the resolution, which recommended that the House, in terms of section 231 (2) of the Constitution approve the said Agreement.”

The agreement was approved and no further comment was made.

Outstanding Minutes
The Chairperson tabled four outstanding minutes for consideration. These were dated 21 July and 4, 11 and 25 August. The latter was adopted with a minor correction while the others were approved without any changes.

Dr Koornhof appreciated the Hansard style of reporting of the minutes, but suggested that only the essence of the meetings should be captured. A lot of work was put into writing word for word minutes.

Mr Mubu said that the minutes were well written and were of a high standard, but questioned if there was another format in which Parliament drafted minutes. He added that the minutes were fine as they were and that it alleviated confusion about who said what.

Mr Ngonyama said that the standard of minutes was about the agenda and the resolution of the meetings.

The Chairperson acknowledged the points that had been raised. He agreed with Mr Mubu that there had to be a standard procedure throughout Parliament, in every committee, about the way minutes were drafted. He pointed out that when names were mentioned in the minutes those decisions were associated with the individuals rather than the Committee as a whole.

Mr Ngonyama said that it created a false impression about how active a member was in a particular meeting.

The Chairperson commented that there was strong motivation to change the way the minutes were drafted and only provide the context of the meetings; however he conceded that there was some merit in recording the actual contributions of Members.
Ethiopia Visit
The Chairperson said that the Committee still planned to go to Zimbabwe and had not abandoned this idea.
The Chairperson requested Members to consider what countries to visit for oversight visits. These countries must have multi-lateral institutions so that when visited, the Committee could deal with oversight issues in the South African embassies and could also call the heads of missions in those regions to meet at a central point to raise issues in one sitting, as there was currently a debate surrounding funding. An application had been made for the Committee to visit Ethiopia to see what was going on at the headquarters of the African Union (AU). Once in Ethiopia, the Committee would also be able to contact embassies in surrounding regions such as Sudan, Nairobi and Egypt and sit with heads of missions and discuss issues. The trip was scheduled for 28 October-2 November 2010. Further details would be provided to Members closer to the time of departure.

Dr Koornof advised that the Committee needed to inform embassies ahead of time, so that all logistical arrangements could be made. It was important that the trip was well planned and everyone was well informed.

Mr Ngonyama said that it was a very important trip. He suggested that a lecture on the history of the country would be useful to the Committee.

The meeting was adjourned.