International Relations and Co-operation Portfolio Committee: Committee Programme

Meeting report

Opening Remarks by the Chairperson
The Chairperson welcomed Members back after their break and advised them to take care of themselves given that flu viruses were causing havoc. He added that diseases were even now globalised. Also, he welcomed Ms Cheryl Dudley (ACDP) as a new member of the Committee.

The Chairperson outlined the agenda for the meeting- the Committee would consider its programme as well as outstanding minutes.

Ms R Magau (ANC) asked why the minutes dating as far back as February was only being considered now. She suggested that minutes should be completed within one week of a meeting.

Adoption of Committee Programme
The Chairperson noted that the programme outlined the Committee’s plans until until August 2010. Not much could be done during the months of June and July 2010 due to the 2010 FIFA World Cup. Parliament reconvened on 19 July 2010 after the World Cup tournament. The Committee had intended to visit the Universities of Limpopo and Venda. Visits at present were out of the question because universities were busy with exams. The Chairperson noted that it was the reality of the situation. The months of August and September were the only months available to the Committee as October was again exam time at universities. Some members even had to write university exams. November and December was also not available since Parliament went into recess in mid-November.

The Chairperson said that Members needed to convince their respective party leaders that oversight for this Committee meant undertaking overseas visits. The cost of one business ticket was roughly R40 000 and if one included accommodation and transport it could easily amount to R60 000-R80 000 per member. If five Members were to go (on a visit) it would use up half of the Committee’s budget. It was something to be considered by Members. The Committee should at least have one overseas oversight visit every six months. In Europe, buses and trains could be used and this reduced travelling costs substantially. An overseas oversight visit could cover a region which could include more than one country. Perhaps only half of the Committee could undertake such visits at a time given that the costs of travelling were so high.

The Chairperson stated that the old model of oversight visits no longer worked. In the past oversight visits was seen as study tours which was not true. He advised the Committee not to put too much on its programme and only to focus on what it was able to handle.

Mr K Mubu (DA) referred to the Committee Minutes dated 17 February 2010 and said that the Committee had agreed in that meeting that a visit to Zimbabwe was a priority. The idea was to visit the Committee’s sister committee in Zimbabwe. The visit would be helpful as the situation in that country was relevant to South Africa.

Mr B Skosana (IFP) noted that the Committee could conduct this visit during the period 19-23 July 2010.

The Chairperson explained that when permission from Parliament was requested for the visit to Limpopo University it was suggested that a trip to Zimbabwe be arranged at the same time as Limpopo was not too far from Zimbabwe. A guarantee of a date for the visit from Limpopo University was needed. When Parliament reopens after the 2010 World Cup, the Committee needed to set a date in July. Visit to Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries could also be targeted on the same trip. Tanzania was suggested as a possible destination. The Committee could once every six months visit a particular region and in so doing cover three to four countries.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) agreed that it made financial sense to visit regions. He suggested that perhaps the Committee could visit the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) as well. It was all good and well to place planned visits on the Committee Programme but when was the Committee actually going to embark on one, financial constraints aside. Finally, he mentioned that the Committee should be part of observer missions for elections taking place on the continent.

Mr Skosana said that the Committee had to remember that not much could be done given the 2010 World Cup. He suggested that the trip to Zimbabwe be undertaken in the period 19-23 July 2010. The Committee had to also consider global political agreements. During the visit to Zimbabwe embassies and high commissions of other countries should be invited as well. Representatives of SADC and the African Union should additionally be invited. Unions and civil society should also not be left out. The visit should not only be with the Zimbabwean Portfolio Committee on International Relations. A meeting with Agriforum should be scheduled to find out more about their work in Zimbabwe. Meetings with unions like COSATU could be arranged to determine how workers were affected by international agreements. Inputs from religious bodies could also be obtained.

The Chairperson said that all those mentioned could be pooled together as national stakeholders.  He pointed out that observer missions were within the scope of Parliament as a whole and not only one committee. The Committee needed to recommend that its members should be part of delegations sent on observer missions.

Ms Dudley asked whether the Committee would be briefed on what the plans for the Committee were.

The Chairperson explained that the visit to the University of Limpopo was only a focal point. Other groups would also be invited to meet with the Committee on that visit. He agreed that there should be a meeting to identify what the objectives and plans for the planned trips were.

Mr Skosana said it was important that when the Committee met with stakeholders the Department needed to brief the Committee on foreign policy. A briefing on the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) would also be useful. 31 May and 1 June 2010 were suggested as possible dates.

Mr Mokgalapa said that the Committee Programme needed to remain flexible and added that the NEPAD briefing was a good suggestion.

The Chairperson noted the suggestions made and said that the (India, Brazil, South Africa) IBSA Report would be circulated to Members by the end of the week. He said that the South African Development Partnership Agency (SADPA) was a major legislative issue. The Department needed to brief the Committee on the processes involved over the issue.

Mr Mokgalapa suggested that the Committee wait until the Department was ready to brief the Committee over the issue. Members would not wish the Department’s briefing to be half baked as the relevant processes were not yet complete.

The Chairperson responded that the briefing would only be on the processes and not about content.

Mr G Koornhof (ANC) supported the suggestion of a briefing on SADPA. The briefing should shed light on processes and timeframes.

The Chairperson reiterated that the briefing would be more about processes and timeframes.

Mr T Mgama (ANC) asked about the readiness of protocol lounges and when the Committee was to check on it.

The Chairperson confirmed that the trip was scheduled for the following week. However, there was no confirmation as yet about which Members would be part of this trip.

Mr Koornhof suggested that the administration staff of the Committee consult the parliamentary programme in order to prevent clashes with the Committee’s plans.

Mr Mokgalapa also suggested that the Department brief the Committee on the status of bilateral agreements.

The Chairperson felt that the issue of xenophobia in South Africa was complex.

Ms Dudley stated that it would be useful to investigate how other countries dealt with the issue of xenophobia. The European Union dealt with it on a much larger scale.

The Chairperson stressed that the research section of the Committee should assist Members in identifying what the issues for debate regarding xenophobia were. There were many issues, for example scarcity of resources and the use of foreigners as a source of cheap labour were just two issues that were often cited.

Mr Skosana referred to xenophobic attacks that had taken place in Gauteng and Cape Town in 2008. A report that had been compiled had shown that there were many reasons for these attacks. A lack of housing, crime and health were some of the issues identified. The issue was that ordinary citizens were taking matters into their own hands and hence the law was being broken. The violent attacks on foreigners could not be tolerated.

The Chairperson said that the particular report should be made available to all Members.

Mr Mokgalapa felt that the Committee had limited scope over the issue of xenophobia. Most of the issues pertaining to xenophobia did not fall within the scope of the Committee. Only issues relating to the S outh African brand was relevant to the Committee. By attending imbizos, Members would be more enlightened on the issue. It was a multi faceted approach. There was a forum called public diplomacy.

Mr Skosana disagreed and said that xenophobia had every thing to do with the Committee. It was relevant to the Committee’s work.

The Chairperson concurred with Mr Skosana.

Mr Koornhof said that the issue was more about unregistered foreigners. South Africa could not perhaps stop the flow of foreigners into the country but individuals should at least be registered. It was a national issue and well within the scope of the Committee.

The Chairperson said that it had come to his attention that an outside party wished to sponsor the Committee’s trip to Africa and more specifically to the DRC. Was it allowed? What did parliamentary rules say?

Mr Koornhof said that the rules and regulations of Parliament should be consulted.

Mr Skosana agreed given that a particular sponsor could have vested interests for wanting to sponsor a trip of the Committee.

Mr Koornhof pointed out that countries in Europe were at present plunging into debt. It was a crisis and questions as to how it happened should be asked. How did it affect South Africa’s trade? Some of the countries being referred to were Greece and Spain. Britain at present also had a hung Parliament. Perhaps the Department could brief the Committee on the issues mentioned.
He also wished to bring it to members’ attention that there was a huge scramble for Africa. Countries like China were making huge inroads into Africa and dictated terms of trade. The Committee needed to consider the challenges that some of the African states were experiencing.
Diplomatic and peacekeeping missions were South Africa’s major contribution in Africa. Many contracts were coming to an end. Did the country intend to renew these contracts? The decision would come from the international relations cluster.

The Chairperson asked whether Mr Koornhof was suggesting that the Committee set time aside to deal with the issues raised.

Mr Skosana stated that the Committee might need a briefing from the Department of Trade and Industry over the issue of China making inroads into Africa. The Committee needed to know how China approached Africa.

The Chairperson agreed that the issues highlighted would be placed on the Committee’s agenda.

The Chairperson said that the Committee’s content advisor would compile a framework document on issues that had been raised in the meeting. The protocol lounges at airports in Cape Town, Gauteng and Durban would be visited by Members. The exercise would be complete in more or less one and a half days.

The issues discussed would be incorporated into the Committee Programme.

The Committee agreed to the Programme as amended.

Outstanding Minutes
The Chairperson placed the minutes of 17 February, 17 March, 14 April and 20 April 2010 before the Committee for consideration. He was sceptical to adopt minutes that had not been read by Members.

Therefore, Members were asked to read the minutes and to forward any changes to the Committee Secretary. The minutes would be considered and adopted at the next meeting. The present meeting’s minutes would also be considered.

The meeting was adjourned.