Hon members, I must mention that according to the Schedule the format has changed slightly. There will be questions and answers, meaning that there will be questions to the Ministers and there will be answers until we finish the Schedule and then we will go into the next format which will be the objections and votes in the next Schedule. This is how it has been divided.
Vote No 1 - The Presidency - put.
Vote No 3 - Foreign Affairs - put.
Vote No 4 - Home Affairs - put.
Vote No 5 - Provincial and Local Government - put.
Vote No 6 - Public Works - put.
Vote No 7 - Government Communications and Information System - put.
Vote No 8 - National Treasury - put.
Vote No 9 - Public Service and Administration - put.
Vote No 10 - Public Service Commission - put.
Vote No 11 - South African Management Development Institute - put.
Vote No 12 - Statistics South Africa - put.
Vote No 13 - Arts and Culture - put.
Vote No 14 - Education - put.
Vote No 15 - Health - put.
Chair, I am sorry to break the cycle of no questions. Hon Minister, a total of R394 million has been rolled over this financial year, of which R121 million was rolled over for forensic pathology services, about R10 million for the transfer payment to the National Health Laboratory Service, R4,7 million for the forensic laboratories, and R10,6 million for the HIV/Aids grant.
A total of R234 million has been rolled over for the Hospital Revitalisation Programme, of which several revitalisation projects had to be stopped due to lack of funds, yet we had a roll-over. The provinces worst affected were the Western Cape, the Northern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng. This was confirmed with the committee in our debate on the annual budget with the Director-General. What were the reasons for the project being stopped when there was clearly enough money available, and what assurances can you give the House, hon Minister, that this money will be spent this time? Thank you.
Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. I can only reassure the member that the money will be spent. [Applause.]
Vote No 16 - Labour - put.
Vote No 17 - Social Development - put.
Vote No 18 - Sport and Recreation - put.
Speaker, this morning the President of Athletics SA raised his concern about the SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee, Sascoc, especially the preparations for the Beijing Olympics. Money has already been allocated for Beijing, and now an extra R6,5 million is being shifted from other savings to the Beijing preparations.
My question to the Deputy Minister is: Can he assure Members of Parliament that Sascoc is going to spend this money in the best interests of the members of Sascoc, and will the Sascoc members be happy about that spending?
Hon Deputy ...
The second point is that the department has a saving in respect of employees due to a 50% vacancy rate. This saving has been shifted to municipalities for service delivery. I just want to know what service delivery there is going to be at municipality level.
Also, while the department has made savings on employees, it is shifting money from the goods and services provided by the Department of Sport and Recreation for 2010 projects. What I want to know is what employees they are talking about here, because there are already savings on employees, but they are taking money from savings on employees. Which employees is he talking about? And, if this money is from the department for 2010 projects, is the department not in future going to ask for money from the Treasury for 2010?
Thank you, hon Speaker. I want to correct the hon member. Sascoc will spend the money to the benefit of the athletes involved and not the employees at Sascoc. So, we are preparing for Beijing and, hopefully, a few more medals, and I want to assure the hon member that we will make this country proud once again like we did in France recently.
The second question to me about the shifting of funds to municipalities is not quite clear, because the savings we had were due to virements which we had on vacancies - the vacancy rate. It's not 50% as we speak, hon Masango. Of the 231 allocated posts we have filled 177; we have advertised the balance and we are in the process of finalising that. So the shifting - the R400 000 you were referring to, hon Masango - was done mainly to pay for licensing of the vehicles in the Department of Sport and Recreation, and that goes to the municipalities. That was where they budgeted it.
In respect of the employees referred to for 2010, the hon Masango must be referring to the 2010 unit in the Department of Sport and Recreation. As we speak, we have not filled all the positions as yet, but we are in the process of filling them. And, no, I don't foresee that we will come back for additional funding to fill those positions. Thank you.
Vote No 19 - Correctional Services - put.
Vote No 20 - Defence - put.
Vote No 21 - Independent Complaints Directorate - put. Vote No 22 - Justice and Constitutional Development - put.
Madam Speaker, could the Minister inform the House whether the funds shifted to improve the accounting practices of the Guardian Fund will take into consideration any losses incurred by beneficiaries as a result, and whether a system exists that requires lawyers to submit proof that any funds relating to intestate cases have been deposited into the Guardian Fund. Further, does any information exist for any amount lost due to moneys held in the fund; and, if so, what are relevant details? I thank you.
In order to provide a fuller response to that I would need it on paper, but I could say, generally, that in fact we have made great strides in improving the capacity of the Masters and that we have furnished electronic infrastructure to eight sites - it should be eight sites by March next year.
Vote No 23 - Safety and Security - put.
Thank you, Speaker. Hon Minister, it is of great concern to us that the largest percentage of the appropriation relating to the five programmes goes not to visible policing or to detective services or crime intelligence, but to the protection and security services - in other words, VIP protection and static and mobile security, which also then includes the police stations.
Most of the police stations that we have visited now hire private security, and we need an assurance from the Minister that the majority of the 33,6% increase will be spent on protecting foreign embassy officials and diplomats, who have recently come under attack. It doesn't look good for the reputation of our country that more energy and effort will be put into protecting them from further attacks, rather than protecting our own police officers from being robbed. Thank you.
For starters, hon member, you have misunderstood this allocation. When you read it I'm sure you'll see that the biggest allocation is for the purposes of visible policing. Protection and security have nothing to do with what you are talking about. Protection and security services relate to the protection of VIPs - VIPs who visit our country and other VIPs that we have in the country. So, this has nothing to do with what you are talking about.
The issue of the guarding of government installations is a different matter altogether, and we use private security companies for that. We don't train - and I've been saying this over and over again in this House - police officials in order for them to guard installations. We train them so that they can deal with crime. It has nothing to do with the protection of installations.
Chairperson, there is a further question on Vote No 23 with regard to Programme 2 in respect of visible policing. Could the Minister inform the House whether the allocation that has been made here concerning visible policing will add to the building of trust between communities and the SAPS in terms of fighting crime? This is because the perception exists that the police have a low service record in responding to crime.
Well, hon member, the allocation is given for the purposes of ensuring that there are an adequate number of police officers in the streets for visible policing. If they don't do that work, then there is a problem - and it is a problem that we will deal with. We would be happy if you could furnish us with information that will indicate that.
Speaker, we note with disappointment that in spite of the increasing levels of drug trafficking, particularly among schoolchildren, Programme 4 on crime intelligence has received the lowest allocation of the budget adjustment. Without increasing the budget of the crime intelligence department, how does the Minister plan to reduce drug trafficking, possession and abuse among school-going children? Thank you.
The matter of budgeting has to do with what we have and what we require in terms of the work that we do. Indeed, crime intelligence is a very important division of the police. But this is the amount that we had, and we gave them that amount for the purpose of doing their work.
Of course, we would like to get more money for all the work that we do, but this does not mean that they will not be able to do the work that they are supposed to do. In fact, crime intelligence of the SA Police Service is among the best in the world. We have said this over and over again, and it has not just come from us. People have indicated that, in fact, we do a lot of good work using crime intelligence in this country. It does not mean, therefore, that they will not be able to do their work. [Interjections.] They continue to do their work and they are doing their work very well.
Thank you, Speaker. Minister, it is of concern to us that the largest percentage of the appropriation relating to the five programmes goes to protection and security services - in other words, for the protection of VIPs, stable and mobile security, ports of entry, railway police and the government security regulator - and not, for example, to visible policing, detective services or crime intelligence. Most of the police stations we visit now hire private security.
Hon member, you sound like you are repeating a question that has been raised earlier. [Interjections.]
Vote No 24 - Agriculture - put.
Vote No 25 - Communications - put.
Vote No 26 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism - put.
Madam Speaker, the question to the hon Minister is ... [Interjections.]
Can you please speak into the microphone?
The question is whether the hon Minister is prepared to consider the implementation of improved sustainable community projects, given the negative effect the current allocation of fishing quotas has on the West Coast communities? Consider further that the department has shifted R2 million for a conference, which could be used for such a proposal.
Madam Speaker, the department has programmes for the communities along the coast. For instance, we are developing a mariculture programme for food security that will also assist with job creation. With those mariculture projects, we will even export. Two weeks ago, we held a workshop in Port Elizabeth for the small-scale fishing communities, where we are developing the policy. Very soon, the Minister will be announcing that policy. Again, we are developing the small- scale fishing harbours, which are going to be tourism attractions. We have a lot of tourists who go to harbours, but would always like to go to communities and be part of them.
We are also working with the Department of Labour on a social plan for the communities along the coast. We want to look at it in a more holistic way. We also have the social responsibility project. For instance, we have the coast care that is cleaning the beaches. Those have been very innovative projects and have even introduced refreshment stations. They are also recycling the waste that comes from the coast and that is creating small, medium and micro enterprises - SMMEs.
We have the seaweed project that is processing seaweed for feeding the mariculture abalone. We are also exporting it. As you know, we have many tablets and other medicines that contain seaweed that comes from here. Farmers buy it as well. All those are job-creating projects. We are the only ones, in Africa, who are members of the blue flag initiative.
Blue flag beaches are the ones tourists usually go to, because the quality of water is very good, the beaches are very clean, and there are healthy and well-managed businesses along the coast. These days, many tourists just look in the internet for the blue flag, and then flood there. They are creating employment and more businesses for the people and communities along the coast. I am just giving you a tip. There are lots of them. I thank you. [Applause.]
Vote No 27 - Housing - put.
Madam Speaker, the additional appropriation this year is not much in relation to the original budget. It is just about 1,2%. However, notwithstanding a 21% vacancy rate in personnel, the department identified R6 million savings on compensation of employees. This amount plus an additional R2 million is to be shifted or transferred for pensionable service costs in the government employees' pension fund for the former non- statutory forces members.
I do not begrudge anybody their pension. I would like to ask the hon Minister, if she could please inform this House who these non-statutory members are and why the Department of Housing has to contribute to this fund, and not the Department of Defence? Secondly, why an amount of R105 million is to be allocated to the North West province for emergency housing? Once again, I agree that this is a very necessary expenditure.
However, I would like to ask the Minister if this is for the same disaster area in Taung where flooding took place in early 2006. The committee visited that area in October last year and contrary to what we found in other provinces, the rebuilding of houses was actually going very well there. Therefore, my question to the hon Minister is whether this transfer is for the same project or for other emergency housing in the province? And will the province be able to spend these funds on such emergency housing, preferably within the next month or so? I thank you.
Speaker, if you will allow me I will start with the last matter, which is a substantive one. The hon member does attend most of the portfolio committee meetings that we hold. He will no doubt know that we do have a big disaster in North West in an area called Carltonville.
He will also know that together with the Department of Provincial and Local Government, we are in the process of ensuring that we can remove those people who are living on a dolomitic area, to a new area, so that we can build a new village there. We have discussed this at length. This is what we are using that money for. Is that understood? You won't ask again. I thank you. [Laughter.]
You do know that ... [Interjections.] Please allow him to interact with me. We interact quite freely in the portfolio committee without any interference from the rest of you. [Laughter.] As far as non-statutory forces are concerned, you know that we have a policy in terms of which we are dealing with these forces and the provision of housing. You know that we dealt with that matter in the last budget. It is with us and not with Defence. We discussed this and you understand it. [Laughter.]
Hon Speaker, I just wish that he had not been dragged out of the coffee room, because most of these matters were dealt with at length in the portfolio committee. I thank you very much. [Laughter.]
We now put Vote No. 28 - Land Affairs. Are there any questions? Hon Bici, is that on Land Affairs?
Yes, Madam Speaker.
Is there someone who is still on Housing? Yes, hon member. It is so strange, because it sounds like you interact quite regularly in the portfolio committee? [Laughter.]
Speaker, just on a point of correction to the hon Minister. My question was very specifically about a transfer for the pension fund, not for housing. I do realise that we have a responsibility in the department in respect of non-statutory members, but it was a transfer to a pension fund of non-statutory members. I thank you.
Thank you very much, Speaker. I have been advised by all the hon members sitting here, that it happens to all Ministries. Perhaps the hon member could acquaint himself with how the budgeting processes work. I thank you.
Vote No 28 - Land Affairs - put.
Madam Speaker, my first question would be: What care services does the department provide to land reform beneficiaries to ensure that production does not deteriorate? What is the position in this regard, regarding the black farmers who obtained their farms from the previous TVBC states? The Land Bank seems to be struggling. Has the Minister managed to determine the reasons why the Land Bank is struggling? What strategies are in place to recap this?
Lastly, we have quite a number of institutions or structures like the Comprehensive Agricultural Support Programme - Casp, Elrad, the Micro Agricultural Financial Institutional Scheme of South Africa - Mafisa, Vimba, Khula, the Land Bank and Gijima. Are these not duplications which could probably cause problems to the management of these institutions? I thank you.
UMPHATHISWA WEZOLIMO NEMICIMBI YEZEMIHLABA: Somlomo, ndiyavuya ukuba lo kaBici sinaye phaya ekomitini, ngoko ke uyayazi imigudu esiyenzayo kwabo bafumana uncedo kulungiso lwezemihlaba okanye ii-Land Reform beneficiaries. Zonke ezi nkqubo athetha ngazo ezinjengoo-Casp, Elrad, Mafisa, kunye noo- Land Bank yimizamo apho iSebe lezoLimo lidibana khona nelezemiHlaba aze ahlangabezane, aqaqeshe abantu bakuthi, abangazange balifumana ithuba ngelaa xesha looHlohlesakhe lokuba nabo bangene kulo mnyango wezoLimo. Mininzi imigudu eyenziweyo ke sinayo nentsebenziswano eqiqileyo okanye ukunkampana kunye nabalimi abamhlophe. Ubuninzi babo bayeza baze kuncedisana naba basakhasayo ukuze bagqithisele amava abo kwakunye nezakhono zabo kubo ukwenzela ukuba la malinge abo kunye nezi fama zintsha zingafi.
Kulo mba weza ngingqi zazisakwaziwa njengee-TBVC states andazi namnye mna kula rhulumente wobandlululo noonomgogwana owakhe wanika abantu umhlaba. Ndazi ukuba umhlaba uqale ukunikezelwa ebantwini ngorhulumente ka-ANC, ongene apha eburhulumenteni ngonyaka we-1994. ukuba ke kukho ooTBVC abanika abantu umhlaba ngamaphupha angekhoyo ke lowo.
Kulo mcimbi weBhanki yomHlaba ndifuna ukukhumbuza ilungu elibekekileyo lo mcimbi waqalwa sesi siGqeba-solawulo, esathatha isgqibo ngomhla wama 20 kuMatshi 2007 ukuba makubekho uphando olunzulu okanye i-forensic audit ngabula makhumsha. Sithe sakufumana ingxelo sathatha izigqibo zokuba mazithathwe ezo ngxelo zisiwe emapoliseni ukuze zisetyenzwe ngokusemthethweni. Sele yenziwe ke loo nto kwaye ezo ncwadi zisaphandwa ngamapolisa. Ukuba kukho ophume endleleni ke wenza izinto ezingafanelekanga apho ebhankini kuza kuqhawuka unobathana. Ndiyabulela. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraphs follows.)
[The MINISTER FOR AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Speaker, I am glad because hon Bici is a member of the committee, and therefore he knows that we spare no effort in helping the beneficiaries of the land reform programme. All the programmes that he is talking about, such as Casp, Elrad, Mafisa and the Land Bank are joint efforts involving the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Land Affairs, where the two departments train previously disadvantaged people. We also have a partnership with white farmers in this regard. Most of these farmers come and share their experiences and expertise with the small farmers so as to ensure that their ventures become viable.
With regard to the former TBVC states, I know of no former Bantustan government that redistributed land to the people. All I know is that land redistribution started in 1994, under the ANC-led government. That any TBVC state ever had a land redistribution programme in place, is a mystery.
Regarding the Land Bank, I want to remind the hon member that this issue was brought to the fore by this executive, which took the decision, on 20 March 2007, to carry out a forensic audit of the bank. When we received the report on the forensic audit, we decided to take it to the police for investigation. That has happened, and the police investigations continue. If any official of the bank is found guilty of any wrong-doing, the law will take its course. Thank you.]
Madam Speaker, I think I need to make a follow-up on this. The assertion that there are no farms which were given to the black people before 1994, is misleading. If you go to Elliot in the Eastern Cape ... [Interjections].
Hon member, if you have a question to put to the Minister, this is the time to do it.
Speaker, I have a question to put to the Minister.
Yes. Please put the question.
Is the Minister aware that there are farms in Elliot, Queenstown, and Qumrha in the Eastern Cape, which were given by the then government to ... [Interjections.]
Hon member, the business right now relates to what the order of the House is - and that is about the allocation of the budget. So, the question of history lessons is not relevant. I am sure you can make an appointment with the Minister so that you can sort out the history. [Applause.]
Madam Speaker, I have no problem with that, but it would appear that the Minister is not acquainted with what is happening in her department. If she would talk to hon Didiza, she would get the information because she was there and she knows what I am talking about. I thank you.
Hon member, I now want to proceed.
UMPHATHISWA WEZOLIMO NEMICIMBI YOMHLABA: Ndiyayazi Somlomo laa fama ise- Elliot, awazinika yona uMathanzima, kodwa ke wabhubha ke ngoku kwaye akhange litsho ilungu elibekekileyo ukuba lifuna uncedo ngayo. Ndiyabulela. [Kwahlekwa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[The MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND LAND AFFAIRS: Speaker, I know about that farm at Elliot, which Matanzima allocated himself. However, he passed away and the hon member did not indicate whether he needs some help with regard to that farm. I thank you. [Laughter.]]
Vote No 29 - Minerals and Energy - put.
Madam Speaker, following a number of recent incidents at mines around the country, a renewed interest in the promotion of mine safety and health has developed, so much so that hon President Mbeki has directed that an overall audit or investigation into mine safety issues take place. In light thereof, the reduction or virement in the allocated budget for the programme on the promotion of mine safety and health appears at best odd and out of step with the President's stated intention. What reasons have led to a reduction in the budget of the above programme, and shouldn't we rather be increasing the department's budget on this important programme? Thank you.
Chair, this is one of the sectors of the Department of Minerals and Energy that actually has enormous difficulty in recruiting staff. I mean, you're fighting against employers who pay people large amounts of money.
There is even a part that's quite cynical where they actively recruit skilled people because the mines are in a position to remunerate at such high rates. The problem that then arises is that you have vacancies and you can leave the vacancies funded or you can utilise resources differently.
Clearly arising from the many incidents that have taken place, the Minister has indicated that the oversight branch that deals with mine health and safety will have to be strengthened, but this will mean recruiting people to ensure that they can actually earn their spurs and remain in the department. Thank you.
Madam Speaker, does the Department of Minerals and Energy intend to continue spending billions of rands on the pebble bed modular reactor considering that it has no proven direct benefits to ordinary South Africans?
Chair, I have pages 135-139, which is Vote: Minerals and Energy, and there isn't a dime for any pebble bed modular reactors, so I think the question is out of turn. Thank you.
Vote No 30 - Public Enterprises - put.
Minister, let us just continue with the pebble bed modular reactor. We notice that ... [Interjections.]
Which vote are you on?
I am on Vote 30. I am talking to Programme 4, which is about pebble bed modular reactors.
Minister you have allocated R678 million to this project and this is for research, etc. We all realise that we must reduce carbon emissions, but we believe that the Medium-Term Budget has made R6 billion available for the next three years.
My first question is: Will this be enough to begin construction of this pebble bed modular reactor, bearing in mind that the corporate structure is still not in place? The second question is: We notice that a guarantee of R220 million, which was a guarantee against Denel, had to be paid, and we would just like to know why Denel did not perform properly with regard to this contract. Could you please just help us there? Will this R220 million be the only claim or are there more claims to be paid out in respect of this guarantee for Denel?
Madam Speaker, with regard to the pebble bed modular reactor the R6 billion allocated over the period is, in our view, a very satisfactory allocation. Our intention, as you have just indicated, is to finalise a corporate structure for the pebble bed modular reactor. This is a relatively complicated negotiation. We are dealing with international partners, but the intention would be to attempt to get them to finance the balance.
So, we're comfortable that, although it's a very complex, large and difficult project, we are on track and the R6 billion that the state has given, plus other amounts that were given previously, are a reasonable contribution for the state to make. We would seek to raise the balance from other partners.
With regard to the Denel guarantee, once again I don't know if you are part of that particular committee, but this is a relatively difficult commercial agreement. It relates to supply conditions for parts for a military aircraft and whilst we are in negotiations and some degree of dispute as to who was responsible for what happened, we were obliged commercially to meet our obligations on that guarantee, which we've done. We will continue some negotiations to mitigate the position further, but as we supply more and more products for this aircraft, the value of that guarantee drops quite fast.
Vote No 31 - Science and Technology - put.
Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry - put.
Vote No 33 - Transport - put.
Speaker, through you to the Minister, I'm sure you must be as concerned as I am at the continued inability of the department to spend its operational budget over the past two years. Much of this can be attributed to the delays in the Taxi Recapitalisation Programme and the continuous vacancy rate, which exceeds 40%. Roll-overs of R386 million should never have occurred if proper public transport policy and planning was in place.
Let me focus on the R300 million that has been appropriated for bus subsidies. Almost 20% of the department's budget goes to bus subsidies, if you take out the Gautrain cash cow. Yet, according to the National Household Travel Survey, the nodal share of buses for the journey to work has fallen from 12% in 1997 to 9% in 2003; it could be even lower now. The reason for this is that very few or no bus contracts have been awarded since the mid-1990s.
Transport authorities are few and far between and municipalities in general have failed to co-ordinate formal operators, joint marketing initiatives, improved scheduling or the introduction of thorough or multiticketing systems - all important issues to ensure that an integrated public transport system is in place. Furthermore, Minister, operators have been loath to purchase buses considering that some 39% of that purchase once goes back to the state in the form of VAT and import duty.
Bus commuters, therefore, are not happy with bus services being offered to them and - again according to the National Household Travel Survey - they claim that there are not enough buses available. Often enough they are not there at the right times and travel time is too long and expensive.
My question, therefore, Minister, is threefold: Has your department done any research into the effectiveness of the subsidies, much of which go to the wealthy operators and very little to people such as our pensioners and unemployed who really need it - in other words, the commuter?
Why is it, then, that the buses are being used less, and yet more money ends up going into subsidies? And will you investigate the exclusion of VAT or import duties on these bus purchases? Thank you.
Madam Speaker, regarding the first issue, the Taxi Recapitalisation Programme, I think Mr Farrow is aware that as early as 7 November, that is last week, the portfolio committee was briefed about the progress thereon.
Despite what his colleague, Mr Swart, said during the debate on the main appropriation earlier today, we have to date scrapped more than 11 000 taxis throughout the country and paid out more than R600 million to taxi operators and owners. This means that the Taxi Recapitalisation Programme is on course and is going to be even more robust going into the next financial year.
As far as the issue of bus subsidies is concerned, the budget appropriation is requesting an additional amount because of the demand by commuters to use buses as well. Mr Farrow, you should also be aware that we want to focus on a public transport subsidy as opposed to a specific mode. We want to see a combination of both buses and taxis.
So, this transformation of the bus subsidy system will alleviate some of the challenges that our people face. At the end of the day, it is the commuters who have a choice whether to use buses, taxis or even passenger rail. Our responsibility is to ensure that we create that environment, so that people can have those choices. However, buses still have relevance in South Africa.
Government will continue to subsidise buses because the majority of the people that need subsidies are those that were excluded under the previous system of apartheid. So, Mr Farrow, we shall continue to do that.
Insofar as the last question is concerned, I think the laws of the country have to be applied. There can be no preferential treatment for people who purchase buses.
I just want to know whether we have enough time for a follow- up question, Madam Speaker. Thank you.
Minister, my emphasis is on the fact that this is a major part of the transport budget that goes into subsidies. They are only going to buses and rail at the moment. But now, effectively, with transport and public transport coming into the realm of the recapitalisation of taxis, where is this money going to come from, because every year we run out and we re- appropriate money into the subsidy scheme - a bottomless pit - and yet buses are not really a reality in our situation.
Are we saying that this money is now going to taxis specifically in the same form the subsidies go to buses? That is my question.
Well, you will recall, Mr Farrow, that we are introducing what we call a "model tender document" that will see the gradual incorporation of taxis into this so-called "bus subsidy system". Last month we saw, in the Free State, a bus subsidy system that incorporates taxi operators. We want to see this happening throughout South Africa. So, very shortly, that model tender document will see the transformation of the bus subsidy into a public transport subsidy.
Madam Speaker, there is another question. My question relates to Programme 7: Public Entity Oversight and Economic Regulation. We have passed the Road Accident Fund Amendment Act here in Parliament, and R14 million has been rolled over owing to the regulations, programmes and strategies to restructure the Road Accident Fund. What is it, within this Department of Transport, that is hampering the Minister passing and implementing those regulations?
What is happening on the ground, really, is that victims of accidents are having a very difficult time with unscrupulous lawyers and the way in which they deal with them. We feel that the restructuring of this Act, especially the regulations, is going to assist victims in making those direct claims. Minister, what is the problem in terms of the restructuring and regulations? Thank you.
Well, you would be aware that Parliament passed the Road Accident Fund Amendment Act and promulgated regulations. There was also a court case recently, which the Constitutional Court is going to pronounce upon. Certain sections of the Act have not yet come into operation. So, we are waiting for the ruling of the Constitutional Court, which we understand will be made at the beginning of February.
However, I can assure the hon member that there is a great deal of improvement in terms of the approach of the new management of the Road Accident Fund. And as soon as clarity is received from the Constitutional Court, we are going to see accelerated transformation of the Road Accident Fund.
This would help the fund do what it was intended for, that is to pay victims of road accidents, and not to line the pockets of lawyers or even doctors who are living off the fat of the Road Accident Fund, thereby making the victims of road accidents victims of the fund itself.
Vote No 34 - Water Affairs and Forestry - put.
Discussion on Votes and Schedule concluded.
Vote No 1 - The Presidency - agreed to.
Vote No 3 - Foreign Affairs - agreed to.
Vote No 4 - Home Affairs - agreed to.
Vote No 5 - Provincial and Local Government - agreed to.
Vote No 6 - Public Works - agreed to.
Vote No 7 - Government Communications and Information System - agreed to.
Vote No 8 - National Treasury - agreed to.
Vote No 9 - Public Service and Administration - agreed to.
Vote No 10 - Public Service Commission - agreed to.
Vote No 11 - South African Management Development Institute - agreed to.
Vote No 12 - Statistics South Africa - agreed to.
Vote No 13 - Arts and Culture - agreed to.
Vote No 14 - Education - agreed to.
Vote No 15 - Health - agreed to.
Vote No 16 - Labour - agreed to. Vote No 17 - Social Development - agreed to.
Vote No 18 - Sports and Recreation South Africa - agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 19 - Correctional Services - agreed to.
Vote No 20 - Defence - agreed to.
Vote No 21 - Independent Complaints Directorate - agreed to.
Vote No 22 - Justice and Constitutional Development - agreed to.
Vote No 23 - Safety and Security - agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 24 - Agriculture - agreed to.
Vote No 25 - Communications - agreed to.
Vote No 26 - Environmental Affairs and Tourism - agreed to.
Vote No 27 - Housing - agreed to.
Vote No 28 - Land Affairs - agreed to.
Vote No 29 - Minerals and Energy - agreed to.
Vote No 30 - Public Enterprises - agreed to (Democratic Alliance dissenting).
Vote No 31 - Science and Technology - agreed to.
Vote No 32 - Trade and Industry - agreed to.
Vote No 33 - Transport - agreed to.
Vote No 34 - Water Affairs and Forestry - agreed to.
Schedule agreed to.