Mr Speaker, on the issues of climate change and the looming water crisis that has been anticipated, the department is more supportive of the Department of Water and Environmental Affairs on this aspect. Our task is to ensure that we support the department and it's the one that is leading on these issues and, therefore, we are accepting that whatever they come up with through co-operative discussions will be taken up by ourselves. What we have done though, is to conduct a study around the water and sanitation backlogs in South Africa. We have the report in that respect that outlines what has to be done for us to be able to ensure that universal access is reached in South Africa.
The last point is on the issue of urbanisation. We have developed an Urban Development Framework, a framework that is aimed at looking at the migration of people. We found out that a lot of people are staying in squalid conditions in informal settlements because they are running away from the grinding poverty in rural areas. Others are being evicted from the farms, therefore they go to these urban areas and stay in these conditions.
Now we have a situation in South Africa where areas that are wealthy are living side by side with squalid conditions and poor areas. Thank you very much.
Speaker, Minister thank you for your response. There is no doubt that this is one area that requires collaboration and co-operation across the three spheres including the communities on the ground.
South Africa is a water-scarce country and the fact that we might be facing a water crisis suggests that as individuals, families, organisations and especially government, we need to take proactive steps to increase the intensity of this collaboration. However, its results also ought to be evident in the manner in which municipalities themselves, especially because they are on the frontline, provide guidance and assistance in water harvesting. This also applies to the kind of maintenance that is required for infrastructure that we provide, to make this service absolutely available now and in the future.
Concerning drought and similar disasters that affect our area of responsibility this collaboration needs to be intensified for purposes of sustainability which we are committed to. Thank you.
Mr Speaker ...
Baba Somlomo, esifuna ukukusho nje nathi esivumelana naye uSihlalo, ubaba uTsenoli ukuthi udaba lokusebenzisana nokuthi sibenesixaxambiji uma senza umsebenzi kuyinto esemqoka kithi, esiyithandayo nesiyenzayo. UMnyango wakhelwe lokho ukusebenzisana kwalezi zigaba zikahulumeni. Ngaleyondlela leyo ... (Translation of isiZulu paragraph follows.)
[Mr Speaker, we would like to say that we also agree with the Chairperson, Mr Tsenoli, with regard to the issue of collaboration. We should co-operate if we are working together; it is important to us, because it is something we love and practise. The department is also meant for the collaboration of these governmental spheres. In that way ...]
... morena, re a thaba ge re ekwa taba ye. Re re re tla e loki?a. Re tla kgona go ?omi?ana gore re kgone go t?wela pele ka go loki?a ditaba t?e t?a meetse ka ge re dumela gore meetse a bohlokwa set?habeng sa Afrika-Borwa. Ke a leboga. [Magoswi.] (Translation of Sepedi paragraph follows.)
[... sir, we are glad to hear that; we will address that. We believe that water is an important resource to the nation of South Africa. We will therefore work together to address the issues around it. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Speaker, hon Minister it's a known fact that 98% of the surface water in South Africa has already been allocated and climate change will mean that we would have less surface water in the future. So this is a very important aspect, given the fact that a lot of municipalities are very badly run, and you know that the majority are run by ANC.
I would just like to ask the Minister whether he would agree that there is an urgent need to consider that the Municipal Infrastructure Grant, MIG, be directed towards fixing the ailing water infrastructure, and also whether he would he would strongly condemn curb water theft in this country.
Mr Speaker, I am requesting the hon members, on this side of the House, to rise above petty party politics.
Issues of governance do not require the approach that hon Doman takes. He is a very sensible man. Today I am shocked to the marrow that he speaks like this. Maybe, he has been briefed by somebody to speak like this because he's always been rational in the way he approaches matters.
When you talk about the issues of municipalities that are badly run, municipalities are not different from the ones in the Western Cape. The ones in the Western Cape are the worst because people go to bed with different partners at different times, because of the coalition system that is prevailing in this area.
You find that leadership is being changed from time to time when people come in. Now I am saying let us not throw stones when we live in glass houses. I am requesting that we should focus on the issues at hand and engage with them. [Interjections.] I like it when the temperatures rise under these conditions. I enjoy it, in fact.
The issue that is important hon Doman is the Municipal Infrastructure Grant. We do agree. We must be able to find creative measures and ways of ensuring service delivery. Thank you very much. [Time expired.]
Minister, we know that government has committed a huge amount, in the order of R50 or R60 billion, to resources for solving this problem and also that, for the first time, there has been a lot of concentration and emphasis on preventive maintenance.
However, the situation is that there are tight, time constraints to deal with this matter, because there are very long lead times to resolve the water crisis in the longer term.
Secondly, there has been nearly enough reduction and consumption, and that's pretty huge pressure on some of the systems like the Vaal system in particular. Thirdly, we have enormous capacity constraints with the local level to deal with the problem. Now the Minister made the comment that yes, we have a report, let's identify the backlogs.
The question I would like to ask the Minister is not about whether he has a report but about whether he has a plan or whether the government has a plan with timelines and specific targets to address the crisis because it is in fact a crisis. Fourthly, does the government have a plan to deal with emergency interventions in respect of those places in the country where the poor water quality is a threat to the environment and to life? Thank you.
Speaker, on the issues that have been raised around the backlogs, it's more of what has been raised by hon Smith, on waste-water-treatment plants, where we are saying that the cost requires an amount of about R56 billion. When he talks about what is a plan, do we have a plan? I must tell you that this information was assembled and presented last week on 21 and 22 October in relation to the extent of the backlogs.
We are involved in the process of developing a turnaround strategy. If you ask me the same question in December, I will be able to give you a reply because we are developing a strategy that will be ready at that time.
On the issue of consumption being reduced, the people who are mostly consuming the water are the farmers and the people at the mines and that is where the consumption of water is most prevalent. We are engaged on issues of ensuring that savings happen on those areas and also interventions on areas where there is an emergency. That matter is taken up, hon Smith. Thank you very much.
Speaker, there are many concerned citizens who say that the challenges in our water sector are beginning to bear a resemblance to those that sounded the initial alarm bells of the current energy crisis.
Water availability and quality have been compromised. Water pollution and the poor management of water resource infrastructure have culminated in severe water shortages in some places with measurable health impacts and environmental damages. What we want to know, hon Minister, is what specific actions are local governments in Gauteng province in particular taking, to ensure that they do not experience water shortages in the year 2013, as has been predicted by many. Thank you.
Mr Speaker, on the issues of challenges there is no doubt that South Africa is a semiarid country. Water is not available in abundance and this is compounded by the fact that we are losing almost 40% of the water underground that is not reaching the people and the municipalities because of leakages. Those are the issues that are applicable across the country in different municipalities.
Therefore, we are involved in measures to ensure that: one, we save on the leaks so that the leakage is able to be stopped; and two, we are involved in campaigns to ensure that we save water because if we do not do so, as we get water from Lesotho, the agreements are going to kick in earlier than the year 2017 if we don't act on this.
Therefore, as government we are involved in measures to ensure that water is treated as a scarce resource and that it is managed as such. But we are requesting Members of Parliament to work with us in this campaign of conserving water. Thank you very much.
Submission of Cedaw reports to UN and progress made in implementing Cedaw provisions
202. Mrs D M Ramodibe (ANC) asked the Minister of Women, Youth, Children and People with Disabilities:
(1) Why (a) did South Africa not submit the required country progress reports to the United Nations in terms of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, Cedaw, in (i) 2001 and (ii) 2005 and (b) were country reports submitted late;
(2) who is responsible for verifying the accuracy and relevance of information reflected in the country report;
(3) what measures are in place to ensure that (a) future reports are submitted timeously and (b) they meet all requirements as set out by the Cedaw Committee; (4) what has been the progress in implementing the provisions of Cedaw? NO2357E
Question 202 has been posed by the hon D M Ramodibe to the Minister of Women, Children and People with Disabilities. Unfortunately, the Minister is not available. The question will stand over to the next question opportunity.
Measures in place to provide for amendment or rejection of long-term strategic plan by Cabinet
222. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) asked the Minister in the Presidency - National Planning Commission:
Whether, with reference to the Green Paper on National Strategic Planning (details furnished), any measures are in place to provide for the eventuality where Cabinet amends or rejects the long-term plan devised and proposed by the National Planning Commission; if not, why not; if so, what measures will be put in place to resolve this dissension? NO2378E
Hon Speaker, I am not quite sure how to deal with the question because Rule 68(2) is the anticipation rule. The hon Leader of the Opposition is the member of the ad hoc committee dealing with the Green Paper. I would like to believe that the process being undertaken by that ad hoc committee has full veracity.
I don't think it is correct for a member of that committee to ask me to anticipate its outcome. The committee now has full power. The Green Paper is a consultative document. The committee should feel free to get evidence from anybody. I have indicated to the committee on more than one occasion that I am available to do that. That may be a more appropriate forum. I am not trying to duck the question, but I am trying to find a way that recognises the process underway. I think that Rule 68(2) does provide us with a way of trying to deal with this matter. I thank you.
Thank you, hon Speaker. Hon Minister I accept that it might be pre-emptive to have asked the question I have asked, but I could pose the following question to you. Since the national vision is a long-term strategic plan, covering at least 15 years, at least two congresses of a governing party could take place within that time. If, after such a congress, a governing party that is leading the government at the time were to change their strategic direction, how would that affect a long-term vision determined by the National Planning Commission?
I think between such congresses there are also national elections. I think that we have always set store by the fact that our elections must be free and fair, allowing the electorate to articulate their view about the trend and direction of government. That serves as a check and balance in the system of democracy.
The approach that we eventually take to the Planning Commission is that we are mindful of all of these. What we don't want is a commission that finds itself impaled on a fundamental difference between itself and the executive because the Constitution vests executive authority with the President and the Cabinet. You cannot deal with the contradiction or have a lapdog commission. You can't have a commission that sets itself up as a place where bargaining takes place.
I am hoping that, in exploring these kinds of issues and making recommendations, as I have already indicated to the ad hoc committee, we would be persuaded by the issues that they raise in their report. We are undertaking to go back to them to indicate the issues that we will be taking forward, arising from the detailed work that they are doing.
We must find the kind of balance that would give the commission the necessary authority over and power to implement the issues that they raise. It is a difficult path. It may have been easier in 1994 to establish a National Planning Commission like this, but I think we have taken the decision that we want to have greater clarity and participation about the future. The perspective that we take should extend beyond the life period of an elected government. I think we must take account of these issues as we proceed. I thank you.
My apologies. My input pertains to the question that is standing over. I thank you.
Speaker, Minister, I think the challenge with regard to national planning is the manner in which the plan is adopted. You have to ensure that it becomes a country plan rather than a party-political plan. The problem with this particular plan and the discussion in general, is that an attempt is being made to project it as being only Cosatu and SACP plans. For it to be a 15-year programme, we have to ensure that we canvass the views of the people in general and that the plan is embraced by the majority of South Africans so that it does not become a party-political plan. Do you agree with me on that? [Interjections.]
Speaker, I do agree with hon Kganare. It is not a party or a government plan, but it is a national plan. It involves all South Africans, regardless of political persuasion. It is about mediating between the future and now. It is about reconstructing what we do. Therefore, the ideas must be widely canvassed. That is quite fundamental.
I want to use this opportunity to indicate that I don't frequently notice the party that the hon Kganare represents here in Parliament at that committee. I don't think that they go there at all, but I speak under correction. It would be good if that party didn't complain about issues, but excluded themselves, because I actually know the members who ought to be participants and alternates in that committee and they don't attend. I thank you. [Applause.] [Laughter.]
Speaker, I accept what the Minister has said, vis--vis the rule of anticipation. However, the ad hoc committee has been engaged in the process of public hearings. What is refreshing is the kind of consensus that is emerging within the committee. [Interjections.]
Hon Speaker, can I raise a point of order?
What is the point of order, hon member? Hon Singh, can you please take your seat?
Speaker, correct me if I am wrong, but I find it irregular or you will correct me, that the ad hoc committee is sitting and addressing this issue; and that this issue is now being sneaked into this Parliament and being discussed at this stage, whilst the ad hoc committee is dealing with it. Can the hon Speaker give direction with regard to this?
Hon member, that is not a point of order. Continue, hon Singh. [Interjections.]
Hon Speaker, I was going to say that the ad hoc committee has been seized with a number of issues which I think will be identified in the report. The report was supposed to have been finalised today, but unfortunately, it didn't happen. I think in due course the report will be finalised and will deal with the details of what the Planning Commission should entail, the institutional arrangements, and so forth. That is exactly what I wanted to say.
Hon Chairperson, I don't think I have gone into any details of what the ad hoc committee has said, but I just wanted to respond to the Minister that, yes, the rule of anticipation should apply in this regard. I thank you.
The rule of anticipation, Rule 68(2), is the one being drawn attention to. The hon Singh is perfectly correct about that. I do think that we should go back to the ad hoc committee and try and resolve these issues. If there are contradictions, we can try and intermediate with regard to those issues before we try and bring them back to the floor of the House for discussion and debate. I thank you.
Hon members, I would like to recognise in the gallery, the former deputy chairperson of the NCOP, Mrs Peggy Hollander, who is sitting in the Speaker's bay. We are extending a warm welcome to you. [Applause.]
Thank you, hon Speaker. Minister, for the purposes of those of us who were not part of the process, the simple question would be, when do you foresee its conclusion, since we are hearing the scepticism out there? If the process is not finalised promptly, it does send mixed messages, more especially when it comes to the investor community out there. We would appreciate it if you could just give the House a timeline as to when this process will be coming to fruition. I thank you.
Chairperson, let me just start by saying that the way in which we undertake the issues around the Planning Commission should make a lot more sense to all of us as South Africans, ordinary people who feel differently about their future. That should be the benchmark and investors would be persuaded by what we do.
I want to have a rather different benchmark in dealing with this matter, going forward. In respect of completion, on the one hand, the matter is now in the hands of the ad hoc committee, which is chaired by the hon Mufamadi, who is doing this amongst a series of other tasks. One would hope that, before we rise in a few weeks, Parliament would have spoken about the issues. As the executive we can then take this matter and consider it. I have said in public that I would like to see the establishment of the institution, sooner rather than latter. The sooner we can have it, the better because part of what we in the executive have to learn, is a different way of approaching these matters. The sooner the institutions are there, the better it would be for all of us. I don't want to pre-empt a process that I think is inclusive and very detailed. That is the process led by the ad hoc committee. I thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Regarding the rule of anticipation, I think it is in order for members to discuss the process around the ad hoc committee, as long as they do not get into the substance of the matters being discussed there. That will be covered when the committee reports to the House. In future members should stick to that.
Achievement of targets for employment of persons with disabilities, and impeding progress
208. Mrs J M Maluleke (ANC) asked the Minister for the Public Service and Administration:
Whether targets for the employment of persons with disabilities will be achieved by 31 March 2010 as espoused in the Job Access Strategy; if not, what factors are hindering the progress; if so, what actual percentage of people with disabilities is currently employed by his department? NO2363E
Chairperson, if government departments continue at the current pace, it is unlikely that we will reach the 2% employment equity target for people with disabilities in the public service as set out to be achieved by 31 March 2010. At the moment, and as of June, the actual average performance stands at 0,22%.
Regarding the part that refers to the performance by the Department of the Public Service and Administration, at the moment the performance is at 1,47%, which indicates that the department falls short by 0,53% to reach the set target of 2%. As I have indicated, if this continues as an average performance, we are unlikely to reach our target. Thank you very much.
Chairperson, thank you.
Ndza khensa Holobye eka vutihlamuleri bya n'wina. [Thank you, Minister, for your accountability.]
Recently, the Portfolio Committee on Tourism went to the Ficksburg border post on an oversight visit. The new building under construction at this border post looks like it will not be able accessible to people with disabilities. What strategies are in place to ensure that when new buildings are constructed, they will be able to cater for access by recruits with disabilities, as well as people with disabilities seeking services in these buildings?
Chairperson, it is government's position, as well as a policy position, that when new buildings are constructed, departments should make sure that these buildings will be accessible to people with disabilities.
This also applies to old buildings. It is necessary to modernise our buildings to meet the required standards, so that a building, as a structure, should not in itself become a deterrent to people with disabilities.
I think the Ficksburg border post will have to respond accordingly to this issue. Thank you.
Chairperson, hon Minister, government acted very strongly on affirmative action, especially as far as race is concerned, and, to a lesser extent, as far as gender is concerned. It seems, however, that government is only paying lip service to disabled people, or they do not have the political will to reach the target of 2% in the Public Service. It is important that government must talk to disabled people and not only about them.
My question is the following: Does the Department of the Public Service and Administration communicate with organisations representing disabled people as part of a recruiting process? Thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, government moved with speed in implementing policies across the board, whether it's a policy on affirmative action or on disability. What the department does - and we remind all departments, every year, through our engagement on improving conditions for policy implementation - is to make sure that when it comes to dealing with issues related to people with disabilities, we take the stakeholders that are dealing with that on board.
The association Disabled People of South Africa, DPSA, has made itself available to say, "nothing about us without us". That is what we encourage departments to do. It may not be correct to say that the slow pace is actually because we are paying lip service to the issue. It is an issue wherein we acknowledge that there is room for improvement.
The Public Service Commission, PSC, recently studied what is causing these kinds of delays. Nothing close to lack of commitment was found, but there certainly are issues that we will improve on. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Chairperson, thank you. Hon Minister, what is it the department sees as obstacles to achieving the required targets, and what measures are being implemented this time to overcome them? Are these measures producing some results? Please give us some of those relevant details. Thank you.
Chairperson, what we can say, like I referred to the study that the PSC has conducted, is that one of the reasons the PSC reported was that departments indicated that they are not getting sufficient applications. That is one of the reasons stated.
All we are saying - like when we engage with stakeholders every year we have a conference mainstreaming the issue of dealing with cases of people with disabilities - is that we may also have to make a call to the public representatives present here to encourage and support departments because departments themselves are saying that they are not getting sufficient applications to work with towards achieving the goal. Thank you very much.
Chairperson, arising from the Minister's response and a concern that, at the pace at which they are travelling, they may not reach the target, I wanted to find out from the Minister if there is a departmental target that has been set for each department to meet in employment, because I believe it is not only the responsibility of one department, but a shared responsibility. It sounds to me almost like a lack of will issue. It sounds strange that we would say that there are not enough applications. Is there no way that you could target or headhunt as part of the strategy to deal with that particular question? I wish the Minister could explain what other strategies are there to meet the target, other than to say the pace we are travelling at is very slow. Thank you.
Chairperson, the 2% target, which is a national target, is a target for each department. It is very clear. That is why I said that when it comes to the Department of the Public Service and Administration, we are working towards this 2% target, and we are now at 1,47%.
We are not saying that we are limited to what is being said. That is why I indicated that the PSC had to investigate because it is an issue of concern. As a nation, we wanted to know what was going on. You get different reasons. What we are saying is true. It is true that it is a shared responsibility.
What the Department of Public Service and Administration is doing is to make sure that, this being policy, we encourage and insist that there has to be compliance. That is why we are making a call to all government departments and stakeholders that have an interest in dealing with issues of people with disabilities to assist departments in making sure that we get responsive applications to enable us to reach the target. Thank you very much. Initiatives launched by NYDA to advance youth development
228. Ms S P Lebenya-Ntanzi (IFP) asked the Minister in the Presidency - Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Administration:
What initiatives have been launched by the National Youth Development Agency, NYDA, since June 2009 to (a) advance youth development and (b) promote the economic development of young people?