Chairperson, hon Members of Parliament, comrades and friends, esteemed ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for the opportunity to address the NCOP on the occasion of the Third Reading of the Social Assistance Amendment Bill.
This Bill is part of the ANC government's efforts to build a caring society. It also bears witness to our ongoing work in ensuring the progressive realisation of the constitutional right of access to social assistance. The Ministry of Social Development has stated before that our social assistance programme is witness to the ANC government and our society's way of putting the values of social solidarity into practice.
With these small but important resources that we are providing to older persons, parents with young children, people with disabilities and others, they are able to buy the bare necessities, primarily food for themselves, their families and their children. This provides the indigent with a measure of dignity, as they feel that they are part of society.
For as long as our society remains one of the most unequal in the world, with high levels of structural unemployment and accompanying social exclusion, it will continue to state unequivocally that the ANC government, as the leader of our social transformation agenda, will through state instruments lead in our efforts to mitigate the worst impacts of poverty and unemployment. It will also implement programmes aimed at reducing inequalities.
We are often confronted with comments and suggestions that our social assistance programme is unsustainable. Yet research has indicated that our cash transfer programme has been the key intervention in reducing the Gini coefficient, which is the measure of inequality. This is an important point, as international research has proved that unequal societies perform less well economically and socially than societies that are generally more equal.
Brazil has until recently been the most unequal society in the world. But a rapid escalation of their social assistance programme, known as Bolsa Familia, has resulted in an unprecedented reduction in their inequality rate. The reduction in inequality spurred on economic growth, increased the number of jobs created and generally contributed to a more cohesive society in Brazil.
With the deepening of our own social assistance programme, we are on a similar path. Therefore, it is time that we change the discourse here in Parliament and in society. Our new discourse should focus on the unsustainability of inequality in our country, as this is the key inhibitor of real economic growth and progress towards a more stable and cohesive society.
That means your questions to us should focus on what our progress is towards building a comprehensive social security system that will, over time, facilitate a more socially inclusive South Africa.
Chairperson, for us to extend our social assistance programme, we need to improve on how we administer it. The Social Assistance Amendment Bill therefore sought to do three things: firstly, to introduce a new definition for disability; secondly, to provide a mechanism for the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa, to review its decisions when a beneficiary is not satisfied with the outcome; and thirdly, to enhance the appeals process.
Coming to the issue of the definition of disability, which is a key area of leakage in the system, we are deeply concerned about the fact that every cent lost due to bad administration, fraud and corruption in our system diverts resources from those in our society that need them most. The nonreporting of an increase in a beneficiary's income constitutes an area of fraud and leakage too. Corrupt officials and government employees have over the last five years felt the retribution of government as the Special Investigating Unit and courts have dispensed justice for their wrongdoing. We once again call on all members of our society to work with us in dealing with leakage, fraud and corruption in the grants system.
Disability targeting presents a key challenge in any social security system. In our case, we lack a common assessment tool for disability. This results in errors of inclusion and exclusion in the administration of disability grants. Effective targeting for the disability grant requires the reliable and objective implementation of a uniform disability assessment tool. The passing of this particular amendment will enable us to make a distinction between permanent and temporary disability, and people with chronic illnesses.
The debates in the Portfolio Committee on Social Development on this aspect of the initial Bill were vigorous. After much constructive deliberation the committee felt that whilst this aspect of the Bill was noble, with good intentions, it might lead to unintended consequences, such as the exclusion of people with chronic conditions. The Department of Health indicated to the portfolio committee that it was not ready to implement the new disability assessment. It outlined challenges it has in developing a comprehensive response in assisting people with chronic illnesses and indicated that it would require more time.
Chairperson, based on the fact that as government we will not be able to provide adequately for chronically ill people, who may be removed from the system, and based on a new approach to defining disability, the portfolio committee felt strongly that the provision regarding the definition of disability should be referred back to Cabinet for further deliberations. We will, together with the Department of Health, work towards an appropriate response in addressing the needs of those suffering from chronic conditions.
The right to fair administrative action is a basic human right. The Constitution guarantees that administrative action must be reasonable, lawful and procedurally fair. It also makes provision that applicants for social grants have the right to request reasons for administrative action that affects them negatively.
The Social Assistance Amendment Bill facilitates a process wherein social grant applicants and beneficiaries are treated with fairness, dignity and respect. It makes provision for applicants and beneficiaries to request Sassa to review its decisions in order to expedite the resolution of disputes and avert unnecessary and costly litigation. The Bill also makes provision for applicants and beneficiaries to appeal against a decision of the agency, and for the appointment of an independent tribunal, in a manner to be prescribed by regulations.
Tribunals are a key part of the administrative justice process and make it possible for applicants and beneficiaries to present their grievances and, if there are merits to their claims, to obtain simple and speedy resolutions to their cases.
I am indeed pleased that, as elected representatives of our people, and recognising its critical importance for the poor and vulnerable members of our society, we have put our political differences aside and adopted this important piece of legislation. Notwithstanding its size, this Bill will impact positively on the lives of many of our most deserving citizens. It aims to ensure that our government fulfils its constitutional obligation in terms of section 27 of the Constitution.
The final product, the Bill we have before us, bears testimony to the robustness of the legislation-making process in this country. Aside from the extensive public consultation processes, the portfolio committee was rigorous in its examination of the implications of the Bill in its original format. It also asked for informative inputs from advocacy groups in civil society.
The select committee too, led by Comrade Nomonde Rasmeni, undertook public consultation processes which provided platforms for the electorate throughout the country in order to engage with the contents of the Bill. The collective wisdom that emerged from these processes is gratifying and testifies to the enduring democratic spirit prevailing in this young democracy. I would like to express my gratitude to the members of the select committee, and indeed civil society, for their inputs, which served to improve this Bill. That is what a robust policy-making process should do.
We should be heartened by the fact that we have such an open system, and perhaps bear in mind that we should not always have to resort to shrill and alarming ways of proposing or opposing policy ideas in the public domain. The debate regarding the protection of information Bill and the proposed media tribunal is a case in point, but I shall not digress and speak on that matter now. What we are assured of is that we have a democratically elected ANC government and a robust decision-making system to ensure that we make decisions for the collective good of all South Africans.
In conclusion, I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the officials of the Departments of Social Development and Health for their hard work on this Bill.
Finally, I thank members of the House who have contributed to the debate at various stages. Chairperson, I support the passing of this Bill by the NCOP. [Applause.]
Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister of Social Development and hon members, social assistance is a socioeconomic right guaranteed in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. The Constitution furthermore specifically guarantees the right to social assistance for those who cannot provide for themselves.
In 1994, the ANC government inherited a social security system that was massively underdeveloped by international standards. It was characterised by policy gaps, duplication in delivery and fragmented institutions. The social security system failed vulnerable groups that faced risks such as poverty, ill health, disability, unemployment, injury on duty and a range of other challenges. This resulted in their effective exclusion from participation in society.
As we enter the second decade of freedom, with the strengthening of democracy and the acceleration of the programme to improve the quality of life of all our people, the ANC recognises that we are at the beginning of a long journey to being a truly united, democratic and prosperous South Africa in which the value of all citizens is measured by their humanity, without regard to race, gender and social status.
In 2001, the ANC government set up a committee of inquiry into a comprehensive system of social security for South Africa chaired by Prof Vivienne Taylor. The committee was mandated to conduct research and to advise the government on social policy reform and the new system. The commission found that most people, who numbered around 22 million at the time, depended to a very large extent on the social grants that they received from the government. It also pointed out that the social grant system inherited from the apartheid era was inadequate to meet the challenges of rooting out poverty, and that not all people qualified for these grants.
The committee came to the conclusion that the social security programmes failed to satisfy the constitutional imperatives, and thus made the state vulnerable to Constitutional Court challenges, and were clearly inadequate. The commission mainly recommended that a comprehensive social protection package, which addresses not only income poverty but also capabilities poverty, asset poverty and special needs, must be available. This package must also include free and adequate public health care, free primary and secondary schooling, free basic water and sanitation, free basic electricity, accessible and affordable public transport, access to affordable and adequate housing and access to jobs and skills training.
According to the 2009 report of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, social security assistance directly reduces poverty through improved health outcomes, increased school attendance, hunger reduction and livelihoods promotion. Social security assistance makes growth more pro-poor by enabling household investment in productive activities and human capital. It helps poor and vulnerable households to safeguard their assets and adopt effective coping strategies to meet challenges arising from man-made and natural disasters. It builds self- reliance, not dependency, as it strengthens the employability of poor women and men, and enables them to seek and obtain better and more remunerative work. It also reinforces the social contracts that can help legitimise and strengthen the state, which is particularly important in fragile contexts.
The report further concludes that poverty can only be alleviated through economic growth and social assistance. According to the report of the study, a profile of social security beneficiaries in South Africa commissioned in 2006 revealed that 82% of recipients of disability grants indicated that food was their largest expenditure item, followed by payment for basic services. Seventy-five percent of recipients said that the disability grant helped them to care for other ill members of the household. By far the largest demographic group that receives disability grants, 75,4%, are black African people, of whom 54,3% are women. On average, few have completed secondary education and almost a third have had no formal education.
In our quest to build a caring society, the ANC is determined to create a comprehensive social security system that is built on the fundamental principle of social solidarity. We advocate a system that ensures that the majority of South Africa's poor benefit from expanded noncontributory or social assistance measures. By 2010, over 13 million people received some form of cash grant, thus complying with the Constitution.
The need to amend the Social Assistance Bill became evident when the 2003- 04 uptake of disability grants spiked to more than three times the projected figure for that period. An investigation was done to establish the cause of this sudden increase. The core findings were that there was no common definition of what constituted a disability. There was also no uniform assessment method or tool to determine whether a person had a disability. This situation resulted in errors of both inclusion and exclusion. Most of the stakeholders participating in the public hearings were concerned about the health system's ability to assess disabilities, and the fact that the definition as it stood excluded people with chronic illnesses.
Also, clause 18(1) of the Bill permitted only applicants or persons acting on their behalf to appeal against decisions of the SA Social Security Agency relating to any matter regulated by the Act. The section did not permit beneficiaries whose grants had been terminated or suspended to appeal against any decision of the agency relating to any matter regulated by the Act. A beneficiary, thus, had no choice but to approach the court for review.
The amending Bill allows a beneficiary to appeal against a decision of the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa. The Bill also allows Sassa to reconsider a decision by means of the process of an internal review. The amending Bill also allows an applicant or a beneficiary to lodge an appeal with the independent tribunal after the lapse of the 90-day period from the date that the grant was terminated; this was not the case before. It therefore provides more time for the applicants or beneficiaries to appeal.
The committee has learnt that the independent tribunal is ready to carry and perform this mandate. In addition to that, the committee noted that there are some challenges and that progress has been made by the Independent Tribunal. Thus far, the appeals backlog has been reduced. On average, 4 161 appeals are being processed per month compared to the 400 per month in past years. The reduced backlog can be attributed to the leadership and management in this institution and the department itself, as well as the fact that 60 persons have been employed through the Expanded Public Works Programme, EPWP. Medical doctors and lawyers have been enlisted to process appeals faster.
There are still minor challenges that are being experienced in this area. The visibility of the tribunal at the provincial and national levels has to be realised. Fast-tracking in the processing of the backlog also has to be done. Lastly, a lack of necessary equipment is being experienced in the call centres. The ANC supports the Bill as amended.
Chairperson, and hon members, the primary objective of the Social Assistance Amendment Bill is to amend the Social Assistance Act, Act 13 of 2004.
It is my duty to make the following statement as a member of the DA: My party believes in an open opportunity society, where people must have the opportunity to make choices to better their lives for a better outcome.
One of the opportunities is the choice of employment. This opportunity is very scarce in South Africa, and it is the duty of government to develop circumstances and economic situations for people in South Africa, and to make these opportunities available to the poor. Too many people are unemployed, poor, vulnerable and dependent on grants.
That is not to say that the DA does not support the policy that a safety net for the disabled, the sick, the poor and the permanently disabled and others must exist in the policy of government. We must try to create a citizen who is self-reliant and has the dignity not to be dependent on hand- outs.
The DA agrees then that in the absence of these work opportunities for the poor and the vulnerable such amendments to the Social Assistance Act are important - very much so! Grants give a pot of gold to loan sharks. Therefore, government must use all its resources to clamp down on practices which make the poor poorer.
Sections 14 and 18 of the Social Assistance Amendment Bill speak to the appeals measures: the right to reconsider the application, the right to appeal the decision made by the agency, the right to clarification of the decision and process they have taken, condonation and appeal to be handled within 90 days, and applications received after 90 days has expired to be considered.
Section 5 will still prevail and be referred back to Cabinet. This section speaks to chronic illnesses, and the Department of Health said that they were not ready to implement the harmonised assessment tool and related matters.
We therefore agree with the view that redefining disability and implementing the harmonised assessment tool must be cleared, because no misunderstanding and misinterpretation must prevail. The referring back to Cabinet of section 5 is supported. The Western Cape provincial parliament supports the Social Assistance Amendment Bill. I thank you, Chairperson, for allowing the debate on this Bill in the NCOP. [Applause.]
Chairperson, hon Deputy Minister and hon members, it is good to be back in the House. It's a good thing to see you, my colleagues. The goal of this Bill is to assist the poor, but how much say have the poor had in its drawing up? South Africa is known as one of the countries with the largest inequality gap between the rich and the poor.
Is there a point of order?
Yes, Chairperson, it's a point of order. Now that the DA has swallowed up the ID, in what capacity is the hon member speaking?
Hon member, I don't think that is a point of order. Hon Gunda, please proceed with the debate.
Thank you, Chair, for protecting me. South Africa is known as one of the countries with the largest inequality gap between the poor and the rich. Approximately 57% of individuals living in South Africa are below the income poverty line. The vulnerable groups are the rural poor, female- headed households, Aids orphans, people with disabilities, farm workers, and the unemployed. They are the ones affected. I therefore plead with the government to really listen to and hear the plight of our people.
As some of my colleagues here today will know, I am an evangelist, and I would like therefore to start by quoting three verses from Ecclesiastes 9:14-16 in the Bible: There was a little city, and few men within it; and there came a great king against it, and besieged it, and built great bulwarks against it. Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. Then said I, Wisdom is better than strength: nevertheless the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.
Sometimes I wish that King Solomon was here to guide us with his wisdom, so that we as the leaders of today could learn and understand that the true value of humanity is not measured by our status and our belongings.
Ek hoop en vertrou dat hierdie wetgewing nie net op papier sal wees nie, maar dat dit regtig aan die pleidooie van ons mense aandag sal gee en dat die regering nie aalmoese sal gee om ons mense beter te laat voel nie. Ons moet ons mense ontwikkel sodat hulle regtig 'n s kan h in hulle eie toekoms sodat dit 'n permanente verskil kan maak in hul lewens. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Mr J J GUNDA: I hope and trust that this legislation would not be mere words on a piece of paper, but that it will really address the appeals of our people and that the government will not hand out alms to make our people feel better. We have to develop our people so that they can really have a say in their own future in order to make a permanent difference in their lives.]
I would like to close with this, Chair. Yes, this ANC government of today has failed, but they have done something very, very important - they have recognised the plight of the poor. I hope that this Bill will truly assist our people - assist them to see to it that people have a much, much better life! We as the ID support this Bill.
Chairperson, the hon member Mr Sinclair has a problem with alliances that are being formed. I wonder what he has to say about alliances that are exploding at the moment. [Interjections.] Maybe one of these days we will have one party speaking with three voices!
The Western Cape considered this Bill, and we support it. We believe that it is going to close a couple of loopholes that exist at the moment.
Some of the evidence that was presented to the committee was from the Black Sash and they had some pertinent points to make, one of which was that the five-day notice period given to respond to the proposed Bill simply did not provide for the public. They especially alluded to the fact that those members of the public with limited resources would not have had adequate time to engage properly with its content and make critical and meaningful input. They also said that they felt there should be both an internal and an external or independent review mechanism. This was because the internal review mechanism was more of a bureaucratic one where, if a technical mistake was made with regard to the application, it could easily be handled by the department. However, there needed to be some sort of an independent mechanism, to which matters that were not just of a technical nature could be referred.
Lastly, the Black Sash, an organisation of many years standing in dealing with this specific category of indigent population requiring grants, expressed their concern that there had been no agreed definition of disability or consistent application of a standardised tool to assess it. This has subjected many of our clients to the discretion of medical practitioners and officials, which contradicts the basic principles of administrative justice. These are important points. I hope that they will be taken into account in the regulations.
However, the whole debate on this Bill raises some other pertinent points, such as the issue of the war on poverty or poverty as such. I would like to quote from Premier Zille's newsletter of last week where she says:
Almost everyone in South Africa agrees that our country's major challenge is poverty and unemployment.
The question is, how can we enable people to move out of poverty, and earn an income, in a sustainable way?
The "War on Poverty" programme, which is one of the major initiatives of President Zuma's office. It is spearheaded by the Deputy President, Kgalema Motlanthe. Its key strategy is "community profiling". In theory this involves compiling a detailed survey of each household in a community, so that the state can target its interventions with the purpose of enhancing the capacity of the households to move out of poverty and earn a living.
I am sure that every member in this House religiously reads Helen Zille's newsletter every week, and so you will know that she gave a couple of examples and anecdotes about what happened when she visited the community to see the exposition of this particular profiling mechanism.
I want to quote just one example, because it really is illuminating. In this particular case, the person was obviously an alcoholic, who was blind drunk in the middle of the morning. The conclusion of the profiling was that the way to alleviate that person's poverty was to fix the crack in the wall of his house. The state is going to have to mobilise its resources and fix the crack in the wall of the house. Nowhere did it say in the profiling that his alcoholism needed to be addressed, and nowhere did it take into account that the man was a skilled bricklayer, tiler and plasterer and could have done it himself if his alcoholism had been addressed in the first place.
That, unfortunately, is one of the idiosyncrasies of a purely bureaucratic approach. When she addressed the Deputy President in the meeting, she further said:
I used the opportunity to talk bluntly about some of the "unmentionable" causes of poverty: teenage pregnancy, substance abuse, the spread of HIV through unprotected sex, the failure of many fathers to take responsibility for their children. I said that if we were to wage a real and effective "War on Poverty" we would have to be honest about these issues and devise effective strategies to address them. This would require both the government and individuals to take responsibility. The current approach was entrenching poverty and dependence, not eradicating it.
Currently, the Western Cape's strategy as far as poverty is concerned is that the effects of poverty may be eliminated through state intervention, but ultimately people can only be said to be out of poverty when they are able to take care of their own basic needs. The state has a responsibility to facilitate opportunities to escape poverty. It is necessary for people to accept responsibility for making the most of the opportunities. No one can escape poverty through state action alone. It must be a joint effort between the state and the individual, in which each has responsibilities. Nowhere in the discussion by the Deputy Minister did I hear about the responsibility of the individuals concerned. There are many different definitions of poverty in use today. The Western Cape provincial government has chosen to take a capability deprivation approach borrowed from the economist Amartya Sen and consistent with our vision of an open society for all. At its heart is the understanding that substantive freedom, the ability to lead a life of value, is the objective of development and that poverty consists of not having the power, opportunity or means to do so.
Therefore, it follows that while the state has the responsibility to facilitate opportunities to escape poverty, it is necessary for people to accept the responsibility for making the most of these opportunities. No one can escape poverty through state action alone. It must be a joint effort between the state and the individual, in which each has a responsibility.
One of the speakers has alluded to Brazil. With Brazil, I think you will find, there are very few comparisons to be made with South Africa as far as productivity is concerned. In its industry Brazil is per capita one of the most productive nations in the world at the moment. South Africa has an abysmal rate of productivity in world terms. We also have one of the highest dependency rates per capita in the world as far as social grants are concerned.
Therefore, contrary to what has been stated, it is not currently sustainable. We must be careful - just as with the economy, we need to create an environment where people want to participate and not one where people are demotivated in regard to participating in the economic centre. The DA believes that we should have a hand-up society and not a handout society. We support the Bill. [Applause.]
Madam Chairperson, in the light of section 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, which obliges the state to achieve the progressive realisation of the right of everyone to social security by taking reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources towards that end, all persons in South Africa who are unable to support themselves and their dependants are, by virtue of section 27, entitled to appropriate social assistance. Cope, therefore, supports the Social Assistance Amendment Bill.
The inadequacy of the definition has led to many grievances because of an uneven determination of disability. In some cases, deserving applicants were turned down, and in other instances cases were approved which clearly should have been turned down. The need to refine the definition of disability became necessary. We do not believe that this is the end of the matter. This matter will have to be further revisited going forward. Amending the Social Assistance Act was unavoidable.
The Bill also facilitates a quicker resolution of the disagreements among the concerned parties. Applicants and beneficiaries who have issues with the SA Social Security Agency, Sassa, can now request Sassa to reconsider any decision that it might have taken, on the grounds that certain issues or material points may have been overlooked or given lesser weight than they actually merited.
Chairperson, this amendment will also allow Sassa to hear the other side, maybe to uphold the rule of audi alteram partem and make sure that before they take a decision relevant facts are taken into account. The Bill is also asking for Sassa to apply its mind to every decision it takes. Where the matter still remains unresolved, it will also go before the independent tribunal in a manner that regulation will prescribe.
By its name and nature, social assistance is an attempt by government to alleviate poverty. It should not, therefore, be used or seen as a salary. Government and this House must keep a wary eye on the outcome of this amendment. Already the state, in seeking to provide a security net, has unintentionally created everlasting dependency.
In conclusion, Chairperson, because we know that at present the government is providing this security, all people in this country will have recourse to the Bill and be listened to when they have a problem with it. Cope supports the Bill. [Applause.] UMntwana M M M ZULU: Sihlalo wale Ndlu, dadewethu Phini likaNgqongqoshe Dlamini, amalungu ahloniphekile ale Ndlu, Inkatha Freedom Party, i-IFP, iyayeseka i-Social Assistance Amendment Bill. Njengoba sazi ukuthi kuleli lizwe lethu kunongqeqe abacwaninga ubuningi babantu. Uma becwaninga-ke bathi abantu abahlwempu abahlala ngaphansi kwamazinga okuhlupheka balinganiselwa ku-82%; bese kuthiwa abaphakathi kuka-50-58% babhekene nokungabi bikho kwemisebenzi. Ongqeqe bathi uma kuphela unyaka ka-2010, uMnyango weZokusiza uMphakathi uzobe unika abantu abangaphezu kwezigidi eziyi-14 zemali eyisibonelelo sikahulumeni.
Ngiye ngizibuze, Phini likaNgqongqoshe, ngithi ingabe yini engenziwa nguMnyango wakho kanye noMnyango wezoLimo amaHlathi kanye neMboni Yokudoba ukubhekelela abantu emakhaya, njengoba wazi ukuthi siye sikholelwe ukuthi ukuya emasimini kungahle kusisize. Ngoba phela uma sibuka umnotho wethu asinazo izinsiza ezanele ukuba kungenzeka izinto ezithile ezweni lethu.
Lokhu kufuneka sikukhuthaze ngayo yonke indlela ukuthi kwenzeke ezweni lakithi. Noma ngazi ukuthi lesi sibonelelo sikahulumeni sinikezwa uMthethosisekelo waleli lizwe ukubeka ngokusobala ukuthi bonke abantu kufuneka bakwazi ukuthola izinsiza. Lo Mthethosivivinywa siyawusekela ngoba usunikeze uNgqongqoshe amandla ukuthi lezo zicelo ezinokubukelwa phansi, bakwazi ukuzibuka nazo ngendlela epheleleyo.
Yingakho lo Mthethosivivinywa siwusekela njenge IFP ngoba siyabona ukuthi uzosiza abantu bakithi abampofu nabahlwempu. Singeze sangena ezintweni eziningi zokusisiza ukuthi sithole amaphuzu kwezombusazwe. Thina noma mina njengendoda yaKwaZulu ngiye ngikubuke ngeso lokuthi abantu bangasizakala kanjani bakwazi ukufaka isicelo manje bese batshelwe manje ukuthi siyaphumelela noma qha asiphumeleli, noma-ke uma besalindile kube khona abangakwazi ukuyokupheka eziko. Lokhu ngikusho ngoba indlala ngiyazi kahle.
Ongayazi indlala kungamdida lokhu,ngoba phela uma ungayazi indlala kuba lukhuni kabi ukuthi uqonde ukuthi kwenzekani. Emalokishini bayazi ukuthi indlala bayivikela kanjani; badla isinkwa ekuseni babuye basidle emini. Mina ngidla ekuseni, emini kanye nantambama. Ngenzela ukuthi umkhaba ube kahle.
Manje-ke mhlonishwa Ngqongqoshe siyi-IFP kanye nabantu besifundazwe sobukhosi baKwaZulu-Natal siyakweseka ngoba onke amaqembu kulesiya sifundazwe ayawusekela futhi ayawemukela ngokuphelele uMthethosivivinywa. Siyacabanga ukuthi abantu bakwaCetshwayo noma bakaDinizulu nabakaZwelithini bazodla kahle baphumule. Ngiyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu speech follows.)
[Prince M M M ZULU: Chairperson of this House, hon Deputy Minister Dlamini, hon members of this House, the Inkatha Freedom Party, the IFP, supports the Social Assistance Amendment Bill. We know that there are experts in our country who research the density of the population. In their research their findings are that 82% of the population live below the poverty line, and then it is said that between 50% and 58% are faced with unemployment. The experts say that by the end of 2010 the Department of Social Development would have given grants to more than 14 million people.
Deputy Minister, I sometimes ask myself what it is that can be done by your department and the Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries to cater for people in the rural areas. You know that we believe that growing crops might help us because if we look at our economy, we do not have adequate resources for certain things to happen.
We have to encourage this by all means so that it can happen in our country. I know that this government's example is encouraged by our Constitution, which states clearly that all people must have access to resources. We support this amending Bill because it gives the Minister the authority to review, thoroughly, the applications that were not taken into consideration. That is why we support this amending Bill as the IFP, because we are quite aware that it will help our needy and poor people. We won't involve ourselves in many things in order to score political points. We, or rather I, as a Zulu man, sometimes wonder how people can be assisted in making an application and get an instant response whether their application is successful or not. Or maybe they could get something that they can cook while they are waiting. I say this because I have first-hand experience of hunger.
This can puzzle someone who has not experienced hunger, because it becomes difficult to understand what is happening if you have never experienced hunger. In the townships they know how to prevent hunger; they eat bread for breakfast and for lunch. I have my breakfast, my lunch and my dinner.
Well, hon Minister, we support you as the IFP and the people of the Kingdom of KwaZulu-Natal, because all the parties in that province support and fully accept the amending Bill. We think that the people of Cetshwayo or Dinizulu and Zwelithini will have a good life. Thank you.]
Chairperson, the introduction of the Social Assistance Amendment Bill is a response to the stark reality that the ANC government has had to face. This reality has its origins in the legacy of apartheid and colonialism. In our current conjuncture, this reality reflects more people being relegated to the outer fringes of the labour market, and the social grant system being the main support for many families facing poverty and unemployment.
The strengthening of the rights of claimants in such a context is a fundamentally important responsibility that the ANC government has taken up, informed by the ANC policy on social security. Since 1994 the ANC-led government has endeavoured to create a comprehensive social security net to cushion many of our people from economic deprivation. This is in line with the ANC's vision to create a caring society and an integrated system of social development services that facilitates human development and improves the quality of life.
The impact of the ANC government's economic and social policies has seen a significant reduction in the level of severe poverty and an improvement in the quality of life of millions of South Africans. These policies have had a particularly important impact on the lives of women living in poverty. Female-headed households receive a larger than average share of the social wage. This is largely because women are disproportionately affected by poverty.
The ANC's 52nd national conference in Polokwane in December 2007 strengthened this position. ANC policy views the social security net as a critical pillar in a basket of measures aimed at stimulating the economy of our country. This means that social grants should not be viewed in isolation from the broader mandate of the ANC government to create employment and economic growth in our country.
Having said this, we are also aware that this comprehensive security net is not an end in itself, but is aimed at helping our people to keep afloat so that they graduate to other economic opportunities and self-sustainability. In this regard, one of the critical tasks that the ANC faced when it assumed political power was not only to rationalise and restructure the social security system, but to eradicate the racial skew of that system, a legacy of the apartheid-driven system of disbursing of grants.
Social grants have many advantages for individuals and communities. Over the past 16 years the positive outcomes of giving social grants to the impoverished and vulnerable have had a substantial impact on the ability of the most impoverished to survive. Grants are used to purchase essential food and clothing, and to improve nutrition and basic human welfare. Households that receive grants have been statistically proven to be less likely to have malnourished or stunted children. Households receiving grants have also been able to better access essential state services such as health, clinics and schools.
Social grants generate economic benefits by improving recipients' ability to manage risk and insecurity. They also facilitate productive economic activities such as informal trading or enable other household members to migrate in search of work, thereby strengthening prospects for their livelihoods.
Social grants enable our people to enter into the existing ubuntu system of social reciprocity and mutual support which continues to mark our impoverished communities. Hon Wiley, these are the revolutionary reasons which have resulted in the ANC getting overwhelming results in the past 16 years, because South Africans, and Africans in particular, have realised that ...
... setlhare sa motho e motsho, ha se lekgowa empa ke ANC ... [the notion that black people can't get anything done unless watched over by a white man does not ring true, but the ANC can assist].
Many people living with HIV and Aids or other chronic illnesses require social assistance to survive. These chronic illnesses, with all their debilitating side effects, require those living with such illnesses to access medication and adequate nutrition in order to live with dignity. Many are currently eligible for the disability grant, but concerns have mounted over the past seven years in relation to the manner in which the proposed grant system operates and, in particular, what impact any legislative amendment will have on those living with HIV and Aids or other chronic illnesses.
Madam Speaker, on a point of order: Sesotho was put in the English where, to my mind, the member said, "ha se lekgowa ke le-ANC" [not by the white man but by the ANC]. That to me is hate speech and, unless I've heard it wrong, the member must please explain or withdraw it.
Chair, it is unfortunate that Watty does not understand Sesotho. The hon Watty does not understand Sesotho. It is an old saying of the African people. Watty devolved from Europe to Africa - that is the situation.
Chairperson, I rise on a point of order: A point of order was raised by the hon Watson. It is up to the Chair to make a ruling and not open a debate on the matter. Whether the hon Mncube was correct or not, we are going to rely on the Chairperson's ruling. I therefore, Chair, ask you to close this debate. You can either make a ruling now or make it later. You are not compelled to make a ruling on the matter now. Let us not debate it.
I'm closing the debate. I will make a ruling next time.
The responsibility for providing care for the thousands of people whose health has deteriorated because of poverty places challenges on our ability to realise the right to health care for all of our people. The purpose of the Social Assistance Amendment Bill is to amend the Social Assistance Act of 2004; to define disability; to regulate the application process of grants; of critical importance, to regulate the work of the SA Social Security Agency in reconsidering its decisions with regard to the approval or otherwise of grant applications; and to clarify the process of appeals against the decisions of the agency.
While the availability of both health care and medication is critical in maintaining the wellbeing of individuals with chronic illnesses, the ability to take control of the given condition is often inhibited by the inability to afford extra medication, transport to and from clinics, adequate nutrition and basic necessities.
Section 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa obliges the state to achieve the progressive realisation of the right of everyone to social security by taking reasonable legislative and other measures within its available resources towards that end. All persons in South Africa who are unable to support themselves and their dependants are entitled to appropriate social assistance.
As with other socioeconomic rights, the right to social assistance must be interpreted against the values of the Constitution, including the protection of a person's right to human dignity. Treating people with dignity requires the state to act in a reasonable manner towards those claiming social security rights.
According to the memorandum on the Bill, and in regard to its objects, the purpose is to insert a definition of disability in order to provide clarity on eligibility for a disability grant. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recognises the diversity of definitions of disability that are applicable globally. Central to these definitions is a person's inability to maintain himself or herself through employment by virtue of his or her disability.
In our considering the amending Bill, it was felt that it would be a grave mistake to hastily approve an amendment that could result in the reversal of gains made over the past 16 years, given the implications of the proposal in regard to disability.
It is therefore clear that there is a general consensus that the clause containing the definition of disability be withdrawn from the amending Bill in order to address unintended consequences. This implies that at a future stage further amendments will have to be brought to Parliament. The ANC supports the Social Assistance Amendment Bill.
Chairperson, firstly let me thank all the parties for supporting this Bill, and say that this is going to help us take our programme to fight poverty forward.
Also, we are used to fighting all the time and engaging.
Kepha okumnandi ukuthi ngesintu bathi impangele enhle ekhala igijima. [What is interesting is that in our culture we say, "Make hay while the sun shines."]
So, we've heard what you are saying and some of the issues that have been raised are reasonable. We note the concern about ongoing discretionary decisions about disabilities. What is important is that we should understand that doctors have been trained, and we are continuing to train them in parts of the assessment tools to improve the objectivity and reliability of assessing for disability. This issue was raised by the hon member Mr Wiley.
Regrettably, the argument of the DA about the causes of poverty is very simplistic. Poverty is multidimensional in nature and it's a lot more complex. What we need to understand is that when our government took over, there was a very high level of poverty, squalor, hunger and unemployment. It takes years to eradicate poverty. We have been called upon by the United Nations to halve poverty by 2015 and that is what we as the government of the ANC are trying to do. That is what the Millennium Development Goals are demanding of us as governments.
Mexico, one of the countries that has a good social assistance programme, takes seven and a half years to take people out of the cycle of poverty. I think we should be proud of the work that our country is doing. This programme is for vulnerable groups only but, from what I've heard here, it sounds as if the programme is also for people who are eligible for work, people who belong to the working class, who can contribute to the economy of the country, and who are between the ages of 19 and 59. This programme is only for older persons, children and the disabled. These are the vulnerable groups. It's not for able-bodied people.
I also want to remind the hon member Mr Wiley that this government's response to poverty is to provide not only toilet bowls, but also walls. [Laughter.] So, it's a comprehensive programme.
Mr De Villiers of the ID, the open opportunity society should not be an argument aimed at ignoring ... [Interjections.]
Madam Chairperson, on a point of order: Mr De Villiers is not from the ID. I ask the Minister to withdraw that and state the correct party, please. [Laughter.]
What do you mean? The DA and the ID are the same. [Interjections.] Did Mr De Villiers speak as a member of the DA? What do you ...?
He is the member of the DA, ma'am.
But I said "Mr Wiley".
He is not a member of the ID!
At the end the Minister said "Mr Wiley".
Her last words were "Mr De Villiers of the ID"! [Interjections.]
Chairperson ...
Let us move on. I've made a ruling - sit down.
Chairperson, to Mr De Villiers of the ID, the open opportunity society should not be an argument aimed at ignoring ...
The Minister is repeating it! Shhhhhhhh!
Oh, I'm responding to the DA now, yes, to Mr Wiley. Mr Wiley. Okay, I'm changing now.
The Deputy Minister was responding to the DA member.
Yes, but she said "ID"!
HON MEMBERS: No! [Interjections.]
Okay. Continue, Deputy Minister.
I made a mistake - I'm very sorry. [Interjections.] Okay. All right.
Secondly, it is clear that many of us endeavour to create an individualistic society and South Africa is not an individualistic society. People have been arguing for people to help themselves, even when it is clear that the grants are targeted at the sectors that I've spoken about.
I also want us to talk about the fact that we've been speaking about the social movement and the partnership between the government and civil society. We proved that we could do that when there was an economic downturn. Government, civil society, business and labour worked very closely in the National Economic Development and Labour Council, Nedlac. This presented us with an opportunity to prove that we were able to work together. During the 2010 Fifa World Cup we also proved that we are a united country, and a united society. Some of the things that are being raised here are very artificial. South Africa is a united country and we are aspiring to be a democratic, nonsexist, nonracial, united and prosperous country.
Lastly, the issue of community profiling is going to be continued. The Deputy President started with that programme and councillors in our wards are also busy with it. Community-based organisations and nongovernmental organisations are busy with profiling because it's going to help us to target families that are poor and it's going to help us to be able to deal directly with poverty, because you can't just throw resources at it anyhow. To be able to deal with poverty, you need to understand where it is, so that you are able to root it out.
There has been talk about people who can't repair their houses, and who are waiting for the government to repair those houses. We all know that our people do not have artisanal skills and the government has also pronounced on that. We as the government of the ANC have a programme focusing on that, and so we are on course. [Applause.]
Thank you, Deputy Minister. Your debate was hot!
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Bill be agreed to.
IN FAVOUR: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West, Western Cape.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 65 of the Constitution.