Deputy Speaker, it has been reported that all five Brics countries reaffirmed their support for nuclear energy as an important element in their future energy mix, while Germany, Switzerland, Japan and Italy have now joined Austria, Spain and Denmark in withdrawing from commitments to nuclear power.
Post-Fukushima, South Africa's continued commitment to a nuclear programme, which the Department of Trade and Industry's Industrial Policy Action Plan estimates will cost in excess of R1 trillion, is foolhardy. Not only will this place an enormous strain on the balance of payments and result in severe consequences for the South African economy, but we are closing our eyes to other very real risks.
The ACDP calls on government to utilise the R1 trillion in the implementation of less-destructive energy-efficient measures. Hon Minister, South Africa needs your assurance that we will not be bound by short- sighted commitments to nuclear programmes and that we will not allow ourselves to be manipulated by France or Brics partners in this matter. The ACDP will not support this Vote.
This ANC-lead government has worked out a brilliant energy strategy called Integrated Resource Plan, IRP, 2010, which also includes nuclear energy. The hon member is aware of that. More than that, nuclear energy has not been withdrawn because of Fukushima. As she also indicates, there are countries that are confidently moving ahead with nuclear energy because it is a technology that has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that it can be safe.
Furthermore, we, as a committee, are seized in also ensuring that any programme that is being rolled out here in South Africa will integrate high levels of safety. Therefore, her alarmist approach is neither here nor there. As a result, the ANC will definitely support the Budget Vote No 29 on Energy.
Vote agreed to (African Christian Democratic Party dissenting).
Vote No 30 - Environmental Affairs - put and agreed to.
Vote No 31- Human Settlements - put.
Declarations of vote:
The DA has always supported the housing budget in what we now know as the misguided belief that relatively decent housing would be provided. Although I was aware of problems with corruption and the quality of workmanship, I did not think it happened on such a large scale. It will appear that money budgeted to provide adequate shelter for vulnerable people has largely, since 1994, disappeared down a black hole.
According to a report from the national Department of Human Settlements, up to 70% of houses built between 1994 and 2010 will require some form of rectification or will have to be demolished. The cost at the value today is estimated to be R64,4 billion. If this is successful - say, over the next five years, which I doubt - the final cost could very well exceed R100 billion.
The hon Minister has rather reluctantly admitted during the budget debate in April that the provision of subsidised housing in South Africa is in a crisis. Notwithstanding this, he has thus far failed to provide the portfolio committee with a credible plan to address this failure - now called the rectification programme - while still continuing to fulfil the responsibility of providing new housing for the hundreds of thousands still on the waiting list.
I therefore cannot with a clear conscience recommend to my party that we support this budget. Hence, the DA will not support Budget Vote No 31. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, ... asithethi ngoqashi-qashi ke thina, bathetha uqashi-qashi bona. [... we are not guessing, but, they are!]
The ANC welcomes and supports Budget Vote No 31, which includes an additional allocation of R4,9 billion for human settlements upgrading, municipal services, as well as the new Urban Settlement Development Grant of R21,8 billion over the Medium-Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF, period for the provision of bulk services to the cities.
The budget is supported mostly on the basis that it is biased towards the poor majority ... asibazi ke bona ukuba bamele obani. [... we do not know who they are representing.]
It is also in line with the constitutional requirement, the strategic objectives of the department and the policy imperatives.
The budget proposes a range of measures to accelerate housing development and housing infrastructure. It is the responsibility of this government to ensure that all people are decently housed in order to bring up their families in comfort and security, as reflected in the Freedom Charter.
The ANC-led government's most urgent priority is to ensure that settlements development and redevelopment is imbued with infrastructure within the vicinity of quality homes. The prevalence of settlements with spatial dysfunctions and inefficiencies can no longer be left unresolved.
The quality of houses or settlements is central to the social transformation that we seek to realise. That is the main reason that the Cabinet took a strategic decision to introduce the rectification programme in areas where structural problems have been observed. The purpose is to maintain humanity and restore dignity of the citizens of this country.
We all agree that government has been confronted with the challenge of substandard development. However, in response to the behaviour of unscrupulous contractors, the department, under the leadership of the Minister, has committed itself to a tough stance. The ANC supports the Budget Vote. [Applause.]
Vote agreed to (Democratic Alliance, Independent Democrats and Congress of the People dissenting).
Vote 32 - Mineral Resources - put.
Declarations of vote:
The State Diamond Trader has caused immense harm to the local diamond cutting and polishing industry. This is due to its failure to ensure access to rock diamonds to the local market. Its main purpose is the accessibility of rock diamonds locally, which objective we support in principle.
However, diamonds are illegally exported currently without such diamonds been cut and polished locally, by those to whom rough diamonds have been sold by the STD, the State Diamond Trader, against the purpose of the State Diamond Trader.
The chairperson of the State Diamond Trader is alleged to have imported rough diamonds valued at approximately US$1 million during March this year from the Marengo region in Zimbabwe. Due to human rights abuses, the purchase of diamonds from Marengo has been prohibited by the Kimberley Process, despite what the department says. The credibility of the Kimberley Process is in danger of being irrelevant. The hon Minister is not taking any steps against the chairperson, despite having been informed during the Budget debate three weeks ago.
The hon Minister's alleged insistence that the minutes of the SA Precious Metals and Diamond Regulator be amended to exclude the fact that the illegal importation of diamonds from Marengo raises many questions, inter alia, where those diamonds are currently located; whether the chairperson has an operational business licence; and whether there is in fact a licence to do so.
The chairperson of the State Diamond Trader's action reveal a conflict of interest in that she has either acted illegally for her own personal account or to the benefit of the State Diamond Trader without the Act providing for the State Diamond Trader to import diamonds. On both scores it is alleged that the chairperson's actions should be investigated.
The apparent answer for the Minister's failure to take action against the chairperson appears to be the fact that the chairperson of the State Diamond Trader has strong political ties with the hon President Zuma, was at one stage his legal advisor, is now a member of the Jacob Zuma Children's Fund and a co-director of the Deviate Information Technology with the President's son, Duduzane.
The DA will therefore not support a budget where the hon Minister is seemingly not prepared to take steps against alleged illegal actions. [Applause.]
The ANC supports Budget Vote 32 without any conditions. [Interjections.] We support this Budget Vote because it provides a possibility for a turnaround strategy within the Department of Mineral Resources.
Regarding the issues raised by the hon member, hon Adv Schmidt, firstly, he is aware that next week the portfolio committee will be addressed by the State Diamond Trader and the regulator thereof on matters pertaining to the strategy of the State Diamond Trader. Secondly, and most importantly, he is aware that the Deputy Minister of Mineral Resources is dealing with an elaborate strategy on the diamond industry as a whole.
Thirdly, the issues of relationship between the chairperson and the President should not play any role when we look at matters pertaining to the institutions that report to both the department and the Ministry. [Interjections.] Therefore on Tuesday you will have an opportunity to get clarity.
Lastly, let us say that the Kimberley Process is very clear. If there were any problems, we would have been notified at this stage. We do not have the information you have at our disposal. Therefore, we will be grateful if next week, on Tuesday, you will submit that information to the portfolio committee when we deal with the matter of the State Diamond Trader. The ANC supports Budget Vote No 32. [Applause.]
Vote agreed to (Democratic Alliance and Independent Democrats dissenting).
Vote 33 - Rural Development and Land Reform - put. Declarations of vote:
The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform has consistently failed to demonstrate proper governance practices and as a result of this failure South Africa's Land Reform Programme has effectively stalled, leaving many land claimants and land owners in a state of perpetual uncertainty.
Even as some political leaders disingenuously try to peddle fear and hatred by claiming that the Land Reform Programme's failure can be blamed on a single race group or a clause in the Constitution, the facts speak clearly for themselves.
In the last few years, the department has been beset by problems. It has outstanding lawsuits against it to the value of over R500 million. It has a backlog of post-settlement support to land claimants amounting to over R3 billion. This for a department with a total budget of R8 billion!
Since the 2004-05 financial year, it has accrued R15 million in wasteful expenditure and R164 million in irregular expenditure. It has received qualified audit after qualified audit, and the Minister still refuses to release the vital Green Paper which will outline President Zuma's administration's envisaged direction for land reform.
In the department's latest annual report, the Auditor-General listed the department's failure once again to complete an audit of all state-owned land as one of the main reasons for his qualified opinion. In addition, he listed financial irregularities, mismanagement of land subsidies and inadequate internal management as matters of serious concern.
In addition to the failure to complete the audit, the Auditor-General further noted the following worrying financial irregularities: R53 million lost to the department through fraudulent activities and irregular and wasteful expenditure. In fact, the department is now being so badly managed that it is under investigation by the Special Investigation Unit, SIU. After six consecutive years of rampant mismanagement, failure to deliver on its own mandate and no discernable effort being made to improve on the status quo, no responsible member of this Parliament can be expected to hand this department an R8,1 billion blank cheque, knowing it will only likely deliver more of the same. The DA will not be supporting this Budget Vote. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
On page 714 of the Estimates of the National Expenditure, the department indicates that it revised its 2010-13 Strategic Plan in order to create vibrant, equitable, and sustainable rural communities. The period when this goal is to be attained is deliberately left open-ended. Furthermore, there is no schedule where the department records how year-on- year an increasing number of rural communities have become "vibrant" and "sustainable", and how state resources and expertise were being given to such communities on an equitable basis.
Each year, Parliament is given a wish list by the department, which becomes the wish list for the next year and the year after. Parliament and the nation are fed promises, not delivery. The language used is: "aimed to alleviate"; "has identified"; "is proposing"; "will be developed"; and "will propose". When will we read: "is expanding"; "is accelerating"; and "is succeeding"?
It is about time that we see proof of vibrancy, sustainability, and equitable treatment. Cope will support this department when we are taken out and shown how the lives of the rural communities have been transformed for the better. [Interjections.] Until then, it is all pie in the sky and the surreal neglect of rural communities continues unabated.
Out of the sympathy for the unrelieved suffering of the rural communities, we will vote against what is laid on the table. The department must get its act together. [Applause.]
The impact of land reform on the livelihoods of land reform beneficiaries is of concern as most funds distributed to beneficiaries are either in distress or have collapsed. We must ensure that the recapitalisation and redevelopment of a further 387 farms will be more successful than the previous 200 farms.
The ACDP urges government to ensure that the farm distribution is done in a way that protects the interests of all parties, and that it achieves continued success. Land reform must include skills transfer and it must stimulate the local economy with value-adding business. This budget must facilitate both farming and rural infrastructure for access to markets, storage and credit facilities.
The ACDP agrees that the comprehensive Rural Development Programme, aimed at eliminating poverty and food insecurity in rural areas, has to be a key spending priority for the department. The specific needs in rural communities, like running water, sanitation, electricity, housing and development support must be urgently addressed. The ACDP will be supporting this Budget Vote.
Deputy Speaker, I stand on behalf of the APC to support this budget. The work of this department is very important but, equally, not easy. It is important to note that in part the department is dealing with what was at the core of our subjugation as a people - the underdevelopment of the rural areas and the denial of access to land by our people. We do think that the political leadership of the department are comrades who have a clear appreciation of the challenges of the department. They are people who are willing to be engaged, despite the challenges that are there - and I do not think there is anybody who denies them.
I think it is important for us to support the work of that department, especially the Rural Youth Development Programme, which I believe can and will go a long way in providing the necessary skills to our people in the rural areas. So, as the APC, we want to support the budget and also support our cousins here on the left.
Hon Deputy Speaker, I am astounded by the part-time participant from the DA. [Interjections.] She depends entirely on what she reads in newspapers and not on what takes place in the portfolio committee because she is never there. [Interjections.]
We had a series of portfolio committee meetings where we honestly dealt with the officials. We dealt with the Minister and the Deputy Minister on the issues that are challenges to the department. We collectively agreed that there is a marked improvement in the performance of that department, despite its lack of funding.
We collectively agreed that that department is improving in its capacity to deal with the information in front of it and the challenges it is facing. That is why it is very strange today that they should disagree with us when she was not even there.
The last issue is that it is very worrisome when people who represent the nation in this House come here and set the commercial farmers against communities. They stoke fires about the court cases which are lodged by the commercial farmers against the department. The real reason - they know - is that there are law firms that are scouring the countryside, looking at farmers whose farms have been declared candidates for land claims. Yet they come to this House and say those court cases are a danger to the budget of the department, when they themselves are collaborating with those law firms. [Interjections.]
The Ministry is meeting with the commercial farmers next week, on 29 June 2011, where these matters will be debated. While they in this House create enmity between the communities and those farmers, we will not be diverted by those scarecrows. We will go forward and support this Budget Vote. [Applause.]
Division demanded.
The House divided: