Hon members, I wish to take this opportunity before I leave the Chair and Mr Frolick takes over from me at this point, to give a ruling on points of order that were raised in the House during the debate on the President's Budget Vote on 30 May.
Before I do so, however, I wish to clarify the following: Points of order must be about the order of proceedings in the House, not about the content of members' speeches, unless, of course, there are issues in a member's speech that are viewed as unparliamentary. A point of order should be raised when the incident takes place, or immediately thereafter. A member rising on a point of order must indicate the alleged breach of procedure. Members should not raise spurious points of order to disrupt the member speaking, or in an attempt to respond to the member speaking. The Chair does not rule on points of debate. It is for the members to make their points of view known during their own speeches.
While members are allowed to ask questions of the speaker at the podium, a member must first obtain permission to do so. If the speaker at the podium declines to take a question, members should respect that and not become disruptive.
If the use of a word or phrase is challenged, and it does not fall into the category of expressions that are obviously unparliamentary, the Chair will, in the main, refer to the context in which it was used to determine whether the expression is unparliamentary. Members should always be guided by the fact that nothing is gained by using excessive language.
Members should pay attention to the manner in which they conduct themselves, as we all have a responsibility to ensure that the decorum of this House is maintained. More importantly, it is expected that the Whips will lead by example in this regard.
Personal remarks referring to a member's physical appearance in a derogatory manner are always unacceptable.
HON MEMBERS: Hear! Hear!
Allegations of improper conduct on the part of another member are also unparliamentary. Such allegations may only be made by way of a substantive motion.
Having now studied the Hansard in respect of the points of order that were raised in the House on that day, I rule as follows: The hon Kalyan rose on a point of order asking me to rule on remarks that were made by the hon Deputy Minister Tobias-Pokolo during the hon Mazibuko's speech. While the hon Mazibuko was at the podium, the hon Deputy Minister referred to the hon member as "the lady with the funny hairstyle". [Interjections.] Order, hon members, please! Order! [Interjections.] [Laughter.]
As indicated earlier - hon members, I called for order - personal remarks referring to a member's physical appearance in a derogatory manner are always unacceptable. Hon Tobias-Pokolo, your remarks were out of order, and I now ask you to withdraw them.
Hon Deputy Speaker, I rise to withdraw and to apologise unreservedly to the hon Mazibuko. [Applause.]
Thank you, hon Tobias-Pokolo.
I would also like to add ... [Interjections] Order, hon members! Really, this is not a laughing matter. [Interjections.] I would also like to add that the hon Van der Merwe's question regarding hon Mazibuko's hairstyle was inappropriate. [Laughter.] Members should refrain from making remarks that do not add value to the proceedings. Surely, you understand it did not add value? It definitely had the potential to be offensive. I am not asking ... [Interjections] because there is nothing to withdraw. You asked a question, but I think that is the ...
Madam Deputy Speaker, I did not say what I said in a derogatory manner, but in a complimentary manner. [Laughter.] [Applause.] [Interjections.]
I did not ask you to do anything. Now you are worsening the situation!
Hon Deputy Speaker, on behalf of myself and the IFP, I apologise unreservedly to Ms Mazibuko. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Thank you, Tata. Order, hon members!