Hon Speaker, hon members, there is no United Nations resolution calling for a ban on oil imports from Iran. It is, in fact, the United States of America that is imposing sanctions against foreign banks engaged in transactions with the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran or United States-designated Iranian banks. These sanctions are particularly stringent with regard to petroleum-related banking transactions.
Our visit to Ghana focused on energy, which included both oil and gas. We have always tried, and we will continue our efforts, to diversify our energy supply. In fact, every country in the world whose economy depends on oil will continuously seek to diversify its energy supply with the view to ensuring security of supply in the long run. I thank you for your attention.
Hon Speaker, thank you, hon Deputy President, for that response. I think there was a gremlin or a misprint when the United Nations was referred to - it should have been the United States, and I am sorry for that. However, I picked it up a bit too late.
This arose from reports - and I want to emphasise "reports" - by certain newspapers that the United States was going to threaten to disallow any country from doing business with its Federal Bank if they bought oil from Iran. However, we have noted in recent times that our oil imports from Iran have reduced drastically. We welcome these new initiatives to look elsewhere in Africa and other parts of the world for oil supplies, because if we look at the fluctuation in the price of crude oil, we notice it has been as low as $30 a barrel, going right up to $145 a barrel. In addition, fuel to the consumer went from R3,50 per litre 10 years ago to R12,20 per litre a few weeks ago.
The question, Mr Deputy President, is this: When the US threatened to impose the sanctions on our banks, did government consider the impact it would have on our relations with the Federal Bank of the United States vis- -vis our banks here in South Africa? Thank you.
Thank you, hon member. Yes, the sanctions targeting banks do indeed affect us. However, the United States has since extended what they call "an exception" to South Africa for 180 days. What that means is that we have the right to continue sourcing fuel from Iran. However, during those six months, we have to keep them posted and they monitor whether our quantities are decreasing or not. This means that in the next 180 days, when they review that on the basis of the volumes, they may decide that they will indeed impose sanctions against our banks, and so on. So, that is why we have to ensure that we navigate properly and do not expose ourselves and South African banks. Thank you.
Hon Deputy President, to follow on your response, we welcome the initiative, particularly in terms of regional integration and looking at the continent of Africa as a whole. Arising from the Deputy President's reply, firstly, has he looked at a country like Angola, particularly regarding the issue of oil, and what is the strategy around that? Secondly, in terms of our own home-based resources, what is his projection regarding the depletion of energy resources and is there a strategy to explore more in terms of mining at home? What is the strategy? Has a plan been put in place around that particular aspect? Thank you.
Hon Speaker, we are not only focusing on African sources. We are also looking at countries such as Saudi Arabia, because the refineries in South Africa also determine what type of crude oil we should source. If the oil is heavy, it will not be cheap to process it here. So, we look at all those options and we are quite confident that we should be able to have security of supply. We will continue to diversify. It is an ongoing process, because, as you know, you cannot rely on one source, because the wells may dry up or something else may happen. So, it is important to always ensure that we have alternatives. Thank you.
Hon Speaker, hon Deputy President, as you stated, South Africa is one of the few countries that were granted a six-month grace period in which to secure contracts to substitute for our Iranian crude oil supply. However, given that 30% of our current supply comes from Iran on a term contract, we are under extreme pressure to tie up alternative contracts within the next four months if we are to ensure security of supply.
Is this work being left solely up to PetroSA, or is the government at the highest level engaging with oil-producing countries to secure a future supply? I ask this because Nigeria recently indicated that it could not secure contracts with PetroSA, as it had to be a government-to-government contract.
Now, Nigeria will be publishing the list of countries that it will be supplying at the end of this week. Can South Africa therefore expect to find itself on this list? If not, will this indicate that South Africa is not taking this issue seriously enough, and what will you do to ensure that we have alternative supplies in place within the next four months? I thank you.
Thank you very much, hon Greyling. In fact, we do both. We do not rely only on PetroSA or the South African oil companies. As government, we also engage sister governments to ensure that the supply can be secured. We engaged the government of Nigeria. As you know, I hosted the vice president of Nigeria and in that binational discussion we agreed that South Africa would indeed secure supply from Nigeria as well. However, as I indicated earlier, we have to do other things too. For instance, we have to ensure that the refineries are in place to process that kind of crude oil as well. Thank you.
Speaker, let me also commend the government for defending the interests of the country in the face of the increasing importation of petroleum products, as well as the creative ways in which it is seeking diversification in the importation of crude oil against these unilateral and unwarranted sanctions by the US against Iran. Of course, these measures do not provide a comprehensive and lasting solution to the fundamental challenge of the security of supply in South Africa.
Now that the government has been to Ghana and other oil-producing countries in pursuit of the diversification of the oil trade, the question is this: To what extent is the government content with this initiative and with our refining capacity as a country, and what are the implications of its trade with Iran, in particular? Ndiyabulela. [Thank you.]
Well, hon Njikelana, in fact, the current arrangements do take care of our fuel needs. What we are busy with now is to ensure that we also have contingency measures, because our storage facilities also need to be filled up. We have good relations and goodwill with many oil-producing countries. So, we can source from almost all of them. The only challenge we have is that due to the way our refineries are configured, they work better with light oil. That is why countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran are important sources. In addition, as you know, we source only 29% to 30% of our crude oil from Iran. So, when we begin to diversify, we will reduce that percentage to acceptable levels so that we do not remain as vulnerable as the situation would make us were we not taking these precautionary steps. Thank you.
Interventions planned for Elliotdale in Mbhashe Local Municipality
6. Dr Z Luyenge (ANC) asked the Deputy President:
What interventions are being planned for Elliotdale in the Mbhashe Local Municipality, whose water, sanitation, roads, schools, hospitals, human settlements, sports facilities and refuse removal infrastructure is in decay? NO1840E
Hon Speaker, hon members, at the Cabinet lekgotla in July 2011, the Cabinet identified the 21 poorest district municipalities throughout the country. The Amathole district, under which Elliotdale and Mbhashe Local Municipality fall, is one of them. The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform has conducted socioeconomic surveys in Elliotdale, in wards 18 and 28, in which Mbhashe Local Municipality and community profiling reports have been produced.
I am informed that the following projects are being implemented: household water connection across the Mbhashe Local Municipality, including Elliotdale; a housing project in Elliotdale; 25 household gardens were recently completed; 50 hectares of arable land have been cultivated; the Eastern Cape department of rural development and agrarian reform is supporting the community of Elliotdale with agricultural inputs; 10 km of fencing of the arable land has been completed; and 15 co-operatives have been registered.
Hon member, more details can be obtained from the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform. Thank you for your attention. [Applause.]
Ndiyabulela Somlomo, Sekela Mongameli, le mpendulo icace okwekati emhlophe ehlungwini, indinika nethuba elihle lokuba ndilandele la masebe ngamasebe athe anegalelo ekuphuhliseni abantu baseXhorha. Ndiza kujonga ndize ndilinganise akwenzileyo ekunye noomasipala. Ndiyathembisa ke ukuba kwingxelo endiyifumeneyo kwezinye zezinto ozixelelwe ngamasebe, ndiya kuqinisekisa ukuba kwenzeka ngolo hlobo. Ndiyabulela. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[Dr Z LUYENGE: Speaker, Deputy President, this reply is crystal clear and it gives me a good opportunity to make a follow up on these various departments which have contributed in developing the community of Elliotdale. I will have a look at and compare what these departments have done together with the municipalities. I therefore promise that, arising out of the reports I have received about some of the things you have been told by the departments, I will make sure that things happen as they are supposed to. Thank you.]
Nam ndiyabulela. Enkosi. [I also thank you.][Laughter.]
Speaker, hon Deputy President, clearly the constitutional rights of the poor residents of Mbhashe Local Municipality are being violated. Firstly, 70% of the municipalities have no access to drinking water or toilets. Secondly, there are no ambulances in the area. It costs patients between R500 and R800 to hire a taxi to take them to the hospital. The people's constitutional rights to emergency medical services are being violated. Can the Deputy President give a timeframe within which everyone will have access to these basic services? Thank you. [Applause.]
Thank you very much, Mr Boinamo.
Mong wa me, jaaka o itse gore bohuma bo aparetse naga yotlhe, nka se kgone go go raya ke re dilo tsotlhe tse di tla bo di diragetse ka Keresemose. Seo, se raya gore bonnye jo ke setseng ke bo kaile, ke tshimologo ya diphetogo tseo di tla diragalang kwa Mbhashe. Ke ka fao e rileng fa ke simolola fano, ka re Tona ya rona ya Kago ya Metseselegae e dirile porofaele kwa dikgaolong di le pedi tse go fitlhetsweng e le gore tota le moloi o pelo botlhoko tota fa a fitlhela maemo a di leng mo go ona.
Jaanong, se ke se kayang ke gore, se re tshwanetseng go se dira jaaka le re baemedi ba set?haba mo Palamenteng ke gore re nne re latlhela leitlho, re seka ra ba lebala. Ntle le go dira seo, re tla tloga ra fitlhela e le gore fa morago ga dingwaga di le tharo tse di tlang, go tla bo se sa fetoga sepe. Ke tiro ya rona eo, e bile ke morwalo o re o rweleng mme re ikemiseditse go dira bonnye jo re ka bo kgonang go ba thusa gore le bona ba kgone go itirela. Ke a leboga mong wa me. (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)
[Hon member, as you know, poverty has escalated in the country in general; however, I can't commit myself that all these projects will be completed by Christmas. This means that the small projects that I have mentioned are a start of the changes that will unfold in Mbhashe. This is the reason why, in the beginning, I highlighted the fact that the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform has compiled a community profile in two wards, and it was heartbreaking to discover the poor state in which these wards were found.
This poses a challenge to us as public representatives in Parliament in that we should not to forget to keep a watchful eye on the implementation of these projects. If we do not do this, we will find out that even after the next three years, nothing will have changed. It is our duty, as part of the mandate we carry out in assisting them with the little that we can offer as help, so that they will be able to do things on their own. Thank you.]
Deputy President, don't you agree that this is extremely distressing? In fact, we have heard that your government has been delivering for 17 years. The new system of local government has been around for 12 years, yet we find the kind of situation that this question has alluded to. It is actually a disaster, to be honest with you. It is a disgrace. Now, I have two questions in particular. Firstly, would you not agree that this demonstrates an utter lack of local leadership? I mean, in today's media, for example, we have the mayor saying, and I quote:
I could not believe that there are still some communities in Elliotdale who are literally sinking in poverty.
The mayor said that. Why does she not know it already?
The Amathole District Municipality issued a statement today. It said:
In the past the town received a small budget because it was allocated without any research being conducted.
That is absurd, utterly absurd.
So, this is my first question to you, Deputy President: Is that not a crisis of local leadership? Don't you think people would have been better served if another party had been running the show? [Interjections.] Secondly, we have had a municipal turnaround strategy in this country for the past three years. It was launched by our President three years ago. Every municipality has a municipal turnaround strategy. Clearly, there isn't one here. My question, though, is: Why is it that the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, both provincially and nationally, has not pre-empted this and ensured that the situation has not arisen? How can we have a municipal turnaround strategy and yet still have this kind of crisis? It is absurd. Thank you.
Hon Smith, I could not agree with you more, but I would not say it is absurd. I would say it is tragic, actually. I think it is a tragedy. [Applause.] I think it is a tragedy because we have all the following structures: political parties, community development workers, local councillors, ward councillors, public relations advisers, mayors, members of the provincial legislatures and Members of Parliament. [Interjections.]
And Ministers! [Interjections.]
Order, hon members! Allow the Deputy President to respond.
Yes, of course, if we have to go through the whole hierarchy, we have a Minister, a Deputy President and a President as well. It is tragic because this is the reality of our country. We have many struggling communities. As I have said, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform actually went into two wards to do a profile. They a profile of each household in those two wards. They selected those two because they were the worst of a bad lot in that municipality. They were the worst of a bad lot. That is why the immediate intervention had to target them, to try and lift them out of the morass in which they found themselves.
Now, I am saying this is a tragedy because these are matters that we should have on our agenda and focus on at all times. However, even at the local level, you find from time to time that people are discovering that the community they are supposed to serve does not have the basic infrastructure meant to afford them a life as an average human being. So, to me, it is a real tragedy - without apportioning blame to one another. All I am saying is that it is a tragedy. We really should not have such areas without them being the focus of all our efforts. By the time the newspaper people or cameras go there, they should find that we have been seized with the attempt to initiate catalytic processes to lift these communities out of these difficulties. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Speaker, I was tempted to withdraw my supplementary question ... [Interjections.]
I will allow you to withdraw, hon member.
No, please do not, hon Speaker. We have grown so used to responses such as, "Please give me specifics - you are being too vague." So, I must say, the honesty of the Deputy President is encouraging. [Applause.]
Deputy President, I welcome your response as it related to the Mbhashe municipal area. Unfortunately, I cannot let you off the hook, seeing that the opportunity to pose a question to the Deputy President of the country does not come all that often. Does our government have a plan to resolve the decay of infrastructure, particularly in the Eastern Cape? Statistics in the Eastern Cape show that over 85% of our cities' infrastructure is in total decay or has actually collapsed. Does your government have a plan to try and address this issue?
Deputy President, you will think this is an exaggeration, but it is the honest truth: In Grahamstown, where I live, a water pipe will burst just about every second day and the municipality will leave an open hole unattended for the next two months. This is either because they could not get parts, because the infrastructure is so old, or because they could not get suppliers on time. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon members, the President has established the Presidential Infrastructure Co-ordinating Commission and through the Management Committee of the Secretariat, chaired by hon Minister Gugile Nkwinti, who is also the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, 23 strategic infrastructure projects have been identified. Some of them are already at the stage of being implemented. There is an effort to address the infrastructure backlog.
Part of the rationale behind it is to learn relevant lessons and apply them to the roll-out in the rest of the country. As you know, the issue of co- operative governance - the three spheres - can also thwart efforts to implement with the speed required. This is the reason that the PICC brings together local municipalities, through the SA Local Government Association, provincial premiers and Ministers at national level. It is to ensure that the lessons learnt from these strategic infrastructure projects will inform how issues of spatial planning can be improved upon in future.
We are confident that with this approach we should be able to nibble away at the huge mountain of social infrastructure backlogs. We need to reach an understanding at some point, so that we will have a template for the laying out of infrastructure, particularly in the rural poor municipalities that have no real revenue base to speak of, so that their responsibility will be to maintain rather than lay out infrastructure. Thank you. [Applause.]
Government's position regarding expulsion of Syrian envoys
7. Rev K R J Meshoe (ACDP) asked the Deputy President:
Whether the Government will join the USA, France, Britain, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, Australia and Bulgaria, which announced the expulsion of Syrian envoys from their countries as an expression of their outrage at the recent massacres in Houla in Syria; if not, why not; if so, when? NO1841E
South Africa's position on the current crisis in Syria is that all parties should adhere to the United Nations-led six-point plan of 5 April 2012 and the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2043, which provide the opportunity and basis for all Syrian parties to proceed with a Syrian-led national, peaceful dialogue towards a lasting political solution in Syria.
South Africa condemns the tragic loss of life of ordinary citizens and the destruction of infrastructure in Syria. In a statement to the United Nations Human Rights Council on 1 June 2012, South Africa supported a thorough and immediate investigation into the killings at El-Houleh, with the full involvement of the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria and the Commission of Inquiry established by the Human Rights Council.
Our position is premised on our conviction that peace and political stability are preconditions for growth and development, also in the case of Syria. In order for that country to prosper, there has to be peace, the cessation of hostilities and political stability.
Thank you, hon Deputy President, for that reply. I agree with the position that government has taken, but nothing seems to work, particularly given that the former UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, presented that United Nations plan to the Syrian regime and they don't seem to accept it. They don't seem to respond. Is there anything else that the Deputy President thinks can be done, because innocent lives, particularly of women and children, are being lost every day?
Something has to be done to express the outrage of countries like ourselves. We just say that we condemn what is going on. Obviously, anybody in the street can say "we condemn this". Government should be able to do more to put pressure on the Syrian government. We also know that Russia and China are opposed to military intervention as a solution. So, what I want to know is whether, besides what the Deputy President has said, there is anything more that can be done, or will our government just tail behind China and Russia regarding the issue of military intervention? Thank you.
Hon Speaker, according to the UN Security Council, there are five permanent members who have veto power. So, regardless of what General Assembly members feel, believe and propose, as well as what four of the five permanent members of the Security Council and the rest of the nonpermanent members of the Security Council believe, one permanent member can veto any resolution if there is no consensus among the five.
That is the case with regard to Syria at this point. Trust among the permanent members was eroded by the manner in which the issues of Iraq and Libya were dealt with. We are in a situation where some of the permanent members are indeed mobilising, and are being frustrated, while others are of the view that there should be no regime change. What you are alluding to - military intervention, for instance - has to be done under the auspices of the UN Security Council.
If forces were to go in there, they should be peace-making forces. They should also be capable of keeping the peace once it has been attained. At the moment, it is close to civil war flaring up there. The appeal to them to observe a ceasefire has failed. Former Secretary-General Kofi Annan has been there. He has been in discussion with all parties and still the fighting is raging on. It is actually getting worse.
An intervention would have to be a peace-making intervention, so that anybody who runs around armed should be knocked on their heads and those who are in uniform should be pushed back into barracks. Conditions conducive to dialogue should then be put in place.
There are those kinds of agendas. Unfortunately, we are small fry. We are a big country with great people when it comes to issues of human rights. However, in the broader scheme of things and in the way the UN Security Council functions, we are nonpermanent members with no veto power. We can only use soft power to persuade those with the real veto power to find each other and a common meeting point. Indeed, an intervention in that situation is called for sooner than yesterday. Thank you. [Applause.]
Speaker, Deputy President, I think all of us and the whole world are concerned about the situation in Syria. My colleague, hon Meshoe, asked you what South Africa could do. I am afraid your answer came down to the point that there is actually nothing we can do. We support the resolutions of the UN and we sit back and hope for the best.
I think the situation in the whole of North Africa and Syria shows us that there is something wrong and that it is very big. We have had Saddam Hussein hanged; we have had Hosni Mubarak sentenced to life imprisonment and Libya's fate is the same. What needs to happen to the president of Syria? Is he just going to go on and on and on? Every day we read in the newspaper that another 30, 50 or 100 people have died. Isn't there something more constructive that South Africa can do? Thank you.
Speaker, hon Van der Merwe, I will repeat myself for your benefit. I did not say we should just sit back and look at the situation as it worsened without doing anything more. I said we needed to persuade the powers that be. That is the best we can do under the circumstances.
There are only five countries that really have the veto power. We must persuade them to reach a consensus position that seeks to create peace, because peace won't happen on its own. Both the opposing sides are at a point where they believe they can rout the other. What is required is a peace-making force to be deployed and to also defend that peace, once attained. That is the best we can do. Resolutions can be passed in the General Assembly. If these five permanent members - or only one of them - adopt a different view, the entire UN is paralysed.
We have had experience of unilateral action in Iraq, for instance. Even earlier today, bombs exploded in Iraq, killing more than 60 people. It is important that the UN must take responsibility. The Security Council is responsible. The Security Council was established precisely for this purpose, but, of course, now the agendas don't seem to converge. Our role and responsibilities should be to be the conscience and to continue pointing out that this carnage is unacceptable. It should not be allowed to happen.
Speaker, first of all I would like to express my appreciation for the Deputy President's response, particularly his sense of outrage and revulsion at the violence that has taken place there. We on this side of the House likewise expressed our view as far as that was concerned.
In terms of what we can do, I wonder whether we have explored all the possibilities. We are a member of Brics. We are a member of an organisation that, seemingly, in the geo-political world, is on the rise and can exert some sort of influence. Within that context, I wonder whether South Africa, as a valued member of that organisation, can't exert some sort of influence on Russia and China to come around, to make sure that Syria actually does implement the six-point plan. In fact, Ban Ki-moon indicated that Syria had unfortunately not implemented every aspect of that six-point plan. I wonder whether we can't bring our influence to bear in that context.
In another context, violence is spiralling out of control simply because of the import of arms into that country, primarily from Russia. In fact, this morning it was reported that military helicopters were delivered into Russia for the Syrian government in order to prop up that government. I wonder whether we should not be promoting a ban on all imports of any type of armament into Syria. In that regard we need to exert our influence in Brics on our partners there - Russia and China. We need to promote a complete ban on the import of arms into Syria. I thank you. [Applause.]
Speaker, hon Davidson, yes, that is indeed one of the pressure points that we can try to exploit in order to ensure that there is such a consensus. As I said, our understanding now is that, on the one hand, these two - Russia in particular - is dead-set against regime change. On the other hand, the Arab League and other countries believe there has to be regime change. Within the Security Council, all these permanent members must agree or be persuaded to agree that there is a need for peace-making and that there will be investigations to ensure that whoever may have been responsible for the taking of innocent lives should be apprehended and later made to face the full might of the law.
I think the ingredients of a consensus position are available. The challenge is whether these very permanent members of the Security Council will be willing to send in their troops on the ground, because they are the ones who have the power and all the sophisticated weaponry and armoury. If they are willing to commit to send their forces to create peace, it should not be difficult under the UN auspices and supervision. It should not be difficult, and then smaller countries like ourselves can go in and contribute towards the overall peace and stability in that country.
However, I agree with you that we can't sit back and do nothing about it. We need to keep on knocking on their door. The situation was much, much better two weeks ago. It has spiralled completely out of control now. I suppose Russia, China, the United States of America and the other permanent members are now persuaded that something should happen. There is a G20 meeting coming up. Our President will be attending. I have no doubt that this matter will also have to come up for discussion on the sidelines.
May I just remind members in the House that the idea is to keep your voices down. Believe it or not, we like to hear what the Deputy President has to say. We might want to hear what you have to say, but not in the House. This is question time to the Deputy President.
Speaker, I thank the Deputy President for the answer. Much as we are a small country, with 50 million people, as you said, would you not agree that, in the context of international politics of this nature, our voice remains very important and significant, given the status of South Africa as a country?
Secondly, we were very concerned that up until today there was no clear position regarding government's standpoint on what is happening in Syria. It is much clearer now. Will you be able to issue the same statement outside, so that our voice and South Africa's standpoint is at least clearly and loudly heard by everybody?
Lastly, in terms of the upcoming discussion in the UN, I assume from the President's response that we will take a very hard-line position with the representatives. I hope that we actually condemn it. We must ensure that changes happen for the people of Syria. Can we take it that that is, in fact, the mandate for that discussion?
Speaker, the position I am articulating is very consistent with those already articulated at the UN by South Africa's ambassador to the UN. It is public knowledge. We can repeat these positions here at home because they do actually represent government positions.
As I said, we really rely more on persuading those who really matter in this game than on just issuing condemnation from a distance. I was in Turkey recently. It shares borders with Syria. In the press briefings I issued exactly the same statement - that we condemn the carnage and call upon the powers that be for peace-keeping. In our private conversations and at the press conference, these are the positions we articulate.
Steps taken by Leader of Government Business to strengthen relations between executive and political parties in NA
8. Mr N Singh (IFP) asked the Deputy President:
(1) Whether he has taken steps as Leader of Government Business to strengthen relations between the executive and political parties represented in the National Assembly; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether he will make a statement on the matter? NO1843E
Mr Speaker, hon Singh, the role of the Leader of Government Business is not to deal with tenders, by the way. I get all these invitations because people say I am in charge of government business and they would like to be friends with me. [Laughter.] The role of the Leader of Government Business is to strengthen relations between the executive and Parliament. In this regard, I do meet with the presiding officers and other formations of Parliament, including political parties.
I also periodically meet with leaders of political parties on a one-to-one basis, in what are known as "meetings of four eyes", in order to discuss matters of mutual concern, as well as concerns that political parties may have with any of my colleagues in the executive.
Furthermore, from time to time the President himself convenes meetings with leaders of opposition parties. This confirms that there is a commitment to continue improving relations with Parliament and all the parties represented in Parliament, not only from the Leader of Government Business but also from the President. Thank you.
Hon Speaker, I thank the hon Deputy President for his reply. I trust that those "meetings of four eyes" do not refer to those of us who wear glasses. People who wear glasses are called people with four eyes.
Hon Deputy President, I welcome the initiative to meet with the leaders of political parties. I know you have many, many responsibilities and they relate to the strengthening of relations between the executive and leaders of political parties, also extending to Parliament. When this question was tabled, we did not realise that what happened yesterday was going to happen. Sometimes such ugly spats, exchanges across the floor and the kind of remarks that are made really don't create a good impression of our behaviour in Parliament with the public who watch us on live television channels. I'm not casting aspersions on anyone or any political party.
I think there is certainly a need for the Leader of Government Business, together with the Speaker, to have more of these "four eyes meetings", so that there can be an understanding of the potential challenges that the executive or Parliament faces regarding the nonanswering of questions and other issues. There should be no need for the public to view us as people who constantly fight, enter into frivolous debates and insult each other in this House. Thank you.
Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Singh. Indeed, I agree that whenever misunderstandings arise, the Rules are supposed to guide what should then happen. That is the role of the presiding officers. If they give a ruling and the Rules are understood by all members of the House, it should be possible to avoid the kinds of actions and pronouncements that, as you say, confuse the general public out there.
However, in a democratic House, I suppose, walkouts are also part of the armoury of democracy. So, when they occur, they should be accepted in that spirit. It's part of it. Then, the next day, at the next item on the agenda, everybody is back, and we are all hon members and relate to each other as such. Thank you. [Laughter.] [Applause.]
I thank the hon Deputy President. I think it's true that our democracy is recognised the world over as a young democracy that is vibrant, colourful and also very noisy! [Laughter.]
Hon Speaker, hon Deputy President, you are quite right when you say that the relationship of the executive is with Parliament in the first instance and, in that regard, I state that you have a very important role to play as Leader of Government Business. I also concede that you have taken up the challenge with the "four eyes meetings" with the leaders of the parties represented in Parliament.
However, in that regard, I would like to ask you about a meeting you had with my leader and to follow up on it. What have you done since that meeting to keep your promise to make the executive in this Parliament more accountable in their oversight to Parliament by promptly and comprehensively answering the questions, not ducking and diving some of them, as has happened? This year again, the backlog of questions is clearly building up, day by day.
Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Watson. Indeed, I do take up these issues regularly with my colleagues in Cabinet. The report of the Leader of Government Business is a standing item on the agenda of such a meeting, and one of the features of that report is the list of outstanding questions. I must say, there has been some improvement. There are Ministers who have no outstanding questions. We meet on a fortnightly basis and they have been able to answer all questions. There are those who have fewer than five outstanding questions. We do commend them in Cabinet as well. The President invites them to rise and bow to him, so it's a wonderful incentive of sorts. We say nothing about those who have six and more outstanding questions. The President orders them to stay in their seats and even threatens that the next time they will have to sit here on the floor. Thank you. [Laughter.]
Hon Speaker, I appreciate the hon Deputy President's response to the two questions. However, I would like to probe more so that we can understand this. Who is supposed to initiate these kinds of meetings? Can we as opposition parties and our leaders initiate them, or are they supposed to be initiated only by the Presidency?
Secondly, is it possible for the Deputy President to tell us how many meetings he has managed to convene, in particular with members of the opposition. These meetings are very, very important because, although we sit on the opposition benches, fundamentally, at the end of the day, we are patriots. It is therefore important for us to share some ideas and be able to understand the strategic direction that government is taking. I thank you.
Speaker, I thank the hon member. With regard to the question, the initiative can come from the leaders of the parties themselves, from my office or the Office of the President. All of these are in order. My last meeting with the leader of a political party was with the hon Mfundisi, the new leader of the UCDP. That happened last month. This month I haven't had a meeting with any of the opposition leaders at all. Thank you.
I thank the hon Deputy President. Hon Deputy President, you may leave if you wish, but you are welcome to stay.