Hon members, on Tuesday, 25 February 2014, during Member's Statements, hon Kalyan rose on a point of order after hon Tlake had stated that we were all familiar with the DA rhetoric of "fit for purpose" and "open opportunity society", and their confusion regarding the Employment Equity Amendment Bill, which prescribes penalties for private sector companies that do not meet the government's rigid new target for racial and gender representativity.
Hon Kalyan asked whether, in terms of the Rules of Parliament, a Bill that is before a committee and which has not yet come before the House, could be discussed in a statement. In effect, hon Kalyan asked whether hon Tlake had transgressed Rule 68 that deals with anticipation.
At the time I asked hon Tlake whether she was referring to the Employment Equity Amendment Bill or to the ANC policy on gender representation. She answered that she was referring to the ANC policy of 50% female representation. I therefore allowed her to finish the statement. The hon Chief Whip of the Opposition, after the statement had been made, asked me to study the Hansard and to rule on the matter. I undertook to do so.
Having studied the unrevised Hansard, I now wish to rule as follows. Rule 68(1) provides that:
No member shall anticipate the discussion of a matter appearing on the Order Paper.
The Minutes of Proceedings of the National Assembly for 24 October 2013 reflect that the Employment Equity Amendment Bill was passed by the House on that day and transferred to the NCOP for concurrence. The President, in fact, assented to the Bill on 14 January 2014 and it is now a statute of Parliament.
Therefore, with the Bill no longer on the Order Paper of the Assembly, hon Tlake's reference to it cannot be construed as a transgression of Rule 68.
Furthermore, I wish to remind hon members that the mere mention of a Bill, even if it is on the Order Paper of the National Assembly, does not necessarily constitute anticipation. It is only when a member discusses the Bill that duplication of parliamentary proceedings may occur, which Rule 68 is designed to prevent.
Thank you very much. That is my ruling. [Applause.]