Madam Chair, the Minister said that if he took his hands out of his pockets, he would be very much obliged if we would take our hands out of our pockets as well.
I have an enormous amount of respect for the Minister. I think he is doing a wonderful job as a Minister. Nonetheless, we will be opposing this budget for reasons which are of fundamental importance, and for reasons of details.
The fundamental reason is that this department should not exist. It's a leftover from the apartheid age and it makes no sense as part of the developmental function of the state and the good governance of the country. Each of the SOEs must be removed from this department and placed within the line function they belong to. It is the proper setting for them to be part of a unified policy framework. Eskom belongs to Energy and Transnet belongs to Transport. The residual function, which is that of dealing with matters like corporate governance and uniform remuneration, should resort under the capacity of the Department of Public Service and Administration.
Turning to the matter of the details that force us not to support this Budget Vote - it is not for our own sake, because I don't think many South Africans are pleased with what is happening in respect of Eskom, SAA and Denel, etc - let me add just a few points: On SAA, I fully endorse what the hon Michael said, but there are two additional points that must be stressed. The first point, Mr Minister - I would like you to deny this in your reply if I am incorrect - is the fact that SAA is bankrupt. It is bankrupt because a great deal of its liabilities that are comparable to the liabilities of a self-sustaining airline are actually carried on the books of Transnet. [Interjections.] This is a bail-out, and the language you are using today in respect of making an investment in SAA is at least not completely truthful.
The second reason is that SAA has become the great enemy of our travel and tourism industry. It is cutting South Africa out of all the major travel and tourism opportunities. The prices are outrageous, its activities are inherently monopolistic. They have been sued for antitrust violations in the US, in Europe and in South Africa. It is something that counters the objectives of this government, which has placed enormous emphasis, and rightfully so, on the developmental potential of our industry.
Pan-American in America was destroying the local tourism industry. Everyone in America was keen on having a national flag and there were great fears in privatising Pan-American. As soon as Pan-American was privatised, the industry flourished, prices went down and finally the US, in spite of its enormous distance from other locations, became a tourist location. If we want to make South Africa become a tourist location we need to have a $500 return ticket from London and Frankfurt, and we are not going to have that for as long as we have got such a monstrosity as a state-owned SAA.
My advice to you, Minister, if you will allow me, is to not bail them out, and to let them go under. Somebody else will do the job right and will take their place.
About Denel, Minister, most South Africans and I do not wish to own an arms manufacturer, especially not an arms manufacturer that cannot pay its own bills. I don't, and many other people don't, want to pay the bills of an arms manufacturer. We have no business owning Denel.
Eskom needs to be broken down. You told us very kindly that you gave us back R11 million. Thank you very much. Why not R15-R17 million? The fact is that the entire regulatory environment and pricing of electricity at the manufacturing side is the product of a monopoly. The build programme should have been given the opportunity of creating an Eskom 2 in competition with Eskom 1 so that, through competition, perhaps all of us would not only get back R11 million, but R17 million, and the hon Nhanha would be able to finish his Christmas dinner. [Laughter.]
Coming to Alexkor, why do we own Alexkor? It goes on and on. We keep being told every time that it is a transient solution. What goes into our lifetimes from one generation to the next ... [Interjections.] I cannot hear you. Perhaps when you speak, you may say something. [Interjections.] Do you want to ask me a question? Ask permission from the Chairperson ... [Interjections.]