Good afternoon, Chairperson, hon Minister and hon members. This Budget Vote today occurs less than two months away from the Rio+20 Earth Summit, and that is the 20-year anniversary of the Earth Summit in Rio. It also occurs six months after the highly successful COP 17, which was hosted by our government in Durban last year. The world is now taking stock of its progress, and so is South Africa, when it comes to sustainable development.
New to the agenda is "the green economy". It is a contested term. I often think that government views the green economy as a subcomponent of the economy as a whole. I prefer a more holistic view of what the green economy is. It means that our economy - the whole economy - is part of the ecosystem that makes up South Africa. In other words, we should consider the whole economy as "the green economy".
The UN Environment Programme, UNEP, has developed a definition of a green economy as "one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities." The UNEP goes on to say that a green economy is one whose growth in income and employment is driven by public and private investments that reduce emissions and pollution; enhance energy and resource efficiency; and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. This development path should maintain and, where necessary, rebuild natural capital as a critical economic asset and source of public benefit, especially for poor people whose livelihoods depend more strongly on nature.
I commend the Treasury for its allocation of R800 million for the Green Fund over the next two years. I similarly commend the allocation to the SA National Biodiversity Institute, Sanbi, which is R300 million, for their project called Catalysing Access to Employment and Job Creation in Ecosystem Management.
It is my contention that policy coherence and transversal management across government is the single greatest challenge to the achievement of sustainable development. Today the chairperson recounted how our portfolio committee had worked so diligently on the White Paper on Climate Change over the last year. That White Paper was finalised by Cabinet at the end of last year, after about six years of consultation. It is a very credible document and a credit to the drafters in the Department of Environmental Affairs.
However, critical to climate change and to sustainable development is that it cannot just be the role of this department, the Department of Environmental Affairs. Indeed, all departments and all spheres of government have a role to play and it is incumbent on this particular department to ensure such transversal management and coherence.
One needs only to read the White Paper - and the chairperson has done a very good job of going through some of the key components - in conjunction with some other government policies, for example the Integrated Resource Plan 2, IRP2, already to see some of the policy incoherence. For example, in the IRP2 the energy sector has already appropriated for itself about 50% of the carbon space over the next 20 years. Now, according to the White Paper on climate change that is not feasible.
If we also look at the New Growth Path and the President's state of the nation address, both contain a very definite push to mine. Indeed, the President's state of the nation address backed that up with the necessary infrastructure investment. That is not necessarily policy incoherence, but it is certainly something that we have to look at. For example, how do the push to mine and the massive infrastructure investment fit into a sustainable development strategy? Yes, we must mine, but to what extent is the push to mine being factored into, for example, the available biodiversity, water resources and carbon space?
It comes down to having effective planning instruments and mechanisms to monitor the key environmental indicators and their subsequent changes. Therefore, it is a great credit that finally - and it did take a long time - the National Strategy for Sustainable Development and Action Plan was approved by Cabinet last year. The NSSD and the White Paper on Climate Change must not sit alongside other government policies and programmes. Indeed, other government policies and programmes need to find space within the White Paper and the NSSD.
Getting the balance right in environmental management is very important. Good developments, including infrastructure that creates jobs and improves the livelihoods of our people, need relatively quick environmental authorisations. In this regard, instruments to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of environmental impact assessment systems across the country are required.
The department has correctly identified the need for a greater number of environmental management frameworks, EMFs, particularly in areas facing high development pressures. Ideally, these EMFs need to be integrated with the integrated development plans of municipalities.
The ideal situation would be to say to developers: This is an appropriate area for you to develop; this is the carrying capacity of this area; or, for whatever reason - sensitive biodiversity or strained water resources - this is not at all an appropriate area to develop. I appreciate the Minister's comments today on the subject of environmental authorisations and the instruments that go with them.
Mining remains the elephant in the room. For too long now the Department of Mineral Resources has regarded its principal legislation, the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, Act No 28 of 2002, as being able to trump other legislation.
One only needs to fly over the pockmarked landscape of Mpumalanga to see what poor spatial planning and the lack of proper consultation do to the environment. The Department of Mineral Resources has for several years now foisted unwanted mines on many local communities, with little or no meaningful consultation. So often, communities with little access to resources have been forced to take on the multimillion-rand mining houses.
In this regard it is worth paying tribute to the activists from uMtunzini to Chrissiesmeer, and from Piketberg to Lephalale, who champion good environmental governance when it comes to the authorisation of mines. I also congratulate the good men and women of the Department of Environmental Affairs, who have worked for years to improve the co-ordination mechanisms between the Departments of Mineral Resources and of Water and Environmental Affairs.
Some positive news on the front of mining law is that the Constitutional Court recently upheld the verdict of the Supreme Court of Appeal in the matter of the City of Cape Town versus Maccsand. Simply put, where mining is not permitted by a zoning scheme, the holder of a mining right cannot start to mine. It is important that municipalities and provinces all around South Africa take note of this verdict. Proper local planning and use of zoning laws should determine where mining is permitted. I have long held the view that the mining Minister should not be able to override IDPs. This verdict will have a major consequence for shale gas exploration, where these exploration applications are sometimes as large as 30 000 square kilometres - bigger than entire municipalities! We require municipal councils and provincial governments all to become more involved in mining authorisations from now on.
The scourge of rhino poaching is a national tragedy. A species brought back from extinction in the 1970s is now under assault from criminal syndicates. As at the end of April 2012, 199 rhinos had been killed by poachers. At this rate, 600 rhinos will die this year; up from 448 rhinos last year. This is a 34% increase! The reality is that we don't know what will happen to the rate in future. If what happened between 2007 and 2011 - that being an escalating rate - continues, perhaps those figures will go higher. We know that if the rate keeps on escalating, the overall rhino population will eventually decline.
I am not one for throwing around emotive words, but the rhino poaching epidemic has reached crisis levels. When armed individuals, mostly from Mozambique, enter the Kruger National Park, the jewel of our conservation crown, and kill our rhinos - already 119 dead this year and 252 last year - it is an assault on our sovereignty. It is pleasing that there are a high number of arrests. This year has already seen 122 arrests. However, as the situation currently stands, there will always be more poachers. The value of rhino horn is simply exorbitant and the rewards of poaching currently outweigh the risks. Yes, there is more that can be done in terms of compliance and enforcement. I do not believe, for example, that in the Kruger National Park in particular we are sufficiently "owning the night", which is the period when most poaching occurs. Considering the very tragic friendly fire shooting that resulted in the park between a park ranger and SA Police Service personnel on Saturday, the efforts of the law enforcement agencies are also not sufficiently co-ordinated. Of course, poaching does not occur only in government parks. Private rhino owners, who hold about 25% of the rhino population in their hands, are also affected. They are looking for support. They want the syndicates cracked and the poachers caught.
Another aspect that needs improvement is intelligence. Defence and crime intelligence, as well as park authorities, need to improve their systems of information gathering and sharing. Arresting and prosecuting syndicate bosses will do more to disrupt poaching than just catching the grass-roots poacher, as important as that is.
Notwithstanding the difficulties we face, let me pay tribute to the men and women who work every day to protect our rhinos. These are the park rangers, who go out on lonely trips in the wilderness; the soldiers who patrol our borders; and the magistrates who sit in judgment of suspected rhino poachers. Then there is the ordinary citizen who keeps rhino poaching alive in the public discourse, who raises money for rhino charities, who rehabilitates orphaned rhinos and who goes as far as to appear in court to ensure that suspected poachers do not receive bail or that convicted poachers get the strongest possible sentences, as is the case with activists from Outraged SA Citizens against Poaching.
In closing, let me make a few general comments. The Department of Water and Environmental Affairs is a well-run department under the able and careful leadership of Director-General Nosipho Ngcaba. The Minister, who has been in the role for 18 months, has grasped the complexities of this department and her leadership during COP 17 and the period leading up to it was most welcome. Adv De Lange, the chairperson of our committee, has provided careful guidance. This is a committee that operates with openness, frankness and rigour. I think we are an example to other portfolio committees in Parliament. [Applause.]
The challenges of environmental governance are immense. It is tempting to grow our economy at the expense of the environment and our natural capital, but that would be unethical and irresponsible. It is far more challenging to grow our economy in a way that sustains and grows natural capital. It is the challenge that will define our future. [Applause.]