Chairperson, firstly, I did give an indication there. You see, we have to abide by the very laws that this House passes, and, no doubt, you passed the law! So, if we do transgress the law, then you will hold the executive to account and say, "You have done something outside the law."
Secondly, I am very struck by the contradictions in people. They will say, "No, no, no, national government, do not interfere. Local government is autonomous; it is independent. It is a sphere. Do not interfere." On the other hand, if we tell them that we cannot interfere in some of these things because a law that you as legislators have passed prevents us from doing so, and it is not consistent with the view that we have three spheres, then we are told, "No, no, no, we want national government to interfere, intervene and intrude on the powers of, in this case, provincial government." So, you cannot have your cake and eat it.
What I also want to say, though, is that I have indicated in my answer to the question formally that while these are the legal prescriptions, we can engage with the MEC informally, and I commit myself on behalf of my Minister to seeking to do that. If you give us a month or so - there are three people here from my office and from the department who are taking notes - we will come back in regard to this. You can hold us to account, because Hansard will cover what I have said on behalf of the acting Minister, who regrettably cannot be here, but who conveys his good wishes to this House.
I also want to say that in my humble view it is important for us to hold the executive to account without abdicating our responsibilities as legislators, who are really the power. Parliament is the organ of popular power, not the executive. So, when a Member of Parliament asks what he or she is to do, in the first instance it is the provincial legislature that must actually put pressure on the provincial MEC. That provincial legislature must hold the MEC to account and, if that process fails, then presumably the NCOP has to say, "The provincial legislature has done its bit, and now you are holding us to account."
So, in short, we will work through informal channels to attend to this matter. As the executive we are accountable to you as the NCOP, but we have to act within the law. While we do what we can do, the power does not reside with us as the executive. The power resides with you as Parliament. That is where the people's power is. We can do what we can, but we can also be fobbed off, as sometimes happens.
Look at Education, for example. We have a section 100 intervention. It is quite open, in the public domain. There are people in the Eastern Cape who have required of the President to go there and intervene and say, "We have a section 100 intervention. We are one government with three spheres, not a federal state, and if you are meeting challenges in Education, the national Minister must come in," and so on.
So, we have these issues, and they are inevitable. There is nothing unique about South Africa. This happens all over. In fact, we have far fewer problems than elsewhere where you have this three-tier or three-sphere government. Thank you.
Position regarding procedural correctness of election of incumbent Mayor of Koukamma Municipality
80. Mrs E C van Lingen (DA) asked the Minister for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs:
(1) Whether the election of the incumbent mayor of the Koukamma Municipality was in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, Act 117 of 1998; if so, what are the relevant details; if not,
(2) whether there will be a re-election in this regard; if not, what procedure will be followed to rectify this matter; if so, what are the relevant details? CO434E