[ Home ] [ Speeches & statements ]

QUESTION NUMBER 01

1. Ms N D Ngcengwane (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

In what way are the resolutions that emanated from the Growth and Development Summit contributing towards the mobilisation of partnerships to address the high unemployment rate in South Africa?

REPLY:

Honourable members will remember that in June of this year, we replied to a question in this House on the objectives of the Growth and Development Summit. We indicated, in part, that there are three kinds of unemployment, frictional, cyclical and structural. This structural unemployment is what our economy largely suffers from.

The reasons derive from the legacy of apartheid, whose policies, including job reservation, ensured that there was always an army of unskilled and semi skilled cheap labour available in the bantustans and townships to serve the needs of apartheid South Africa.

As we know, modern and competitive economies require a highly skilled workforce for which our people have not been prepared because of Bantu education and the absence of appropriate education and training.

This legacy of apartheid policies has ensured that today our country suffers from unacceptable levels of unemployment.

It is against this background that government has since 1994, focussed its policies to deal comprehensively with the challenge of unemployment by ensuring macro-economic stability, micro-economic reform, higher levels of investment and effective human resource development strategies.

Again, in June we informed this House that these policies had ensured the increase in the number of jobs from about 9 million in 1994 to 11.16 million in 2002. However, the challenge of creating employment remains, because of an increase in the number of new entrants into the job market.

Because of this ongoing challenge, government together with our social partners, resolved to embark collectively on additional measures that would ensure that we defeat the problem of unemployment.

Accordingly, when we convened the Growth and Development Summit, we set out to achieve three broad objectives. These are:

* To build an enduring partnership between government, business, labour and community organisations in our country;
* To address urgent growth and development challenges; and
* To encourage all of our citizens to participate fully in the process of growth and development of our country.

The partnership that emerged from the Summit is committed to tackle the three big challenges confronting the nation: how to create more jobs, the need to increase the levels of investment and to ensure that the partnership that is built at a national level is replicated at a local level through concrete action.

At the GDS we confirmed a common vision for our country and agreed on a number of critical joint interventions. This was itself a key milestone. We further reached an agreement on four broad areas. I will present a brief report on each of these four areas.

The first set of agreements were clustered under the heading of 'More jobs, better jobs, decent work for all". Key areas of progress under this cluster include the following:

i. Government has already committed itself to a massive programme of public infrastructure investment. Subsequently TRANSNET has followed suit with a major planned programme of capital investment in all aspects of the transport infrastructure. We believe that this is a critical precondition for further growth in our economy and the improvement of the quality of life of workers and other commuters who use this system daily. Implementation of these commitments requires partnerships of both a commercial and social kind.

ii. In the area of the Expanded Public Works Programmes, government is planning to deliver a large number of temporary employment opportunities over the next five years on public programmes. This will simultaneously address both the scourge of unemployment and skills gaps among the unemployed. This expanded programme will have several dimensions: useful infrastructure (e.g. rural roads), social programmes (e.g. home based care), environmental projects and economic projects.

The second cluster of agreements was under the heading of 'Addressing the Investment Challenge'.

i. In this area work is underway in the area of Retirement Fund Reform and policy proposals are expected at the end of the year, aimed at encouraging increased investment in the real economy.

ii. Business and government are working together on finalising the Financial Sector Charter, and work is underway on administered pricing and import parity pricing. Target dates for completion of this work have been set for the end of this year.

The third cluster of agreements was grouped under the heading 'Advancing Equity, Developing Skills, Creating Economic Opportunities for all and Extending Services'.

There are important developments that we can report on in relation to Equity.

i. Firstly, Parliament passed the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Bill on the 2nd September that establishes The Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council. The Council is intended to foster partnership so as to advance a more equal distribution of productive assets and opportunities.

ii. Secondly, there is a strong commitment to ensure Employment Equity. In this regard there would also be a campaign to raise public awareness on the subject.

iii. Thirdly, the GDS elicited a strong commitment from all constituencies, including the recruitment and training of 72 000 learners in learnership programmes by May next year. This has direct implications not only for private sector employers, but also for all government departments. In government, plans are afoot to meet the targets set. In this regard, I need to emphasise the importance of providing learning and employment opportunities to young people. If the learnership programme is as successful as we expect it to be, we would like to set new targets for subsequent years. As I have already said, the Expanded Public Works Programme will also include a training component.

The final cluster of agreements was in respect of 'Local Action and Implementation for Development'.

i. Currently government is taking the lead to ensure that information about these other various initiatives are available to people wherever they live. To this end, government has increased the number of operational Multi-Purpose Community Centres, which provide both economic and social services.

There are many activities, big and small, that are taking place to advance the agreements we reached at the Summit. It is not my intention to detail these today. I am sure our Ministers can speak volumes to detail all these. As we reach the important milestone of the first decade of democratic governance we see a new determination by our nation - business, labour, communities and government - to build a lasting partnership, a people's contract to push back the frontiers of poverty.

This includes a new resolve to ensure increased investments because without significantly more investments we cannot grow the economy and create jobs.

Madam Speaker, all of us are aware that this will take time and we therefore need to sustain our partnerships. Observing what is happening on the ground such as the partnership that underpins the Mogalakwena project in Limpopo, we are convinced that we will succeed.

I thank you.

QUESTION NUMBER 02

2. The Leader of the Opposition (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether, in light of the impact of corruption allegations against the Deputy President on the reputation of the Presidency, the Government and the country as a whole, he has asked or intends asking the Deputy President to step down until the allegations are refuted and the Deputy President is exonerated of any wrongdoing; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether he intends relieving the Deputy President of responsibility for the moral regeneration campaign; if not, (a) why not and (b) what factors did he take into consideration in reaching this conclusion; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY:

Quite correctly, the Leader of the Official Opposition refers to allegations. For once, it seems that the Leader of the Official Opposition and I are agreed on a particular matter of national importance. In terms of the question he has posed, we have to contend with allegations. I fully agree with him that what we confront are allegations.

I am afraid that beyond this point and not surprisingly, the Leader of the Official Opposition and I part ways. We revert to our natural positions, with him taking to the path of opposition inherent within the political and ideological framework that defines him as the Leader of the Official Opposition to the government of our Republic.

His question suggests that we should, on the basis of allegations, reconstitute the Government of the Republic, starting with the sacking of the Deputy President, even if this is on a temporary basis.

He suggests that in the event that the allegations are proved to be false, or as he puts it, "until the allegations are refuted and the Deputy President is exonerated of any wrongdoing", we would then restore the Deputy President to his position, reconstitute the government as it was at the point when he was sacked.

The question proposes that if we do not carry out this immediate provisional sacking, we should remove the Deputy President from his leadership of the important Moral Regeneration Campaign. I presume that the Leader of the Official Opposition makes this suggestion because he believes that the allegations carry such weight that they make it impossible for the Deputy President to continue to be our government's designated champion of the cause of moral regeneration.

Indeed, in the question, he speaks of "the impact of corruption allegations against the Deputy President on the reputation of the Presidency, the Government and the country as a whole..."

From this statement, I presume that he has made the determination that the allegations of corruption against the Deputy President have had a significantly or decisively negative impact on the Presidency, our Government and country as a whole.

I am very interested thus to learn, for the first time, that the Leader of the Official Opposition is interested to protect the reputation of the Presidency, the Government and our country as a whole.

I believe that this Presidency, Government and country, should respect the rule of law and the attendant judicial or due process. Accordingly, none of these should act on the basis of allegations, as the Leader of the Official Opposition suggests in his question.

As I understand it, the Rules of this House prescribe that the Leader of the Opposition, as the Hon Member who posed the question to which I am responding, will have the right and possibility to respond to the comments I am making in response to his question.

I suppose, therefore, that he will exercise this right. Accordingly, I trust that he will substantiate the allegations to which he correctly referred, to justify the suggestions he makes that we take action either temporarily to retrench the Deputy President, or to limit the scope of his work as a leader of our government and people.

I must presume that the Leader of the Official Opposition has the facts the President of the Republic would need to take the actions he suggests in his question.

In this regard, I would like to state some ground rules in a clear and unequivocal manner. The first of these is that we will not take any disciplinary or any other action, simply on the basis of allegations, whoever makes these allegations.

We will always act on the basis of respect for the rule of law and due judicial process. As a result of this, we will always adhere to the principle of the presumption of innocence until guilt is proved, as well as the constitutional right of all our people, which protects all of us from being forced to make incriminating statements.

What this means is that, contrary to what the Leader of the Official Opposition suggests in his question, we will not be stampeded to respond to the allegations that have been made, as though they constituted the truth, or were credible enough to be treated as sufficient grounds for us to take the kind of actions suggested by the Leader of the Official Opposition.

Some people in our country have made the absurd call that the President must "break his silence" about the allegations that some have made, and are making with regard to the matter we are discussing.

Quite what they expect the President to say, in addition to what I said many weeks ago, I do not know. If the demand is that I must rule on the veracity or otherwise of the allegations that have been made, I must state this clearly and unequivocally that the President is not a court of law. Neither has anybody approached me to give me proof of any of the allegations that have been made about the Deputy President and indeed the National Director of Public Prosecution.

I proceed from the premise that individuals should be presumed innocent until proven otherwise. Accordingly, to approach the matter raised by the Leader of the Opposition in the manner that he proposes, would be contrary to this principle. This would obviously be wrong.

If this were to happen, we would require public representatives and officials to relinquish their positions on the strength of mere allegations. This will not happen.

QUESTION NUMBER 03

3. Miss M Xulu (IFP) to ask the President of the Republic:

(3) What is the position of the African Union in advancing and protecting the interests and rights of women on the continent;

(4) Whether African leaders have addressed the matter of Amina Lawal, the Nigerian women facing the death sentence under Sharia law for committing adultery, taking into consideration the impact of such sentence on the image of Africa in respect of its treatment of women; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY:

(1) Madame Speaker, the Maputo Summit of the AU held in July this year adopted the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People's Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa.

The Protocol enjoins, among others, Member States to:

* Eliminate all forms of discrimination and harmful practices against women;
* Protect the rights to dignity, peace, life, integrity and security of the person;
* Ensure access and equal protection before the law;
* Ensure equal rights to participate in the political and decision-making process;
* Protect women in armed conflicts;
* Ensure the right to education, training, economic, social welfare and health and reproductive rights; and
* Accord special protection to elderly women, women with disabilities, and women in distress.

This Protocol is important because it binds all of us, as Africans, to move from rhetoric with regard to the rights of women and implement programmes that should stop all forms of discrimination against women.

We are obliged by this Protocol to take measures that would protect the dignity, integrity and security of women, especially during times of conflict. This is very important because, as we know, people who suffer most during conflicts, are women and children. Member-States are further required to ensure better access to health and social welfare.

Again, we have to put in place processes that would empower women through education, training and access to economic opportunities and ensure that women are able to participate, on an equal footing, in political processes.

This Protocol and other measures of the African Union, demonstrate very clearly, a firm resolve, by Africans, to ensure that the renewal of our continent touches every citizen of this continent.

The honourable member would be aware that the leadership of the continent have also ensured that in all our programmes, the rights of women are protected and promoted.

In this regard, the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), a programme of the African Union, places particular emphasis on the need, at all times, for the advancement of gender equality, the need to free women from oppressive and demeaning practises and most importantly, on the challenge for the development of women.

It is now the duty of all Member-States, including our Parliament, to ratify this Protocol so that the AU can proceed further with its task of advancing and protecting the interests and rights of women on the continent.

(2) As I have said, the AU firmly believes in the equality of all people and the right to human dignity, freedom and security for all. This applies to the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

From the period of British colonial rule, to date, the Nigerian legal system has been made up of English law, traditional law and Sharia law. Earlier, the latter was evoked with regard to matters affecting personal and family law. Since the democratic elections of 1999, 12 Nigerian states, acting within their constitutional rights, have extended the Sharia code to cover offences considered as criminal offences within this code.

The charges against Amina Lawal were preferred in this context. Her case will soon be considered by the Sharia Appeal Court. If this Appeal Court confirms the sentence of the lower court, the matter will then advance to the Federal Supreme Court.

Among other things, this latter Court will have to consider the constitutionality of this sentence, taking into account Nigeria's Bill of Rights.

President Obasanjo and the Federal Government of Nigeria are working to entrench respect for the rule of law in this important African country. This is especially critical in the light of the regularity of military rule during the period since independence.

I would like to suggest that, with regard to the tragic case of Amina Lawal, we should:

* act in a manner that supports the respect of President Obasanjo and the Federal Government of Nigeria for the rule of law;
* accept the need for the Amina Lawal case to be subjected to due process, within the context of the Nigerian legal and constitutional system;
* constantly monitor this process;
* continuously defend the inviolability of the human rights provisions in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as well as the obligations that arise from the human rights instruments binding on all members of the African Union, including Nigeria; and,
* act together with the people of Nigeria who are as concerned about the Amina Lawal case as our people are.

As with other important bilateral, continental and global matters, I will maintain regular contact with President Obasanjo on the issue of Amina Lawal, conscious of his sensitivity to all the concerns that we as South Africans, Nigerians, our continent, and other people in the rest of the world, have raised, in defense of the human rights of Amina Lawal.

In this context, I would like to express my appreciation for the manner in which the ANC Women's League has tried to give this matter the public profile and engagement it deserves. However, I would also appeal to the League that it should understand the need for our government to respect the principles and practices of the rule of law and the due process of law.

QUESTION NUMBER 04

4. Mr M B Ntuli (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, in light of the fact that many South Africans still do not hold identity documents, that in order to access government services citizens are required to have identity documents and that in order to vote in next year's election identity documents will also be required, the Government has allocated sufficient resources in this regard; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

REPLY:

The government has instituted the ID campaign precisely to ensure that, the most vulnerable in particular, are able to access the whole range of social services that the government is providing. This is part of the campaign to improve the quality of life of our people, especially those who remain voiceless and faceless in the remote corners and informal settlements of our country. It is correct that this campaign, will of necessity, help deepen our democracy so that these same people are also empowered to exercise their democratic right and participate in the forthcoming elections.

The campaign is targeted at the youth, rural areas, and informal settlements. It is carried out in partnership with various parties, to which we have to express a word of gratitude: the various provincial administrations; the religious communities; the offices of the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC); municipalities; the South African National Civic Organisation (SANCO); Ward Councillors; local radio stations; the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC); and Traditional Authorities.

In the first instance, the campaign aims to increase awareness so that more and more people apply for ID's and collect them afterwards. In this regard, the government has distributed banners, pamphlets and leaflets in all official languages. Furthermore there are community outreach programmes that include, among others, visits to schools, the churches, traditional authorities and community organisations. We therefore call on people to approach their local Home Affairs Offices and apply for ID's.

Secondly, the campaign requires the government to issue and where possible also distribute uncollected identity documents. For this purpose, the Department has innovatively deployed 168 mobile units that on the one hand process and take in applications for identity documents; and on the other deliver these ID's.

During the period since the campaign started, the Department of Home Affairs has issued and dispatched over a million identity documents and also more than a million birth certificates.

In addition, further uncollected identity documents are sent to central places such as churches, the offices of the IEC and the other partners that I mentioned earlier. We take this opportunity to encourage these partners and others who can a play a role to keep up this sterling and important work. Yours is an invaluable service.

Part of the reason why so many identity documents remain uncollected is because of migration, and that many people remain without postal addresses. We therefore call on people regularly to check their identity documents at the offices where they had submitted their applications.

In the light of what we have said, those who have received their identity documents should approach the relevant government authorities so that they may access the various services on offer.

With regard to the forthcoming elections, all of us must encourage our people to respond in large numbers to the recent announcement by the IEC that voter registration will take place at your local voting district on the weekend of the 8th and 9th of November.

I would like to assure the Hon Member that the effort to ensure that all our people have the necessary identity documents will not be hampered by lack of resources.

QUESTION NUMBER 05

5. Dr B L Geldenhuys (New NP) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether he will consider contacting President Mugabe on the possible release or transfer to a South African prison of the so-called "Harare Three"; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether he will make a statement on the matter?

REPLY:

First of all, I would like to say that I am sensitive to the feelings of the Hon Geldenhuys with regard to the plight of the people he designates as the "Harare Three". In his intervention during the debate of the Budget Vote of the Presidency in June, he said: "I was part of a government who let these men down." However, I must state some of the facts about this matter.

The story of the "Harare Three" is by no means a pretty one. Among other things, these men, currently serving life sentences in Zimbabwe, bombed a residence of ANC exiles in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe in 1988. None of the people who lived in this house were involved in the military activities of the ANC.

This action followed on other operations of the apartheid regime against non-military members of the ANC who were working in Zimbabwe. These include the late Joe Gqabi, a prominent leader of the ANC and former Robben Island prisoner, who was assassinated by agents of the apartheid regime while serving as the political and diplomatic representative of the ANC in Zimbabwe.

The ANC people who were killed were civilians who fell within the category of people who were described as "soft targets".

The Zimbabwe courts sentenced the then "Harare Five" to death. President Mugabe the exercised his constitutional right to exercise clemency by commuting these death sentences to life sentences. Subsequently, the government of Zimbabwe released two of the "Harare Five", B.D. Bawden and D.C. Beahan, having completed part of their sentences.

Mr Bawden was allowed to return to South Africa given that he was a South African.

On the contrary, the "Harare Three" are all citizens of Zimbabwe. This means that Zimbabwe nationals allowed themselves to be recruited by agents of the apartheid regime to carry out criminal acts in Zimbabwe against non-military personnel of the ANC, resulting in the death of both South Africans and a Zimbambean.

The "Harare Five" were arrested in 1989. At this point, they were citizens of Zimbabwe, as they still are.

The then South African Trade Mission in Harare, effectively the South African Embassy, initiated processes in 1992, three years after the Five were arrested, to get these South African citizenship. The "Harare Three" were granted this citizenship a mere 6 days before our first democratic elections on April 27th, 1994.

However, we must make the point that both Kevin Woods and Michael Smith were born in Zimbabwe. In Philip Conjwayo's application for citizenship, the claim was made that he was born in the Transkei in 1933, and that his parents had emigrated to Zimbabwe when he was eight years old, in 1941.

Not unreasonably, the Government of Zimbabwe has refused to accept the claim that the "Harare Three" are South African, and not Zimbabwean. Indeed, a proper investigation of the decision taken on April 21, 1994 by the apartheid regime to classify them as South Africans, might question the legality of this decision, even within the context of the then extant legislation.

Nevertheless, our High Commission has extended consular services to the "Harare Three", respecting the decision taken by our Department of Home Affairs on April 21, 1994. For this reason, as late as August this year, 2003, the High Commission facilitated the meeting that the Premier of the Western Cape, the Hon Marthinus van Schalkwyk had with Kevin Woods at the prison where he is incarcerated.

In this context, I would like to remind the Hon Members that two members of the "Harare Five", Messrs Bawden and Beahan, were released. Mr Bawden was released and allowed to return to South Africa after President Mandela approached President Mugabe.

Mr Conjwayo wrote to the South African High Commission in Harare on the 14th of November, 1999. In this letter he said:

"As you are aware, I wish to retain my Zimbabwean citizenship. Obviously, if I continue to receive consular visits, my Zimbabwean status will be compromised. Even if I am on your current visit list, please don't call me to see you later this month or in the future."

Put more starkly, Mr Conjwayo has said that he is not a South African and that we should stop treating him as a South African, on the basis of a determination made in 1994 that he is a South African. He is ready to pay the necessary price for the criminal acts he committed in his own country. We respect his decision.

In the light of everything I have said, I would suggest to the Hon Geldenhuys that:

* we accept that at the time the "Harare Three" committed the offences for which they were found guilty, in 1988, they were citizens of Zimbabwe;
* the South African citizenship granted in 1994 had the purpose to oblige our democratically elected government to intervene on behalf of the then "Harare Five" to solve a problem created by the apartheid regime;
* accordingly, the assertion that our government should intervene in this matter on the basis of the citizenship decision taken in 1994, rests on very weak grounds;
* one of the people who died as a result of the actions of the "Harare Three" was a Zimbabwean;
* the previous government, which was responsible for the actions of the "Harare Three", never expressed remorse or apologised for these actions, either to the government and people of Zimbabwe, or to the ANC; and,
* the initiative taken by the government of Zimbabwe to commute the death sentences, and to release Messrs Bawden and Beahan, show the willingness of this government to show mercy towards people who caused the death of others, to perpetuate apartheid rule in our country and promote aggression and destabilisation against Zimbabwe and other countries of Southern Africa.

In the light of all this, I would like to suggest to the Hon Geldenhuys that public agitation about this matter, including debates in this House, is not necessarily the best way to find a solution to the problem he is trying to solve.

Like President Mandela, I have also discussed this matter with President Mugabe. We must respect the right of the government of Zimbabwe to take whatever decisions it considers fit and proper, affecting Zimbabweans who have been convicted and sentenced by the courts of Zimbabwe for actions described in our country, in the context of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission as "gross violations of human rights", and for the murder of another Zimbabwean.

I trust that the Hon Member, however intense his sense of remorse, will accept this advice, in the interest of those who, as he said, were let down by the apartheid government to which he belonged.

Issued by The Presidency, 18 September 2003