[ Home ] [ Speeches & statements ]

30 March 2006

Question Number 1

Ms P Bhengu (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

(a) To what extent have the local government elections held on 1 March 2006 consolidated democracy and (b) what steps will the government take to ensure the acceleration of integrated service delivery to ensure a better life for all?

Reply:

One of the founding values of our democracy as articulated in Chapter 1 section 1(d) of the Constitution is universal adult suffrage, a national common voters’ roll, regular elections and a multi-party system of democratic government. Since we attained our freedom in 1994 we have held three successful national and provincial and three successful local government elections, including the recent ones. Voter turn-out has consistently gone up in each election, clearly demonstrating an irreversible process of the consolidation of our democracy.

As Honourable Members are aware, in terms of our electoral system and laws, any interested party may lodge with the Independent Electoral Commission an objection that is material to the determination of the final results. Because of the smooth technical management of the elections there were no material objections to the running of the past elections. As a result, these elections were declared free, fair and credible in all respects.

However, democratic election management is more than an efficient and well-managed technical process and also includes an enabling constitutional and political environment. Free and fair elections implies the presence of an environment that ensures civil and political rights such as freedom of expression, of movement, of association, assembly, and participation by all citizens, the absence of intimidation and compliance with the rule of law. The fact that the March elections took place within this climate bears testimony to our deepening of democracy.

Before the last local Government Elections, government conducted Izimbizo, nationally, to identify obstacles to the acceleration of integrated service delivery as well as to assess the necessary capacity and readiness of municipalities in pursuit of a better life for all. We have completed that assessment and have identified priorities that are central to the consolidation of the system of local government that will improve the living conditions of all our people.

On the basis of that assessment, the focus of the new municipal councils will be around practical and critical technical and policy interventions in the priority areas of institutional and skills development, acceleration of basic service delivery and infrastructure investment, improving capacity for economic development at district and metropolitan levels, improving financial viability and financial management and promoting good governance and meaningful community participation.

We have prioritised the important challenges of institutional development because we have to give adequate support to municipalities to work out credible and workable Integrated Development Plans (IDPs) that are linked to the Provincial Growth and Development Strategies (PGDS) and the National Spatial Development Perspective (NSDP). In this regard, we will ensure thorough hands-on support for all municipalities and help them to have in place the basic systems, resources and staff for their effective and proper functioning.

Government in partnership with South African Local Government Association (SALGA) will also embark on a training programme for councillors as part of our efforts to improve the capacity, efficiency and effectiveness of our municipalities.

Further, as we have announced in the past, to achieve universal integrated service delivery, government will continue to build on the progress made in broadening access to basic services and infrastructure. This includes maximum and efficient utilisation of the R25 billion earmarked for the Municipal Infrastructure Fund over the 2006/07 medium-term.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, priority actions to accelerate service delivery and infrastructure investment also include ensuring that the service delivery targets with respect to access to clean water, decent sanitation and electricity and the eradication of the bucket system are on track.

Creating favourable conditions for accelerating service delivery and infrastructure is also bound to have a positive impact on economic development opportunities within municipalities. Over and above this, however, national government will work with municipalities and provinces to strengthen and help stimulate local economies.

As honourable members know, local government derives most of its income from its own revenue sources such as property rates and service charges. Strengthening and supporting municipal financial viability and financial management is thus crucial to the proper functioning of local government. Specific measures have been put in place to ensure that this is achieved through the provision of hands-on support, capacity building as well as financial support mechanisms where necessary.

Finally, it is clear that there is still a lot of work to be done if we are to increase public participation in our local government system. Accordingly, we will do whatever is necessary to improve mechanisms for better and effective community participation, especially ensuring that ward committees have the required capacity and resources to discharge their mandate.

We will also ensure that the work of the community development workers assist this process of improving interaction between government and communities so that we are better able to respond to the challenges facing our people, accelerate integrated service delivery and bring about a better life.

Question Number 2

Adv. HC Schmidt (DA) to ask the President of the Republic:

Whether, in light of the statements made by the Minister for Public Enterprises on 28 February 2006 and 3 March 2006 with regard to the problems experienced at the Koeberg power station, he intends taking any steps against the Minister; if not, why not; if so, what steps;

We presume that this question is in reference to the purported ‘sabotage statements’. The press conference on the eve of the election where the alleged inferences were made was occasioned by the failures of the system the night before. Reference to the outage at Koeberg one arose due to the need to clarify inaccurate speculation on the cause of the problem.

The CEO of Eskom and the Minister of Public Enterprises have at all times been consistent in stating that the cause of the shutdown of Koeberg unit one is under investigation and I am receiving regular updates in this regard. Minister Erwin also dealt with this matter in hearings of the Portfolio Committees on 14 March 2006. He has made the commitment to make a statement in Parliament once the investigation has been completed.

Whether he will set up an independent commission of enquiry to establish the causes of the failure of the government to meet South Africa’s national electricity capacity needs and to recommend appropriate action; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

The Honourable Member is proceeding from the wrong assumption that our government has failed to meet South Africa’s electricity capacity needs.

On 14 March 2006 Minister Erwin, accompanied by the Deputy Minister of Minerals and Energy, the Chairperson and the CEO of Eskom, gave a comprehensive briefing to a joint meeting of Portfolio Committees. This dealt with the situation comprehensively and Honourable Members had the chance to ask questions.

The situation is well known and understood. Accordingly I do not believe that there is any purpose to be served from the appointment of a Commission of Enquiry. The Parliamentary procedures provide adequate means for members to obtain any information in relation to this matter.

As was made clear in the above mentioned briefing, the situation in the Western Cape is specific to issues around Koeberg. The process to deal with this has been fully outlined and will require the full collaboration of all concerned. In this regard, I would like to thank Premier Rasool for the hard work he and his team have undertaken to try and mitigate the situation. The Premier is co-ordinating all stakeholders in the Western Cape with the full co-operation of Eskom and the Minister of Public Enterprises and more than seven meetings have already taken place this year.

I am also pleased to announce that the SAS Drakensberg is currently making its way to Cape Town with the replacement rotor. I would like to thank the Government of France, Electricité de France, our Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Defence and the Navy. We are fortunate in having the capacity to carry out such an exercise.

I would also like to thank the staff at Koeberg who are working tirelessly to try and deal with this very difficult situation. It is also my view that Mr Gcabashe and the Eskom team have responded to this crisis in the most expeditious and professional manner possible in the circumstances.

These events have however, only served to confirm the urgency of investing in our infrastructure. The increased pressure on the transmission lines to the Cape and on the City infrastructure have shown up weaknesses that are being addressed with the necessary urgency.

The position nationally is that we have about 37 000 MW available with an additional 2 000 MW available to manage very high peaks. The projected demand is some 35 000 MW. As has been indicated in the abovementioned briefing to the Portfolio Committees the situation is tighter than we would have preferred, this being the result of the higher than projected rates of growth.

However, the Eskom build plan is already addressing this situation. Approved projects, including those under construction, will add another 7260 MW in the next few years. Projects in the planning process will provide a further 10382 MW. The Minister of Public Enterprises has asked the Eskom Board to provide for plans to fast track this latter category of projects. It is therefore evident that there is no crisis and that on the contrary this very large build plan will have a major impact on the growth of the Economy.

Question No: 3

Prince NE Zulu (IFP) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the government is on course to halve poverty by 2015; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

(2) whether the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA) will have an impact on non-affluent societies; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;

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

Reply:

Madam Speaker I think it would be better that I give an answer that addresses all the three parts of the question simultaneously. I therefore ask for your indulgence, Madam Speaker, to be allowed to combine the answers to all the elements of the question.

Let me start by saying yes, we are confident that we are on course to half poverty by 2015.

As Honourable Members are aware, there are several ways of measuring poverty—the three key components of poverty are income poverty, asset poverty and human capital poverty. By all measures we can say with confidence that poverty levels in South Africa are on the decline.

Certainly, income poverty is the most conventional measure; it is a measure of income by household or by individual. Target one of the Millennium Development Goal one requires us to “halve between 1990 and 2015 the proportion of people whose income is less than US$1 per day”. By this measure, in 2000, 11% of our people were living on less than US$1 a day, and one third of households [1] and 34% of individuals were living on less than US$2 a day [2].

Madame Speaker, using the measure of US$2 per day with respect to income poverty our task is to reduce levels of poverty to less than one-sixth of individuals or households by 2015.

Asset poverty relates to the distribution of economic assets, particularly land and housing. Honourable Members have access to the considerable progress that we have made since 1994, and we expect to make even greater progress by 2015.

A third element of poverty is human capital poverty. We have already made major strides in reversing the damage that apartheid did to the human capital through “bantu education”. This progress is continuing, even accelerating, and we expect to meet our targets by 2015.

A recent study, utilising a variety of techniques to measure poverty [3] (in this case, incomes below R250) found that in recent years the proportion of poor people have declined substantially - 18.5 million in 2000 to 15.4 million in 2004. Over the same period, the number of non-poor rose from 26.2 million in 2000 to 31 million in 2004.

The study also shows that per capita real incomes of individuals comprising the poorest two population quintiles rose by more than 30% during 2000-2004. Our pro-poor socio-economic policies are meeting with success.

As we have reported to this House, the main impact of the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative for South Africa (AsgiSA) on non-affluent communities in South Africa is through job creation, which is not only important in helping us defeat unemployment but also in ensuring that we are better able to increase household income. This is the central focus of AsgiSA.

In addition to the direct impact of AsgiSA through job creation, the fact that AsgiSA supports a growth rate rising to 6% means that the economy will generate additional resources, some of which can be redistributed through the fiscus in the form, for example, of better schooling and health care, access to water and roads, and as social grants including pensions and the child support grant.

Further, there are numerous elements of AsgiSA specifically designed to address the challenges of poverty and unemployment. These include a further expansion of the Expanded Public Works Programme, further impetus to providing access to credit and savings facilities for the poor, and a range of skills interventions, and industrial strategies designed to create jobs for low skilled workers.

A key mechanism is to use the leverage of the First Economy to address the Second Economy. There are two key examples in AsgiSA in this regard.

The first is to leverage the increased levels of public expenditure, especially investment expenditure, to develop small businesses and broad based empowerment addressing such issues as: access to finance, preferential procurement, sectors that are labour intensive and review of regulations’ impact on this sector.

As part of ensuring that the poor, the majority of which are black, do benefit from the growing economy, we have among other things, decided on a procedure through which 10 products that are regularly sourced by government, would be set aside for procurement from smaller black owned business.

Another form of leverage will be that all the sector strategies, such as the strategies for tourism or Business Processing Outsourcing (BPO), will have elements addressing development goals in the second economy. For example, the economic cluster of government is committed to ensure that at least five BPO operations are established in poor areas with relatively little economic activity. The targeted beneficiaries are youth and women.

All these measures together with other programmes of government will have an impact on non affluent societies such that we will be able to half poverty by 2015.

More generally, Madam Speaker, we continue to create a considerable number of new jobs and our social programmes and social grants have had an enormous positive impact in our efforts to defeat poverty. Although we still have a long way to go to reduce poverty and inequality in South Africa, we however are confident that we can more than meet our targets for 2015.

Since we are currently growing at a rate of about 5% per year, we believe that our objectives will be met. Recent research by a team led by Professor Servaas van der Berg at the University of Stellenbosch has found that between 1994 and 2004, and mostly within the period 2000 to 2004 the real incomes of the poorest 20% of the South Africa population increased by 30%. This finding (and the findings of other researchers) indicates that our redistributive strategies, including employment creation, tax relief, and social grant programmes, are having a real impact on the conditions of the poorest South Africans.

Notes:

1. In 1993 40% of all South Africans were asset- (and service-) poor, by 2004 this figure had halved to 22%. (Study by Bhorat, Naidoo and van der Westhuizen)

Question No 4

Ms F Hajaig (ANC) to ask the President of the Republic:

In view of the referral of the matter of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the United Nations Security Council by the International Atomic Energy Agency, what steps does the government believe should be taken to resolve this matter?

Reply:

Madame Speaker, the position that the South African Government has adopted in relation to the matter of Iran’s implementation of agreements concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is primarily informed by a principle contained in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). This is “that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States”. The exploitation of nuclear technology offers humanity the possibility to achieve its socio-economic development goals in activities such as electricity-generation.

Access to the benefits of nuclear technology must be accompanied by a reciprocal pledge by all Parties to the Treaty to prevent the diversion of nuclear materials from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. We are fully conscious of the devastation which, as articulated in the preamble to the Treaty, “would be visited upon all mankind by a nuclear war”. We are consequently duty-bound, acting in concert with the rest of the international community inclusive of the Islamic Republic of Iran, to make every effort to avert the danger of such a war and to take measures to safeguard the security of the world’s population.

We believe that the verification of compliance or otherwise by Iran with its commitments made under the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as well as with the nuclear safety standards developed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), should be performed under the auspices of the Board of the IAEA. The Honourable Hajaig will no doubt be aware that the IAEA is internationally regarded as the sole authority with the competency to verify and ensure compliance with established safeguards.

Madame Speaker, Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei notes in his last introductory statement to the Board of Governors that, as far as the Iranian nuclear programme is concerned, the agency has not seen indications of diversion of nuclear material to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. He, however, expresses the concern that despite the rigorous verification exercise conducted over a period of three years, the nature and extent of Iran’s nuclear programme remains uncertain. We are convinced that in order to remove these uncertainties, Iran should be urged to co-operate fully with the IAEA and provide maximum transparency and instil confidence in the international community and the IAEA about the manner in which they use their nuclear technology.

Madame Speaker, in our view, to resolve the tensions surrounding the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme, it is of utmost importance that all parties work towards an all-inclusive negotiated accord that respects the legitimate interests of all countries, taking into account the principle contained in the preamble of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) “that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States”.

Madame Speaker, the correctness of the approach we have adopted is confirmed by Director General ElBaradei in remarks he made on 2 March 2006 when welcoming the high-level meeting between Foreign Ministers of the EU3, the High Representatives of the EU and the Secretary-General of the Supreme National Security Council wherein he implored “all parties to use this opportunity to create the necessary conditions to return to negotiations". He went on to call on Iran to “to take all the necessary confidence building measures required to assure the international community of the peaceful nature of its nuclear programme”. In the remarks we are citing, Mohamed ElBaradei reminds us that "Only through these two tracks – full transparency on the part of Iran and negotiations with all concerned parties – can confidence be established regarding the nature of Iran’s nuclear programme and a durable solution be found".

Madame Speaker, Mohamed ElBaradei is right and we agree with the course of action he proposes. The steps we must take should ensure that there “is full transparency on the part of Iran and negotiations with all concerned parties”.

Of course, as the Hon Members are aware, yesterday the United Nations (UN) Security Council issued a statement on the matter we are discussing, which called on Iran to stop its uranium enrichment programme. We will continue to engage Iran and other role players on this and the related issues.

Question 5

Rev. KRJ Meshoe (ACDP) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) Whether the government will put pressure on Hamas to accept the right of Israel to exist within safe and secure borders, in line with similar calls from the international community; if not, why not; if so,

(2) whether the issue of suicide bombers will be discussed; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?

Reply:

Madame Speaker, any intended engagement with Hamas must, in the first instance, be premised on the recognition and unconditional acceptance of the reality that the people of Palestine have freely and democratically elected Hamas to represent their interests.

In the second instance, Madame Speaker, it is vitally important to bear in mind that our efforts to lend whatever assistance we are called upon to provide the people of Palestine to attain their long cherished dream of an independent and sovereign state, must not be based on a false and ill-conceived notion of our ability to place demands on the Palestinians and their leadership on how to pursue their goals.

On the contrary, we are likely to make a meaningful contribution to the peace process through constructive engagement with all the people of Palestine, including Hamas.

In this regard, we have taken note of and are indeed encouraged by the post-election assurances given by the leader of Hamas, Ismail Hanniya, that his organisation is “an aware and mature movement”; that is, among others, “open to the international arena”.

We accordingly seek to use that “opening” by conveying to Hamas that we hold the firm view that the road to an independent Palestinian homeland is through the prescripts of the Oslo Agreement as well as the principles contained in the Roadmap for Peace.

Key among these principles is the two-state solution to the Palestine-Israeli conflict the outcome of which must be the creation of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state co-existing side by side in peace and security with an independent Israel. The recent statement by Hamas political leader, Khaled Meshaal, during his visit in the Russian Federation to the effect that they “will deal with existing agreements according to the interests of the Palestinian people” is worth noting. In our view the recognition of the right of Israel to exist is not inimical to “the interests of the Palestinian people”. On the contrary, we believe that the cause of the Palestinians will be immensely enhanced if they acknowledge the legitimate right of the Israelis to their own sovereign state.

Madame Speaker, it is obvious that the goals of the Roadmap for Peace we have just alluded to can only come to fruition in conditions in which the guns and bombs that regularly echo in that troubled region are silenced.

Consequently we deem it as vitally important that there be a demonstration of continued commitment by both the Palestinian and Israeli leadership to the termination of all acts of violence as well as incitement against each other’s peoples. In this context we welcome the renewed undertaking by Hamas to extend the cease-fire declared in March 2005 provided that Israel reciprocates by refraining from launching attacks against the Palestinians.

Madame Speaker, these are some of the messages that we hope to convey to the Hamas leadership as and when we meet with them in accordance with the agreements we reached prior to the legislative elections. We remain convinced that the approach stipulated in the three-phase Roadmap is likely to lead to the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement and historic reconciliation in the Middle East.

Madame Speaker, this week witnesses another milestone in the history of our country, the historic address of the National Assembly by the President of the Palestinian Authority, President Mahmoud Abbas.

The visit signifies another phase in the deepening of relations between the peoples of Palestine and South Africa. We should expect that, when he addresses us, President Abbas will among other things provide us with insights into the journey thus far traversed by the Palestinian people towards the vision that we have already spoken about, as well as the challenges that they are yet to overcome. We should accordingly be at the ready to respond positively to whatever pleas may be made to us to assist and support the citizens of the region to find a lasting solution to the conflict.

In this regard, we welcome the appeal to the Palestinians made by Ehud Olmert, the new Prime Minister of Israel, in which he said: “We are prepared to compromise, to give up parts of our beloved land of Israel, to uproot painfully Jews who live there, to allow you the conditions to achieve your dreams as well, and live in a state beside us in harmony.”

Question Number 6.

Mr LW Greyling (ID) to ask the President of the Republic:

(1) How have the recent electricity outages in the Western Cape affected South Africa’s (a) growth rate and (b) objectives of Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa (AsgiSA) to obtain the target of 6% economic growth;

(2) whether these outages have affected investor confidence in South Africa; if so, what plans does the Government have in place to (a) restore this confidence and (b) ensure a reliable long-term supply of electricity;

(1) We do not expect the outages experienced in the Western Cape to derail the growth projections outlined in AsgiSA.

The faster than expected economic growth has required that we accelerate our build plan, but it is expected that Eskom’s capital expenditure of R84 billion will have a massive positive impact on the economy and should sustain and drive a six percent growth rate.

This build programme is already underway. I have indicated the amounts of additional electricity that we expect from this new first phase of the build in the previous answer. It is important to note that Eskom is currently in the process of adding 1050MW of peaking capacity in the Western Cape in the form of two gas turbine plants – one at Mossel Bay and the other at Atlantis.

(2) We have no evidence of any adverse impact on investment and accordingly the notion that there has been a rush away from investment in South Africa is not correct.

Large users of electricity approach Eskom well in advance in order to secure their supply. In the modern world where energy is in short supply, we are, as government, aware of any major users in our country.

In regard to the purported aluminium smelter that is looking elsewhere we need to point out that that company has not approached Eskom. In any event the Government is currently only negotiating with one potential aluminium smelter investor. This is with Alcan regarding the establishment of an aluminium smelter at Coega and this negotiation is on track.

Eskom is a flagship entity that has a solid track record internationally. There are very few countries in the world that could host a smelter of such capacity. The fact that South Africa is being seriously considered indicates the degree of confidence that international investors have in our ability to provide sustainable, cost-effective electricity.

(a) falls away and (b) has been dealt with in the previous answer.

[1] For the purposes of our calculation we used the poverty line developed by the Poverty and Inequality Report prepared by Professor Julian May of the University of KwaZulu-Natal in 1997, and updated by Professor Haroon Bhorat from the University of Cape Town. According to this measure, at the latest date of measurement 1999 about 3.7 million households out of 11.4 million were living below the poverty line. This was just under 33% of households.

[2] This is if we use the $2 per day standard and apply this to the 2000 Income and Expenditure Survey of StatsSA.

[3] Study conducted by Servaas van der Berg, Ronelle Burger, Rulof Burger, Megan Louw and Derek Yu utilise a poverty line set at a lower R250 household income per month or R3 000 per year in 2000 Rands. Using various techniques, this study concludes that the proportion of people living in poverty increased during 1993 to 2000, probably as a result of sluggish economic growth and poor labour market prospects. Thereafter there was a rapid decline in poverty.

Issued by: The Presidency
30 March 2006