Including Speaker Baleka Mbete's order that Mmusi Maimane withdraw claim that President Zuma is a "thief" (March 17 2015)
Transcript of the debate in the National Assembly on the Democratic Alliance's Motion of No Confidence in President Jacob Zuma, Tuesday, National Assembly, March 17 2015
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Chairperson, hon members, bagaetsho, dumelang.
I would like to express my deepest condolences to Minister Chabane's family and the ANC for their loss. We mourn his passing and hope that his family will soon find peace during this trying time. Robale ka Kgotso. [Rest in peace.]
Today is not a pleasant day. Nobody wants South Africa to succeed as much as we do. Every member of this House wants our country to be a place of prosperity and hope for every citizen. We all want opportunities to be extended to those denied them in the past. And we all want a President we can believe in - somebody with the commitment and the vision to take us forward.
We had that in Nelson Mandela. When Madiba was President, life was not perfect, but he gave us hope. He gave us the belief that we were moving in the right direction. He respected and upheld the Constitution, and placed the needs of the people before the needs of the party. He gave us a glimpse of what a nonracial and united South Africa would look like. He was a selfless leader who embodied the democratic dream.
But the light of that dream has since faded, as the ANC has become a party that places the needs of one man above those who elected them to power.
On the day of his inauguration in 2009, President Zuma made a commitment to South Africans to "[serve] our nation with dedication, commitment, discipline, integrity, hard work and passion."
Yet in the six years that President Zuma has presided over our country, the dream of President Nelson Mandela has been all but destroyed, and the integrity of the Office of the President decimated.
Madam Speaker, the vote before us today is not only one of no confidence; it is a vote of conscience. We cannot in good conscience allow the needs of millions of South Africans to be supplanted by the agenda of one man, while we look on in silence. For too long the members to my right have turned a blind eye to the destruction of our democracy being perpetrated by the President, and his project of state capture on the grandest scale.
It is on a day like this that I wish we were not constrained by the straight-jacket of our party system. Because I know that many of you on this side of the House will vote against your conscience today. [Interjections.] You will vote to keep a man in office who is doing everything possible to evade 783 counts of fraud, corruption, and racketeering. You will vote for a thief - a man who stole the people's money to build his R246 million home, while millions of South Africans go to bed hungry. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: Hon The Leader of the Opposition, could you please take your seat.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, could you please pause the clock that keeps my time?
The SPEAKER: Yes, I will do so. Please pause the time of the hon member. I think you should just put the three minutes back. Hon Chief Whip?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE MAJORITY PARTY: Hon Speaker, hon Maimane knows that the President has never been charged with theft by any court. Hon Maimane has no right to call the President a thief. He must withdraw, now.
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker...
The SPEAKER: What is the issue, hon Steenhuisen?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, the Constitutional Court of this country has ruled that it is correct that the President can be called a thief... [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: No, hon Steenhuisen...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: ... it is fair comment. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen, can I say the following to the hon The Leader of the Opposition? Hon member, you know that it is unparliamentary to call a member who is not even in this House, a thief. Can you please either bring that matter as a substantive motion, or withdraw.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker...
Mr M WATERS: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: Hon Waters, I am talking to the hon The Leader of the Opposition at the present moment. Can I finish with the hon The Leader of the Opposition?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Chair...
The SPEAKER: No, hon Ndlozi...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: On the matter of your ruling...
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, please take your seat!
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Before you implement...
The SPEAKER: No, hon Ndlozi! I am addressing the hon The Leader of the Opposition. Take you seat! [Interjections.] Take your seat. Hon Maimane?
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon Speaker, if the Constitutional Court permits me to say that, why are we limiting those rights here in this House? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane, I have not seen anything from the Constitutional Court addressed to this House on that matter. [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker...
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane, we need the matter as a substantive motion.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, the...
The SPEAKER: We have not been addressed by the Constitutional Court. This House has not been addressed, not by way of a letter, not through any means of communication. So, until we have that, we need you to play by the Rules of the House, and, in this case, admit that it is unparliamentary...
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: I am losing time.
The SPEAKER: You are not losing time. That time will be given back to you. That much I can guarantee.
So, hon Musi Maimane, bring the mater as a substantive motion, or steer clear of anything unparliamentary.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, the nature of the motion before us today is such that it is a substantive motion. Its required motivation... It is a constitutional motion, and therefore the hon Maimane is allowed to make these comments.
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen, I need hon Maimane to steer clear of any unparliamentary language.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, on a point of order...
The SPEAKER: What is your point of order?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: I'm rising on Rule 70 which provides that... seeing that your ruling says that you have not been addressed by the Constitutional Court... You have not received the ruling, but many of us have received it because it is a very old ruling by now. I think that you can postpone this matter of your ruling, because this House can't be seen to be undermining the Constitutional Court. It has ruled...
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, take your seat!
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, you have not seen it. You can implement Rule 70 because we are allowed... It is not unparliamentary to say that the President or anybody is a thief, particularly in a substantive issue.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, this House has its own Rules, Orders and internal arrangements. And I...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: But you are not above the Constitutional Court, hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, take your seat! We are not run by any court... [Interjections.] ...especially when it has not... [Interjections.] This House is run by its own Rules and internal arrangements. [Interjections.]
Mr M WATERS: Madam Speaker, does this mean we ignore all court judgments from now on?
The SPEAKER: Hon Waters, we are run by our own Rules. [Interjections.] We are not run by another arm of state.
Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, may I address you?
The SPEAKER: No, because, in the first place, I have not recognised you.
Mr J S MALEMA: I am asking for recognition, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: But you are on your feet already! Hon J J, take your seat! I am asking everybody else to take their seats until I start recognising people. Then only may they rise. [Interjections.]
I am going to start with hon Fatima Chohan. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS: Madam Speaker, I think one of the problems we have in this House is that members seek to usurp the Rules to suit their own ends. [Interjections.]
Madam Speaker, you have made a ruling on this matter. There are processes that allow members who disagree with that ruling, to address you. Points of order are not meant to be that mechanism. I really think that it is about time... I think we have been in this Parliament for about a year now. It is about time that some of these members on this side start learning the Rules in the proper way. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Malema.
Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker, I think that you are wrong because... [Interjections.] I just want to remind you that these members of the EFF had been suspended according to your Rules, but the court ruled that their suspension had to be uplifted. That is why they are here. You could not defy that judgment and say, we are governed by our Rules. So, consistency is very important. I have just given gave you an example that relates exactly to what you have just said. So, this legislature here is not above the Constitutional Court because these Rules must be consistent with the Constitution. Therefore, if they are not consistent with the Constitution, they will never be recognised by those who support the Constitution. A Constitutional Court has made a ruling. It cannot be correct to call a President a thief outside, and be wrong to call a President a thief in Parliament where one is supposed to enjoy absolute freedom of speech.
So, that is inconsistent, hon Speaker. Please protect the Constitution even more than these Rules because the Constitution is above these Rules.
The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, let me first correct you on the case related to yourselves. That was an interim order. The main issue is still to be addressed. That's number one. Number two, this House has Rules and it follows those Rules and the laws that create it and according to which it runs. Yes, constitutional principles and what we ourselves actually formulated as a Constitution... but it does not create chaos whereby we don't know what we are following in the House.
So, right now, we are going to proceed according to the Rules that determine what is parliamentary and what is not parliamentary. I really request hon Maimane to withdraw the statement in which he called the President a thief, so that we can proceed with the debating the motion.
Hon Maimane, please proceed.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, may I address you, please?
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane, we are here to debate your motion. I really appeal to you not to sabotage us being able to proceed with this business of debating the motion you have put on the Order Paper. So, allow us to debate it according to our Rules. We can't sabotage ourselves every time we come together. Please, hon Maimane, please proceed.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker...
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen, I really would like to proceed with the business of debating the hon The Leader of the Opposition's motion on the Order Paper.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I respect that, and I also want to proceed with the motion. But it is very important because things that are being said in this House today are going to impact like dominoes going forward. Particularly, things said about the competence of the Constitutional Court. I think it is important that we understand that section 167(5) of the Constitution says very clearly that the Constitutional Court - not Parliament - makes the final decision on whether an act of Parliament, a provincial act, or the conduct of the President, is constitutional and must ... [Inaudible.]
This House is subordinate to the rulings of the Constitutional Court, and I think we need to establish that very clearly; otherwise we are going to have problems going forward.
The second thing is that I would like you to make a ruling on whether the constitutional motion before us today is a substantive motion or not. It is my understanding that a motion of this nature, in terms of the requirements of the Constitution, has to be substantive in nature, which is why the motion requires members to provide a motivation when that motion is submitted. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: I recognise hon Minister Masutha.
The MINISTER OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT: Madam Speaker, I just want to put to the House that the matter that being referred to relates to an utterance made in an SMS that was circulated. The Rules of this House, or any precedence that may have been set as a result of their interpretation and application was not before that court. Therefore, the legality of constitutionality of the Rule that the Speaker is relying upon, in finding hon Maimane to be unparliamentary, still stands. There is no court judgment of any kind, be it the Constitutional Court or any other court, that has found that Rule to be inconsistent with the Constitution. That Rule must be adhered to. It is a Rule of debate. It is still in force. It is still valid.
The onus is thus on hon Maimane to adhere to the Rules of this House or not. I humbly submit that it is as simple as that, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane?
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon Speaker, I withdraw for this purpose.
The SPEAKER: Thank you.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: But it is sad day when one's right can be protected outside of this House, but cannot be protected inside this House. [Interjections.]
What is even sadder, hon members, is that you will vote for a man willing to break democratic institutions so that he can escape accountability. You will vote for a man - and it seems like, today, a party - who believes that the ANC is above the Constitution; a man who believes he is a law unto himself. When the Public Protector exposed him, he dismissed her as an "ombudsman," and failed to abide by her recommendations for remedial actions.
Hon members, if the President disobeys the Public Protector, then none of us has to obey the Public Protector, and no South African should either.
When the Scorpions got too close, they were crushed and replaced by the Hawks. And when it looked like the Hawks were about to swoop, they had their wings clipped.
When the SA Revenue Service, Sars, started investigating fringe tax benefits for Nkandla, it was subjected to a purge of its executive management.
Worst than that, as the threat of the ANC losing elections grows, the IEC was targeted for capture through the appointment as Commissioner of the President's Special Projects Advisor.
All of this, coupled with plans to turn the SABC from a public broadcaster to state propaganda machine, means that we are today witnessing a full-on attack on freedom of expression and free and fair elections.
Yesterday we approached the court to reinstate the charges against the President that he has successfully evaded for five years, and have established a timeline that will lead to his prosecution. I can assure you, hon members, the President will have his day in court if this House is not willing to vote him out, today. [Applause.]
Let's be clear about one thing: The President needs his job to avoid prosecution. He needs his job to keep enriching himself, his friends and his family.
We have seen how Khulubuse Zuma destroyed a mine and the jobs of workers. We have seen how the children of ANC leaders were awarded a tender to the value R631 million for toilets in the Eastern Cape. We have seen how the Gupta family had the red carpet rolled out for them to land at Waterkloof.
Through all of these scandals the President has denied all knowledge and complicity. Hon members, I would like to rename President Jacob Zuma, "President I did not know". "President Angazi". When we asked him about upgrades to his own home at Nkandla, his response was, "I did not know. I did not ask for the upgrades." But he did nothing to stop it. When we asked him about his friends, the Guptas, landing at Waterkloof, this was the President's response: "I did not know." But he did nothing to stop it. When we challenged him about his failure to appear before this House, he said, "Nobody invited me." Yet, hon members, I hold all the letters here that we wrote to both the Speaker and the President in which we ask when the President would be coming to this House. But the President stood here and told the people of South Africa, "I did not know, and therefore did not act." [Interjections.]
So what exactly does the President know? He seems to know nothing! In fact, even when Parliament collapsed right in front of him, he did not act, and did nothing.
The real tragedy is simply this: The longer President Jacob Zuma stays in his job, the more South Africans find themselves without one. [Interjections.]
South Africa's economic growth for 2014 was a mere 1,4%, down from 1,9% in 2013. For 2015 it is projected to be 2%. This is a far cry from the projected 5% required by the NDP. While President Zuma has blamed our economic failures on the global economic climate, growth in sub-Saharan Africa in 2014 averaged out to 4,5%.
When it comes to economic growth, leadership matters, and President Zuma has shown none of it.
Since President Zuma assumed office in 2009, the number of unemployed South Africans has grown by 1,4 million people. Our unemployment rate today stands at 36,1%. Over 66% of those unemployed are young people.
So, hon members, here is the choice we have today. You can choose to keep a man in office who steals from the poor; you can choose to keep a man in office who breaks our Constitution to protect himself; you can choose to keep a man in office who laughs when Parliament is being broken down.
Or, you can choose to vote with your conscience today. But, if you are unable to vote with your hearts, at least vote with your heads. Kancane nje... [Just a little bit...]
Let me remind you, the longer you keep this man in office, the more you show South Africans how the ANC has lost its way. Under the leadership of Jacob Zuma your party has dropped over 210,000 votes since 2009. In Gauteng last year, you dropped nearly 10%. So you are losing MPs. We are losing South Africa. Yet, today, you are going to vote for President Zuma. [Interjections.]
In Nelson Mandela Bay, the ANC dropped from over 70% support to less than 50% last year. That is the beauty of democracy. Every election is a vote of no confidence in President Zuma. And every election we hold shows that people are losing confidence in the man you insist on propping up as President. So, by all means, vote against this motion of no confidence today. Vote against your hearts, and vote against your heads. But know that when your children inherit an economy that is unable to provide them with jobs to support their families, they will look back at this day and ask how you let that happen.
Know that when the pillars of our democracy lie in ruins, your children will judge you harshly for doing nothing to stop the devastation. And know that the day is coming when the people of this country will vote you out of power.
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: What is your point of order, hon Mulder?
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, I am sorry to have to intervene. There are two members at the back here who are repeatedly shouting the same slogan, "drugs, drugs, drugs". [Laughter.] The one... [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Yes, hon Mulder, I am still listening to you.
Dr C P MULDER: One of them has just referred to the hon member at the podium, saying "you are high." I would suggest that that is unparliamentary, and I would ask you to rule that that statement be withdrawn. And please instruct their Whips to tell them to keep quiet and behave.
The SPEAKER: I don't know who the hon members are, but I request hon members in that corner to lower their voices. I still have outstanding business to attend to in relation to that corner.
Ms N R MASHABELA: Speaker, there is a female choir almost every day... by Mafu and Mabe. [Interjections.] Please, listen! Listen!
The SPEAKER: Hon Mashabela, please take your seat.
Ms N R MASHABELA: No, we are unable to hear important inputs by members because of the noise there. They are always singing with discord, barking like mad dogs.
The SPEAKER: Hon Mashabela, please take your seat.
Ms N R MASHABELA: No, they must stop this now.
The SPEAKER: Hon Mashabela, please take your seat!
Ms N R MASHABELA: No, we are tired of this choir this side.
Mr M MASINA: Hon Speaker...
The SPEAKER: Hon Masina, what is the problem?
Mr M MASINA: Hon Speaker, is the member prepared to take a question about drugs in his church?
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane, are you prepared to take a question?
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: No. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: He is not. Hon Sisulu?
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Hon Speaker, I just need some clarity. The hon Mulder has said that one of the members there is saying that the hon member is high. He is on a platform. He is high, so I don't understand what the issue is! [Laughter.]
The SPEAKER: No, hon Sisulu, please! [Interjections.]
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, may I address you on a point of order?
The SPEAKER: What is the point of order, hon Mulder?
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, I know the hon Minister is trying to make a joke, but it is not funny. [Interjections.] No, it's not! A suggestion that the hon member is high on drugs while speaking in Parliament is unparliamentary. I suggest that you enquire from that member who said that, and ask her to withdraw.
The SPEAKER: You didn't name a member.
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, if the member had the guts to say it, I guess the member has the guts to stand up as well. [Interjections.] You!
The SPEAKER: Is there an hon member who is ready to rise and own up to having said that the hon member is high? [Interjections.] I would like the hon member to withdraw that statement.
Ms T MAHAMBEHLALA: Hon Speaker, I did not mention anything about being high. I know nothing about being high. I heard it for the first time.
The SPEAKER: What do you know?
Ms T MAHAMBEHLALA: I know about drugs found in hon Maimane's church. It is here. That I know.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Point of order...
The SPEAKER: Okay, can you just withdraw that, hon member? Hon Mahambahlala, can you withdraw your statement, whatever it is about, about drugs... Just withdraw it, hon member.
Ms T MAHAMBEHLALA: Hon Speaker...
The SPEAKER: No, sisi, just withdraw, because you had no reason to be shouting "drugs" when you are sitting there and the hon Leader of the Opposition is speaking.
Ms T MAHAMBEHLALA: Hon Speaker, I withdraw saying that drugs were found in hon Maimane's church.
The SPEAKER: Okay. Thank you. Hon Maimane, please conclude your speech. [Interjections.]
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Hon Speaker, this motion is absolutely important. It is important because the people of this country... [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! We want to hear the end of the speech.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: The people of this country have an opportunity to decide on whether their lives are getting better or worse under President Zuma.
All I can see is that here is a President who is willing to break every rule to stay out of jail, to build a house for himself using taxpayers' money, and then stand before the people of this country and say that he refuses to pay the money back.
Hon Speaker, hon members, South Africans understand more importantly that a day is coming when they will put a vote of no confidence in the party that will defend a person who is trying to stay out of jail. They will vote for a party that fights against corruption. They will choose a party that fights for jobs and fights for opportunities. They will choose a party one day that wants to put power back into the hands of the people of this country. They will vote for the DA, and that day is coming! Let us vote President Zuma out of here! I thank you.
The MINISTER IN THE PRESIDENCY: Madam Speaker and hon members, Sunday was really the Ides of March as we woke up to the tragic news that our esteemed Cabinet Colleague and Comrade Collins Chabane had passed away in a horrific car accident on the N1. We wish to convey our acknowledgment and appreciation for the condolences that have been send to the ANC and this government and to those that have been sent directed to the families.
For the business of the day, Madam Speaker, let us recognise this motion of no confidence in the President for what it is. A desperate attempt by a party has nothing to offer its country and the few areas that it governs. [Applause.] We will show that this motion is without substance. No sooner had a similar motion been withdrawn two weeks ago, than another one is proposed by a party that was clearly behind the first attempt, using the vulnerability of a party that has only two representatives in a 400 Member Parliament.[Applause.] The proposers of this motion have told everyone who cares to listen that the economy is at its weakest point in recent history. The opposition then takes a huge leap forward and attributes the economic challenges of the globe to one person, President Zuma.
The facts are, in 2007-08 economic crisis was one of the worst since the great depression of the 1920s. And South Africa did not escape the devastating impact. To claim some form of exceptionalism from the economic realities of the globe is wrong and shortsighted. The global economy went from a gross domestic product, GDP, growth rate of 5,2% in 2007 to 0,7% in 2009. Advanced economies contracted by 3,5%; Central and Eastern Europe economies by 3,6%; the Euro zone by 4,4%; Latin America and the Caribbean's by 1,5%.
The global economy bounced back to 4,9% only to contract back from 2011 onwards. Countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy, Spain, Puerto Rico, Croatia, Ireland, Netherland, Slovenia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland have battled to recover from the economic crisis and have experienced negative growth rates for two or more years over the past four years.[Applause.] South Africa's economic growth has also tracked the global economy and has remained below its pre-crisis level.
The charge by the Official Opposition that unemployment has escalated to unprecedented levels is equally flawed. Whiles jobs were lost during this crisis, in 2014 our country has actually managed to employ even more people than they were employed in years when jobs were lost, implying that there is recovery. For an example, the quarterly labour force survey has indicated that the full impact of the recession that manifested itself in the fourth quarter of 2009, saw South Africa shed almost a 1 million jobs from a high of 14,4 million in the fourth quarter 2008 to a low point of 13,6 million in 2009. But by the fourth quarter of 2014 the number of employees had bounced back to 15,3 million people. So, this is indicates that there is a promise that we are going to be turning around this economy.[ Applause.]
If the members of the Official Opposition had taken the trouble to read, they would have discovered all these facts that I have just highlighted. It may even be that they did in fact read, but were not going to led facts stand in the way of a good story. What is the story in Western Cape where they are governing? If you look at the municipal background of employment numbers, it tells a very fascination story about the DA. In 2013 the City of Cape Town had a higher level of unemployment than in 2008. It stood at 25% in 2013 compared to 19,2% in 2008. In Winelands District Municipality it is now at 22,2% from 16,4%.
Look at what the ANC is capable to do in some of the districts under its control. Mopani District in Limpopo has reduced unemployment from 26,7% to 18,8% today; eThekwini Municipality from 17% to 16% this year. There is no denial that unemployment is a serious problem facing our country and it should not be used a political football. It requires government across all spheres to work together. It requires company executives and trade unions to find a solution on wages and other challenges using instruments that our democratic government has availed to resolve this industrial challenge.
The challenges of electricity shortage that we are experiencing now have a negative impact on our economy, but as we have said there are plans that we have. President Zuma's, government over the last 5 year, has spent about R1 trillion on infrastructure development, indicating that we are in fact doing the right things. For us the message is very clear, contrary to the wishes of the Official Opposition, South Africa has weathered the storms of 2008 financial and economic crisis much better that many of the modern economies around the globe.
Challenges of unemployment, poverty and inequality persist, but we have a National Development Plan, NDP, to help us address all these challenges. There is the NDP, a plan, which we believe even opposition parties support. Let us all focus our energies in implementing this plan. But there is one lesson that we should all learn from this. You cannot keep on doing the same thing, the same way thinking that you will have different result.
At the end of this debate, after much noise from the opposition parties, as sure as the sun will rise from the east, President Zuma will still be the President of the Republic of South Africa. [Applause.] I wish members of the opposition could learn and live with that fact. Two things may happen before their will is realised. First the pigs would have flown and secondly would have grown teeth. In short it isn't going to happen. Thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, may I address you on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: What is the point of order, hon member?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, part of Parliament's duty in terms of the Constitution is to facilitate public involvement in the debates in this House. I would like you to please investigate why channel 408 - which is parliamentary channel - has found fit to put a whole lot of the other stuff and is not broadcasting the very important debate we are having in the House today. [Interjections.] And this goes to the very heart of the complaints that were made about why it is essential that outside broadcasters be allowed to have access to a feed. Because I certainly think a motion of no confidence in the President would take precedence over question being answered the Minister in the NCOP.
Nks N P SONTI: Somlomo, ndiyabulela ngokundinika eli thuba. Okokuqala mna ndithi lo tata, uMongameli, hayi makakhe aphumle azibeke phantsi intambo. Akazitsali kakuhle. Nditsho ndimele i-EFF, kwaye njengokuba ke ndimi kule ndawo nje, ndiza kuthethela iMarikana. Into awayenzayo eMarikana yokubulala abantwana babantu befuna amalungelo aba, befuna i-R12 500 kuphela, kodwa wakwazi yena ukuba athumele amapolisa aze kubabulala kuba bafuna imali le angafuni kubanika yona. Ndithi makahlale phantsi aphumle. Ukhohlakele! Uthumela amapolisa endaweni yokuba abanike le nto incinane bayifunayo. Nabo bafuna ukuphila njengaye. Bafuna ukwakha izibaya nabo.
Ms M T KUBAYI: Speaker, point of order!
The SPEAKER: Hon Member, there is a point of order, please take your seat. Hon Kubayi.
Ms M T KUBAYI: Speaker, the hon member just said that the President killed people in Marikana.
The SPEAKER: I beg your pardon.
Ms M T KUBAYI: The hon member in her speech has just said the President killed people in Marikana. She needs to withdraw that statement because it is wrong.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, please take your seat. I want to deal with the issue that has been raised. Hon Sonti, please ...
Nks N P SONTI: Inokuba akasazi isiXhosa esi ndisithethayo. Andizi kuthetha siNgesi.
USOMLOMO: Hayi, hlala phantsi, sisi.
The honourable member is pointing out that you are making an allegation that the President sent troops to go and kill people in Marikana. Now, ...
...leyo ke into sisi sicela nje ...
... in terms of the Rules again, that you withdraw, ...
... emva koko uthethe uqhube.
Nks N P SONTI: Ndithi ukuba isiXhosa akasazi, okanye mandiphinde nditsho okanye zebamcacisele uthumele amapolisa. Lipolisa elibulele umntu. Ipolisa lelikabani?
Nks N P SONTI: Ukuthi withdraw kukurhoxisa, andithi? Angeke ndirhoxise.
USOMLOMO: Ukuba awurhoxisi, ndicela usuke ke sisi kwelo qonga.
Nks N P SONTI: Ndisuke, andithi?
Nks N P SONTI: Imnandi loo nto, ndinixelele.
The SPEAKER: Hon members, take your seats. I now invite hon Nkomo.
Ms S J NKOMO: Thank you very much, hon ....
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker? May you please recognise me?
The SPEAKER: What is your issue, hon Ndlozi?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, you never expressed yourself on the point of order that was put forward earlier.
The SPEAKER: Which point of order?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: That the motion in debate at the moment is a substantial motion to which members are taking an opportunity to explain why in their perspective they think the President must step down and part of those reasons is that they think the President is a thief.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, I don't, I'm not ...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Please, hon Speaker, rule as to whether it is part of a substantial motion, because you said we can't and therefore we must come back to do a substantial motion.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, ...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: We are arguing that this is an opportunity to say that.
The SPEAKER: ... you are not allowed to utter unparliamentary statements in the Chamber on the pretext that it is motivating your point. That is why hon Maimane accepted to withdraw. Can you please just take your seat and let us proceed with the debate. As it is, the hon member who just left the podium has broken the Rules. Hon Malema, please take your seat.
Mr S J MALEMA: Can I address you, Speaker, please?
The SPEAKER: Please take your seat, hon Malema.
Mr S J MALEMA: Please, hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, please take your seat.
Mr S J MALEMA: I have a different point to raise.
The SPEAKER: I really do not want to have a fight with you. Please take your seat.
Mr S J MALEMA: No, no, I also don't want to fight with you.
The SPEAKER: Take your seat, then I will recognise you. I want to recognise you when you have raised your hand properly. I now recognise you, hon Malema. [Laughter.]
Mr S J MALEMA: Hon Speaker, the whole country can see that you have a problem with me.
The SPEAKER: What problem?
Mr S J MALEMA: Because ... - no, because, and Chief Whip, don't do that because you stood up without raising a hand and you spoke and she never did that to you. You are a Chief Whip who is supposed to be guiding how we should do these things.
The SPEAKER: Hon Malema, raise your point.
Mr S J MALEMA: The point I‘m raising, hon Speaker, I'm asking, and it is not a decision that you can take now, the statement you made about the ruling of the Constitutional Court and how the court decisions affect us can be misinterpreted, and at an appropriate moment, please find a way of clarifying that.
The SPEAKER: Alright.
Secondly, the hon Sonti, when she says amaShangaan, and this is my experience, she does not refer to Xitsonga or Shangaan speaking people. When they say amaShangaan, they are referring to foreigners. [Interjections.] She says you are selling toilets to foreigners. I had a problem with that in a meeting I addressed in a community in Gauteng where they said people are giving amaShangaan houses here and I asked them what do they mean by amaShangaan and they said they were referring to foreigners. They are giving houses to foreigners. It is a language commonly used by ordinary people. You won't know because you don't interact with ordinary people.
Ms S J NKOMO: Speaker, I just wanted to inform the Speaker that 10 seconds had been taken away from my time. I would like it to be returned.
The SPEAKER: The Table staff must please give her back her 10 seconds.
Ms S J NKOMO: Speaker, since taking office in 2009, President Zuma has given strong direction on some issues, but on others our President has lacked the political will to lead. He has spoken from both sides of his mouth and led with ambiguity, if not indifference.
This has created a deeper problem for South Africa, for the President has set the example for his administration. Coupled with the absence accountability, it has opened the door to corruption and a breakdown in government. Under the President's watch, South Africa has begun to experience excessive delays in service delivery, threats to foreign direct investment, escalating criminality, and the burgeoning of government. We are faced with social, political, and economic instability.
In response, the President has preferred rhetoric over action, and government follows the lead by talking more and delivering less. The Expanded Public Works Programme is a prime example. There are constant reports of people being forced to join the ANC before being considered for work opportunities, yet no investigation is done. [Interjections.] Such blatant corruption is antithetical to democracy.
However, democracy cannot thrive under this administration. That has been proven by Nkandla, by our President denying any measures of responsibility for the gross misuse of public funds spent on his home, despite his own Cabinet being in charge of the whole process. There is no place for ambiguity or indifference over Nkandla. The Public Protector made it clear that the President unduly benefited and must pay back a reasonable portion of the cost to the state. Instead of acknowledging this, the President's Cabinet and the President's party have sought to discredit both the report and the Public Protector.
We have had Nkandla, and the President remains. We have had Marikana, and the President remains. We have had armed security forces entering this House on the order of the national chairperson of the ruling party using her authority as the Speaker of the National Assembly, and the President not only remains, but he laughs.
The IFP respects the Office of the President. It is painful to see it being challenged but painful too to see it being comprised. For now, as the IFP, we cannot support this motion, though our country is paying the price. We are on the wrong trajectory, and a bold, difficult and selfless act is needed to break from this path and set us on a path of healing. I thank you. [Applause.]
Prof N M KHUBISA: Speaker and hon members, no matter how you try and explain it, the issue of Nkandla is still going to haunt us for many years to come. [Interjections.]
Wherever you go, people speak about it. His Excellency the President spoke about it, and he said blatantly that he is not going to pay. I must say that it will still be with us. After all, Adv Thuli Madonsela was very generous in her recommendations: She said pay the portion because you benefited unduly. What is a portion? The President would have known better; the portion would have been paid by now. Pay the portion. [Interjections.] She said so. [Interjections.] Fowl run, chicken run, kraal, swimming pool - this is what the taxpayer is paying for.
South Africans wake up every morning with the hope that things would turn for the better but, for the majority of them, it is bizarre. Their lives remain the same, with minimum or no opportunities at all. This undoubtedly undermines our democracy. Millions of South Africans are unemployed, poor, illiterate, and plagued by hunger, starvation, and many social ills, including the scarcity of resources to empower them and make their lives better. We need to revolutionise public and private institutions so that they better serve the interests of our people.
The instability that characterises the National Prosecuting Authority, NPA, the Special Investigating Unit, the Hawks, and many other critical units tells the story of ineffective structures of governance which spill over to every delicate organ of state. This inability has continued unabatedly. [Interjections.]
The NFP is unhappy about the lacklustre approach of government with regard to creating conditions that are conducive to job creation, poverty alleviation, and the reduction of unemployment. The government has not taken robust measures aimed at boosting and jump starting economic growth. Our economy is very sluggish. It keeps ailing, and no bold steps are taken to boost investor confidence. The unemployment level is above 36%. The projection is that the economy will not grow above 2% by the end of this financial year. That clearly tells a story that a lot a people will be jobless by the end of the financial year - and that stops at the door of the President.
This is a bleak story that stops at the door of President Zuma and his Cabinet. This bleak story epitomises the government that the President leads. Very little is being done to provide the financial injection that they need to grow to small businesses and entrepreneurs. South Africa is yearning for visionary and purpose-driven leadership, but the President has none to offer. A little more than 15 million people pay tax in our country. There are increases in tax and fuel. No bold measures have been taken to vigorously clamp down on fraudulent tendencies and corruption in our country.
Corruption is rampant in the public and corporate sectors. The ANC-led government is not doing enough to curb corruption in nonprofit organisations and nongovernmental organisations. They are given money, and they don't use it. Most of the corporate executives earn hefty salaries and huge bonuses, yet they fail to perform and deliver. What has happened with Eskom? If you think the NFP is exaggerating, go to Eskom, the home of load shedding, and see how much executives earn, yet ordinary people are suffering.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker and hon members, John Milton in his poem entitled "On his Blindness" meditates on his own tragic loss of sight. It is not his inability to see that he bemoans but, more substantially, he bemoans his loss of relevance. He aptly captures it when he says in the opening line of the sonnet, "when I consider how my light is spent".
To the DA who put this motion of no confidence in the President before us, your light is spent. [Interjections.] Right now, the ratings on Twitter indicate, hon Maimane, that you are a desperate man trying to prop up a desperate party ... [Applause.] ... that you are clutching for relevance. Milton speaks of his inability to see with the inner eye and his lack of ability to reason. In the case of the DA, it would be the refusal to see. In plain English, it is called an ingrained prejudice.
It is well known that the DA has an axe to grind with President Zuma, has had it for a long time - long before he became President. The DA has made it its business to attack, and hurl insults at, the President. What clearly informs the psyche of the DA is nothing more than a deep-rooted hatred of the person of the President, which he himself has called playing the man, not the ball. "Play the ball, not the man." [Interjections.] Hon Maimane comes here and pretends that the DA has always honoured our poor President Mandela. It was the same kind of treatment that he got which you are giving now to President Zuma, which is why he called you a Mickey Mouse party. I wonder why. You are still a Mickey Mouse party even now. [Interjections.]
I don't mind. If Goofy represents Madiba, I don't mind. You are still Mickey Mouse. [Interjections.] What is also instructive is how you use selective examples about what it is that you want to put on the table. In the Western Cape, for the rest of 2014, this province lost 64 000 jobs whilst other provinces were growing. [Interjections.] Why do you forget that? Why do you forget that? [Interjections.] Here we are, 10 months after our voters returned the ANC and its President to power with a 62% landslide, debating something that the voters had so eloquently concluded on, but we do so as an affirmation of the Constitution that the ANC bequeathed to all of you, a Constitution that is both tolerant and accommodating even to the most misguided and insecure, such as you.
Hon Maimane, out there on Twitter, everybody is telling the story that you are being propped up by your Chief Whip behind there.
Mr D J MAYNIER: Speaker ...
The SPEAKER: Order! Hon Minister, just take a seat and pause a little.
Mr D J MAYNIER: Will the Minister, who zoomed around this country on a Gulfstream executive jet and burnt R11 million worth zooming around this country and is lecturing us on wasteful expenditure, be prepared to take a question? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: No, hon Maynier! Hon Maynier, please take your seat. You clearly have no point of order. Hon Sisulu, continue. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: I want to put it on record in Hansard that that is a batty lunatic of a Member of Parliament. [Interjections.] The voters ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Speaker, on a point of order: A seasoned veteran, and I mean it in the nicest possible way, of Parliament would know that that is unparliamentary, and I'd ask you that she withdraws it. Thank you.
The SPEAKER: Hon Sisulu, please withdraw.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, when people make batty gestures when we have agreed in this House ...
The SPEAKER: Hon Sisulu, please ...
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: ... they are nothing but batty. I would like ... [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Sisulu, just withdraw, please.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: I withdraw that the member is indeed batty. [Interjections.] May I continue, Speaker?
The SPEAKER: Please continue.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: He is still batty, and you allow it.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, with respect ...
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: No, Madam Speaker, I also need your protection. No gestures are allowed here. [Interjections.] You allowed his gestures and, at the same, time ...
The SPEAKER: Hon Sisulu, take your seat so I can listen to the hon Steenhuisen.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I would venture to say to you that the word "batty" is within the bounds of parliamentary privilege, and I accept that. It was the hon Deputy Minister's assertion that the hon Maynier is a "lunatic" that she must withdraw.
The SPEAKER: Which she withdrew but why are you calling her a Deputy Minister? She's a Minister.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Minister. The fact is that she withdrew that he was batty. She didn't withdraw the fact that she had called him a lunatic, and I ask that she withdraws it.
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, I thought you withdrew "lunatic" because that is what is unparliamentary.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, may I request you, please. You have made a ruling on numerous occasions that gestures that are demeaning are not allowed. You have allowed it. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: No, fine! Fine, hon Minister. Just withdraw the "lunatic" part. Hon Minister, withdraw "lunatic".
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: I will withdraw "lunatic" from those people who behave like bats and, therefore, I would call them "batty". [Interjections.] May I please continue?
The SPEAKER: Please continue now.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: This is a desperate attempt ...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Speaker, on a point of order: We must withdraw unparliamentary remarks unconditionally. The hon Minister must withdraw unconditionally that other hon members here are lunatics. [Interjections.] Unconditionally!
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, I am satisfied that the Minister has withdrawn "lunatic". [Interjections.] Please proceed, hon Sisulu.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, I think I have lost some minutes whilst you were correcting them.
The SPEAKER: Yes, you will get them back.
Ms E N LOUW: Speaker, on a point of order ...
The SPEAKER: Please restore the minutes that are missing.
Ms E N LOUW: On a point of order, Speaker: I have noted whilst the hon Ndlozi was raising his point of order, firstly, the Minister was still on her feet, and ...
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, please take a seat. Just take a seat.
Ms E N LOUW: This clearly doesn't show respect for the member that is standing and raising the point of order. Secondly, I have noted that, last week, you asked the President to withdraw, and he clearly didn't hear you, and now again you have asked the Minister to withdraw, and she didn't want to withdraw unconditionally. I think, Speaker, it is time that you emphasise that, when you are making rulings, even Ministers and the President must obey rulings that come from your table. I thank you. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: I thank you, hon member. Hon Minister, please proceed.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: This is a misguided ...
Mr M G P LEKOTA: On a point of order, Madam Speaker: It is very important - it is very important - that you earn our respect. If therefore you make a ruling that the Minister should withdraw the word "lunatic", she cannot make it conditional by saying: I will withdraw it to those people who are not waving their hands or something. If that word is unparliamentary, please, Madam Speaker, make it unconditional so that all of us can then obey your rulings knowing that you will be impartial on the question. [Interjections.] I do want say, Madam Speaker, if you allow the Minister to say she will withdraw it to those who are this, that, and the other, then that is not a withdrawal. That is not the ruling you have made. Your ruling is that "lunatic" must be withdrawn, and let it be withdrawn. Thank you.
The SPEAKER: By the time hon Ndlozi raised the issue of the Minister being conditional in her withdrawal, I had already heard the Minister withdraw "lunatic", but she made some statements. So, the unconditional withdrawal of the word "lunatic", I am convinced she had already done. [Interjections.] She had already withdrawn. Hon members, can I please ask the Minister conclude her speech?
Ms D CARTER: Speaker, there was not an unconditional withdrawal. Earlier on, EFF members were asked to leave the podium for not wanting an unconditional withdrawal, so the Minister must give an unconditional withdrawal.
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, can you give an unconditional withdrawal?
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Speaker ...
The SPEAKER: No, hon Groenewald. Hon Groenewald, please take a seat. [Interjections.]
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Speaker, u weet nie eens wat ek wil sê nie! [Speaker, you do not even know what I would like to say!]
The SPEAKER: Hon Groenewald!
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Speaker, hier is lede hier agter wat ons vloek. [Speaker, members at the back here are swearing at us.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Groenewald, please take your seat.
Dr P J GROENEWALD: Speaker, hier is 'n agb lid hier agter wat ons vloek, en ek sal dit nie duld nie. [Speaker, a member here at the back is swearing at us, and I will not tolerate it.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Groenewald, I actually have an outstanding case against the hon Groenewald on that same type of matter, so please allow me to proceed with the point of order raised by the hon member. I had addressed myself to the hon Minister. Hon Minister, please withdraw unconditionally.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Madam Speaker, you heard me correctly. I did withdraw. I therefore also ask your protection against the gestures that are being conducted when, in fact, we had agreed that those gestures ... [Interjections.] Speaker, there it is.
The SPEAKER: No, it is alright. [Laughter.] I think I will leave the hon members to enjoy themselves. Just proceed and finish your speech. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: I think, Speaker, we should ...
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order, Madam Speaker ...
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen! Please, hon Steenhuisen, can you just assist me to proceed with this House.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: I am trying to, but the Minister has not withdrawn.
The SPEAKER: No, please! No, she has withdrawn. What more do you want?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: She didn't. She just used the opportunity to withdraw to have a go at hon Maynier and about gestures. She has not withdrawn unconditionally.
The SPEAKER: Gestures are wrong, hon Steenhuisen.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: That is fine. You must rule against hon Maynier then, but it doesn't take away from the fact that Minister Sisulu must withdraw unconditionally.
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister Sisulu has withdrawn. I am satisfied with that. [Interjections.] I have not even ruled on the issue of the gestures. Hon Ndlozi, please take your seat. Take your seat, hon Ndlozi! I want to proceed and finish with this debate.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Speaker, I am rising on a point of order. Do the Rules not allow me?
The SPEAKER: What do you want?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: A point of order, that is what I said.
The SPEAKER: What is the point of order?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Speaker, we really have a problem. I put it to you, Speaker, that you are spoiling the Ministers. They look like the favoured children to you. [Interjections.] Your favourite children, you treat them with inconsistency in relation to how you treat us. If I was at that platform, I put it to you that you would have said I must say the words: I withdraw unconditionally.
The SPEAKER: No, I have never said that.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: In the event that I didn't, you would have said that I should leave the podium. In the event that I didn't leave the podium, you would have asked the black and whites to come and remove me. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi ...
Mr M Q NDLOZI: I put it to you, Speaker, you are ... this is favouritism. They are spoilt children. They can come and say anything. You tiptoe and egg-walk around them. The hon Minister must withdraw unconditionally. She must say "I withdraw unconditionally" and stop asking for protection!
The SPEAKER: She has withdrawn, and I am not going back there.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: She is very protected - in fact, much more protected than the rest of us!
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, please, don't take us around and around.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: She has not withdrawn!
The SPEAKER: In fact, there are no children here. [Interjections.] Hon Minister.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, this is just a desperate attempt. Even Agang, a 0,2% party, in retrospect was much cleverer. They merely scuppered off with their tail between their legs when they realised that this was a desperate attempt.
The voters indicated their confidence in the ANC and in the President in recognition of the ANC's achievements. Even when the hon Maimane was standing here during the debate on the state of the nation address, he could not but acknowledge that we have made incredible strides in this country. Most of our citizens are living with dignity. We have provided houses, education, health and access to land. We are doing this at a rate unprecedented in the world and free. South Africans who voted the ANC into government know that they will do this again and vote us into power in the next five years and every five years thereafter. [Applause.]
Quite frankly, what we have here is process of Parliament that has become the latest casualty of the opposition stampede for self-promotion. It says something about a Parliament that is gradually being turned into the theatrics which hon Shenge spoke about in his state of the nation address speech, rather than a place established to legislate ... [Interjections.] Speaker, please can you protect me from this noise? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Minister, you are protected. Just ignore them and complete your speech. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Accountability is a word that is bandied about by the opposition - only applying to the ANC. It applies to each and every Member of Parliament, MP, who is here because we are all paid by the taxpayer's money. The opposition imagines that the taxpayer's money is used for them, and it pays for the times that they are captured in the media and they throw the theatrics that hon Shenge was talking about.
Being a Member of Parliament is much more than the opportunity to promote the self. [Interjections.] Now, let me tell what we have ... my brother has nothing to do this!
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: He paid the price!
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: My brother did not take ...
The SPEAKER: Hon members, please allow hon Sisulu to finish. Don't be distracted, hon Sisulu.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, I think personal slights like that are uncomfortable, are unparliamentary. I will not talk about the hon Esterhuizen's wife or where that wife comes from, so I would like him to refrain from that. [Interjections.]
Now, let me tell you what has been achieved by the ANC, the MPs, and the government under President Zuma, specifically in relation to issues that were raised here in the motion which, in relation to the motion, include that corruption has spiralled out of control. Indeed, corruption is completely unacceptable wherever it rears its head, whatever the level it is at. We, all of us, ought to be extremely concerned at all times. We, in the ANC, have expressed ourselves and our concern about this matter and have highlighted it at every step of the way. [Interjections.] Specifically the President has done so every time he has been here for his state of the nation address.
Just to put the matter into perspective: Corruption existed in this country long before the democratic dispensation. Our concern is that it should not have settled into a modus operandi of this dispensation, nor should it have been allowed to continue. What we seek to emphasise, which is very important, is that corruption is a societal problem and can only be solved by all of us dealing with it decisively. [Interjections.] It is by its very nature very pervasive, and it corrodes every sphere of society, whether it is civil society, the private sector, or the public sector.
Hon members, let me tell you what this government has done in the judicial institutions. The state has increased its capacity to curb corruption. The capacity of the Special Investigating Unit, SIU, has grown from 70 staff members in 2003 to 600 currently. From 2003, the SIU has saved government R1,6 billion. [Interjections.] It has prevented future losses of R16 billion. That is what we have done. It has recovered R87 million. [Applause.] In addition, it has stopped R2,06 billion, of which R1,8 billion is in one department alone. As at 31 December, the President had signed ... [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Your time has expired, hon Minister.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Speaker, this is a frivolous motion! This is a frivolous motion, and the people of this country see it for what it is!
The SPEAKER: Your time has expired, hon Minister!
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: It should be thrown in the rubbish bin! Thank you very much. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Dr B HOLOMISA: Hon Speaker and hon members, South Africa finds itself faced with a leadership crisis of epic proportions. On the one hand our economy is in shambles due to poor leadership and economic mismanagement and on the other hand corruption has spiralled out of control. Fanning the flames is the fact that not only is President Zuma at the centre of this mayhem, but in many instances he is actually the cause.
Over the past decade, millions of the taxpayers' money have been spent trying to ensure that President Zuma never gets his day in court to answer numerous corruption charges against him. We therefore find ourselves at the precipice of a decision. We must stop burying our heads in the sand and confront the problem head-on.
The President is at the centre of the problem facing South Africa today. It is for these reasons that the UDM believes that the time has come for us to discuss an amicable exit strategy for President Zuma. [Laughter.] In the meantime, can the ruling party please take back President Zuma and keep him as far away from running the country as possible. [Applause.]
The fact that we have to request the ANC to take back its President because our people are unable to remove him from the office no matter how dissatisfied they are with his performance, points to the current flaw of our electoral system where the party rather than the people, elects the president. The UDM therefore, proposes that we change our electoral system to ensure that people rather than the party directly elect the president. As long as the status quo remains, we will continue to sit with presidents who do as they please and get away with it precisely because they are able to dispense patronage to pacify their political masters.
Mnr P J J GROENEWALD: Agb Speaker, die President van Suid-Afrika word nie gekies deur die ANC nie, die President van Suid-Afrika word in terme van artikel 86 van die Grondwet gekies deur hierdie Raad, die Nasional Vergadering. As ons gaan kyk na bylae 3 dan is dit ook baie duidelik dat die President gekies word deur 'n geheime stemming, nie deur die ANC nie. Juis daarom is die President verantwoordelik en verantwoordbaar en het hy sy verpligtinge teenoor die Nasionale Vergadering.
Dit is wat dit behoort te wees. Daar is 'n leemte in die Grondwet in terme van artikel 102(2) wat sê dat as daar 'n mosie van wantroue bespreek word dat dit nie ook in geheim is nie. Want, ek dink, die ANC en die President sal 'n verrassing kry as daar wel 'n geheime stemming is en daardie leemte moet ook reggestel word.
Die agb President hardloop weg van sy verantwoordelikhede. In hierdie Raadsaal was daar 'n bespreking en 'n debat gewees oor soldate van Suid-Afrika wat gesterf het in die Sentraal-Afrikaanse Republiek. Waar was die President? Hy's nogal die opperbevelhebber van die weermag - hy hardloop weg van sy verpligtinge; hy's nie hierso nie.
Daar was 'n debat in hierdie Raadsaal gewees oor sy vriende wat ongemagtig op Waterkloof gaan land het. Die debat vind plaas; waar is die agb President? Hy hardloop weg van sy verpligtinge en verantwoordelikhede teenoor hierdie NV.
Daar was 'n debat gewees in hierdie selfde Raadsaal en vrae wat gevra word oor Nkandla, sy persoonlike huis; hy sit hierso. Ek vra vir hom verlede week, "antwoord die vraag", maar hy hardloop weg. Hy antwoord nie sy vrae nie. Hier is vandag 'n debat oor 'n mosie van wantroue in die agb President; waar is hy? Hy hardloop weg. Ons het 'n vlugtige President in Suid-Afrika.
Hon Speaker, you know in Hollywood they made a movie titled The Runaway Bride. It's about a bride who couldn't accept the responsibilities and the accountability of a marriage. And on her wedding day she ran away - the runaway bride.
In South Africa, we have a runaway President. He runs away from debates on the Central African Republic; he runs away from a debate on the Gupta scandal at Waterkloof. We have a runaway President to answer on spending of taxpayers' money in Nkandla. The runaway President of South Africa. Unfortunately the difference between Hollywood and South Africa is in South Africa it's a reality. The FF Plus cannot have trust in a runaway President. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr M G P LEKOTA: Hon Speaker, on 20 November 2012, we appeared before Justice Dennis Davis and debated this issue before the court. It was a case of the ruling party that a motion of no confidence in the President is frivolous and not supported by facts. The court on the hand held that such a debate is a very stuff of deliberative democracy. In that judgement, the judge held that in 1994 South Africa boldly began its journey away from a society based on authority to one predicated upon justification from diktat to deliberation, and from arbitrary assertion to rational consideration. Today we are busy with this exercise guided by that judgement of the court.
Cope must, firstly, say that the President has signally failed the country and that he has lost the confidence of the nation because he has undermined the Constitution at every available turn instead of standing up to the dictates of his own oath of office. Secondly, he has created a mountain of debt which is now at 47% of the GDP. This is an excessive huge burden and generation will have to shoulder this humongous burden with enormous pain and strain. Thirdly, there's political interference in the criminal justice system that sees the different arms of the police fighting one another rather than fighting criminals who are terrorising the nation. There are on average today 50 armed robberies in our country and four people murdered everyday. Fourthly, political appointments of incompetent cadres are destroying parastatals and institutions of state. Fifthly, there's ducking and diving on the massive expenditure of R250 million on his private estate undertaken right in front of his own eyes and the eyes of the nation. Sixthly, there's rampant corruption and lawlessness which has seen over R100 billion lost in futile and fruitless expenditure since 2009. Seventhly, his total failure to reverse the ever-widening inequality has seen the rich becoming extremely rich and the poor and the jobless remaining mired indefinitely in poverty and hopelessness.
For these reasons and for so many others that I do not have time to deal with today, we will not vote against this motion. We will support it and will continue to urge you, in the ruling party ranks, to move along with the rest of us because it is the only way in which we can save ourselves as a nation. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr S N SWART: Madam Speaker, the ACDP would like to remind the House of the straight-talking US President Harry S Truman who had a sign on his desk with this inscription: the buck stops here. As the president, he chose to accept personal responsibility for the way his country was governed. We believe the buck stops with President Zuma for the failings of his administration as pointed out in the notice of motion.
Why are we saying that? During the Budget Speech, very disappointing economic growth projections of 2% were announced. We know that South Africa is caught in a low growth path. Of course some of this is due to our past. Low skills, poor public service, poverty and inequality and yes, some blame can be apportioned to the slow down in the world economy and the reduced demand for commodities but not all.
The President must accept responsibility for policy decisions resulting in slow economic growth and his unfortunate penchant for deferring blame is not credible and must come to an end. To cite two straight forward examples, the President has blamed the Eskom crisis on apartheid and the Nkandla perceptions on the media. This is totally unacceptable and he makes these allegations when we know firstly that the Public Protector is very clear on Nkandla. Secondly, former President Mbeki himself, admitted that his government had not listened to Eskom when it wanted to increase generating capacity.
As the longest serving member of the Portfolio Committee on Justice I am shocked by what I have witnessed over the years regarding the politicisation and the weakening of the law enforcement agencies. The rot started with the disbanding of the Scorpions. This highly effective corruption busting unit was disbanded because it was successful in prosecuting politically- connected ANC persons. This happened under President Zuma's watch.
It is apparent that no institution is safe from political interference. This includes the National Prosecuting Authority, NPA, the SA Police Service, SAPS, the Hawks, SA Revenue Service, Sars and now even Independent Police Investigative Directorate, Ipid with its head, Robert Mcbride, last week accusing the hon Minister of Police of abusing his powers for illegitimate political reasons in court papers.
The conclusion is inescapable that if you try to touch the President or one of his allies, your neck will be on the block. Now, we are dealing with corruption and the head of Corruption Watch David Lewis said:
This is a huge failure on the part of the political leadership. Even if they're not actually responsible for orchestrating the instability, they have to take responsibility for it.
The buck stops there. To conclude, the ACDP wishes to reiterate that we have no gripe with the President. We do not dislike him; in fact, he is a very affable person. We are however very concerned about the state of our nation on his watch. As the buck stops with President Zuma, we will support the motion of no confidence. I thank you. [Applause.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Hon Speaker, members of this august House, ladies and gentlemen and fellow South Africans, our constitutional scheme is premised on constitutional democracy. It is based on the will of the people and the supremacy of the Constitution. In addition, all institutions of governance are subject to the Constitution and most of them are accountable to Parliament. The constitutional framework establishes the executive to make policy, allocate resources and govern the country; the legislature to make the laws; and an independent judiciary to settle disputes by interpretation of the law. In their wisdom, the founders of the Constitution also established a number of constitutional institutions to deepen and support democracy.
The Public Protector is meant to investigate any maladministration in state affairs; the SA Human Rights Commission promotes respect for human rights; and the Independent Electoral Commission manages elections, to name but a few. There are also other state institutions that are executive based but have adequate independence, such as the Hawks and the National Prosecuting Authority, NPA. Largely, these institutions are meant to support democracy, and ensure that the will of the people and the pronouncements of the Constitution are observed.
Today, we have before us a motion of no confidence in President Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, but what we are actually being called to consider is a motion of no confidence in government itself. As a matter of fact, it is a motion of no confidence in the people of South Africa who vote for the ANC. It is garbage, and we should strongly challenge and reject it with the contempt it deserves.
The South African state, led by President Zuma, is in its very essence defined by the strong institutions where the separation of powers is enforced. It is a principle that this government has jealously guarded, to protect state institutions from being manipulated to serve narrow political agendas. Where there have been instances of abuse of this principle, we have acted swiftly.
Members of the House, it has been under this government that civil society institutions, including nongovernmental organisations, NGOs, have been able to hold the executive to account through activism, mobilisation and in certain cases, even court action. Last year in 2014, we ranked fourth out of 52 countries in the Ibrahim Index of African Governance - an improvement on our ranking of the year before. [Applause.] This year, we ranked 39th in the World Press Freedom Index - an upward move of three ranks. The Interparliamentary Union's Global Parliamentary report noted that our established practices on public participation, openness and transparency could be regarded as exemplary.
During the current President's tenure in office, a number of institutions have received considerable support, showing the commitment of both the President and the ANC government to the continued promotion of a transparent government committed to the principles of democracy. For instance, the SA Human Rights Commission's budget in 2008-09 was R63 million, while in the last financial year it was almost double that. In fact, it amounted to R119,2 million. The Public Protector's budget has grown from R86,4 million in 2008 to R246 million in 2015. In effect, this means that the budget has almost tripled. This is proof of support for the Public Protector's office to fulfill its mandate.
During President Zuma's tenure, the allocation of a separate budget for the Office of the Chief Justice is part of a move to protect the independence of the judiciary. However, this does not mean that the executive cannot express an opinion in disagreeing with a particular judgment. The courts themselves also get diverted on a particular point of law, hence the majority and minority judgments, as well as the appeal system. The courts are independent and impartial, and the ruling party has always respected the constitutional injunction to assist and protect the independence of the courts.
The opposition has been telling us that the heads of the Hawks, NPA and other semi-independent bodies must not be appointed by the executive. Yet, in most democracies such appointments are made by the head of state. In addition, attorney-generals with a similar role to that of the National Director of Public Prosecutions, NDPP, are in some countries members of the executive. It therefore makes one wonder why in South Africa, where the NDPP is not even a member of the executive, this is made an issue.
Listen to this junk; when the respected head of the Special Investigating Unit, SIU, advocate Soni announced his resignation, he emphasised that it was to care for his very ill wife. Instead, we are fed poison that political meddling was responsible for his resignation. What junk!
As a matter of fact, the vote of no confidence must be directed at hon Maimane. He is leading the most divided DA between himself and his Chief Whip. They defied you openly when you entered into an agreement with the Deputy President to bring order to this House. They showed you their middle finger and you could not move but simply comply, unless you would have suffered he same fate of being exiled to study theories of doom like your predecessor, who was described by the madam as not having been able to achieve anything without her. You are the weakest DA leader, hon Maimane. [Interjections.] Where is Mr Seremane? Where is Mr Seremane who used to sit here?
Your members refuse to be subjected to processes of vetting. Why? Must we be worried that such denied vetting processes may lead to a vetting gate that will uncover an assassin gate, the Askari gate, the Vlakplaas gate, maybe even the drug dealership gate or the eThekwini pants down gate? [Interjections.] What is the problem? Is it the eThekwini pants down gate? My last words ... [Time Expired.] [Applause.]
Mr M P GALO: Hon Speaker, Prince Mashele, the author of the book titled Death of Our Society, on page 25, starts by asking a fundamental question as follows:
How do we liberate ourselves from the believe that there is no alternative to the corrupt, incompetent, arrogant and unaccountable government under whose weight the rest of society is collapsing.
This is the question we must answer, not only as party representatives ... [Interjections.]
Mr N L S KWANKWA: Point of order, Speaker!
The SPEAKER: What is the point of order, hon Kwankwa? Hon Galo, can you take a seat, please?
Mr N L S KWANKWA: Can I humbly request the members of the ruling party to contain their excitement ...
The SPEAKER: Alright! Hon members, please let us just come down and allow hon Galo to address us. Hon Galo!
Mr M P GALO: ... That is the question we must answer, not only as party representatives in this House but as a nation, as whole. In the light of the above: We must first and foremost agree as political parties that under the present electoral system, there is no way that one can call for a Vote of No Confidence in the ANC President and succeed because the same President was imposed by the ANC to the people of this country. [Interjections. ]
Therefore, the problem is not President Zuma as an individual but the electoral system itself, and his party. The AIC is not undermining the idea, but it is a fact that any member of this House accounts to his or her political party. Not even voters can remove the President; only his party can do so, as it was the case with former President Thabo Mbeki in September 2008.
How can one be so sure that he or she is doing well for the masses of this country when passing a Vote of No Confidence in the President as an individual while he takes instructions from Luthuli House, not from the people of this country?
The AIC believes that the current electoral system needs to be changed. A system that will allow the direct election of the President by the people should be put in place: A President who will be above party politics and be able to sign laws that are based on the will of the people; a President who will not appoint politically connected people in key positions in the National Prosecuting Authority, NPA, SA Police Service, SAPS, SA Broadcasting Corporation, SABC, and so forth, with the aim of controlling these state organs for narrow political wishes.
The present system is flawed because it allows the ruling party bosses to instruct their members on: How to behave in the legislatures; which Bills to vote for; and how to hold members of the executive accountable. The AIC is aware that there is no perfect electoral system but believes that the introduction of a direct presidential election might assist to bring about a people-centred and people-driven type of governance.
The AIC is not convinced that passing a Vote of No Confidence in an individual will assist in doing away with the political rot facing our country. The role of public representatives ... [Time expired.] [Interjections.] Thank you.
Mr M A PTLOUAMMA: Hon Speaker, let it be know that AgangSA has no confidence in President Zuma but AgangSA has warned that a mere debate supplemented by a meaningless open vote ... [Interjections.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, may I address you?
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi!
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Is it parliamentary for the hon member to come and debate when he withdrew the motion earlier on? [Laughter.]
The SPEAKER: We are very generous to this hon member, so we allowed him to debate indeed. Proceed, hon Plouamma!
Mr M A PLOUAMMA: Hon Speaker, I want to say it has to be known that AgangSA has no confidence in President Zuma but AgangSA has warned that a mere debate supplemented by a meaningless open vote that does not allow members, especially of the ruling party, to vote according to their true convictions serves no purpose. This motion will ultimately have the effect of eroding the objective of serving as a genuine mechanism of keeping the President and the rest of the Cabinet to account.
I just want to emphasise that when we withdrew our motion, we did not withdraw it because we were afraid or our tails were between our legs. We withdrew because we have a court case on 11 May 2015 that will decide on a secret ballot. We know that most of the Members of Parliament are here because they are very scared that if they could vote against President Zuma, they might be hungry in the future since they are here due to political stomachs.
Also, we know and are aware that some Members of Parliament are here not because of quality but owing to favours. So, we want to protect them through the court case of 11 May 2015. All I need to tell you is that the Zuma Presidency epitomise poverty of leadership. His association with the corrupt and fraudsters has made this country a time bomb that is waiting to explode.
The question that we need to ask ourselves is: Where is Zuma's leadership when we have violent protests, when our country is burning? Do we allow ourselves to be dictated by politics of the stomach, choose ways of cowards, when we can just replace President Zuma with a better capable leader? What are we afraid of? Is comradeship more important than our people and country? His lack of leadership is obvious; his legacy is corruption after corruption!
To all these Members of Parliament, I want to say that: You should never underestimate AgangSA. We will make sure that we pursue President Zuma. If we cannot remove him in this fifth Parliament; he will be removed, come next year's elections. Thank you [Interjections.]
Mr N T GODI: Hon Speaker, comrades and hon members, the weakness of section 102 is that it does not stipulate the basis on which a Motion of No Confidence is passed. This can very well lead to a situation where such motions are no more than just political grandstanding. It is the contention of the APC that a Motion of No Confidence on a head of state must be a serious matter in the eyes of the nation.
Frivolous motions like this one are politically denigrating. [Applause.] They are meant to embarrass. They are merely part of a game. [Interjections.] They do not connect with the fundamental needs of the people. Let us take ourselves seriously. The responsibility of elected representatives is to address the grievances of the people. [Interjections.] The APC refuses to chase after false flags. [Interjections.]
The key question or challenge facing our democracy is the continued resistance to or lack of fundamental transformation in the socioeconomic ... [Interjections.]
Mr K Z MORAPELA: Speaker!
The SPEAKER: Yes, hon member. Sorry, hon Godi. Can you take your seat, please?
Mr K Z MORAPELA: I just want to check if the hon member is prepared to take a question? [Interjections.] Is it true that you are caucusing with the ANC? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Ah, ah! Let us ask the hon member whether he is prepared to take a question or not. You cannot proceed and ask a question. Hon Godi, are you prepared to take a question?
Mr N T GODI: No!
The SPEAKER: Okay!
Mr N T GODI: The key question of challenge facing our democracy is the continued resistance to or lack of fundamental transformation in socioeconomic power relations: The relations of production; or the ownership of the means of production. Poverty, unemployment and inequality remain the burden of the African people in general, and a working class in particular.
These challenges are what should be at the centre of our work here. The politrix and unseemly conduct that sometimes plays itself out in this House does not advance the struggle to realise the promise of freedom, i.e. a fundamental change in the material conditions of our people.
Yes, the revolutionary morality enjoins us to serve the people wholeheartedly, guided by the Leninist dictum of, "Everything for the people and nothing against the people." It enjoins us to fight against corruption and the waste of public resources for the struggle to improve the welfare and wellbeing of the people. That struggle - that gigantic struggle - should not be clouded by these sorts of debates we are having now. I thank you. [Applause.]
Mr J SELFE: Madam Speaker, the hon Godi reminds me of that very famous English expression: He who pays the piper calls the tune. Therefore, I suppose he has to pay for the tune. But we are deadly serious about the motion of no confidence; and there are many reasons why President Zuma must go. At the time at my disposal, I will deal with only some of them.
At the time at my disposal I will only deal with some of them. The first is that President Jacob Zuma should never have become the President of South Africa in the first place. Prior to becoming President, he was facing over 700 serious criminal charges. Two months before he was inaugurated, the prosecution against him was suddenly discontinued by the NP, making a mockery of the principle that all South Africans are equal before the law. The DA is fighting, and we will continue to fight, to have this clearly irrational and unlawful decision set aside.
Secondly, the hon Zuma has used every legal trick in the book, and millions of rands of taxpayers' money to avoid his day in court; but this day is soon coming to a court near you. Not only that, but his private attorney is the President's special adviser, paid for by the taxpayer. What advice, we wonder, does Mr Hulley give at our expense?
Thirdly, and as a result, the Zuma administration has been characterised by a culture of impunity, where whether one gets prosecuted, fired or suspended depends not on what one has or hasn't done, but which side of which faction within the ANC one belongs to, and how slavishly one carries out the orders of number one. Look at Nkandla, look at Guptagate, look what's happening at the Hawks.
The culture of impunity is powerfully reinforced by President Zuma's failure to account, fully and in detail, to Parliament. Despite his protestations to the contrary last week, he has avoided question time. When he gives them, his replies are evasive, generalised and vacuous. Under his watch and with his encouragement - his government has allowed jamming devices and riot police to be introduced to Parliament. He is creating an authoritarian state in South Africa and presides over it with all the ruthlessness of Vladimir Putin and all the sleaze of Richard Nixon.
Fourthly, this sorry state of affairs has become possible because President Zuma has appointed, or intends to appoint, key people in his administration as a result, not of their abilities, but of their loyalties to him and his faction of the ANC. Examples include the COO and the acting CEO of the SABC, Mr Hlaudi Motsoeneng, the former NDPP Adv Menzi Simelane that we had to throw him out by the Constitutional Court and Mr Vuma Mashinini due to be parachuted directly from President Zuma's office into the Electoral Commission.
Most seriously the President has quite simply failed in his duty to lead. At a time when our economy is faltering, when load shedding makes it very difficult to run shops and businesses when corruption is an everyday occurrence, when tens of thousands of jobs have been lost, when deserving students can't stay in university because NSFAS has failed, when xenophobia is rearing its ugly head, when South Africans are desperate for inspiration, vision and leadership - president giggles. [Laughter.] [Applause.]
Some of the participants in this debate don't seem to get how serious a liability President Zuma is. Speakers from the ANC were particularly weak, and I would like to address some of their comments. In particular the Minister in the Presidency who blame the low growth rate in South Africa on the global economic slowdown, and he quoted Greece, Croatia and Ireland, etc. South Africa has a growth rate projected at 2%; Namibia 5,1%; Botswana 5,8%; Mozambique 7,4%; Kenya 5,7%.
Why do we do worse than our neighbours? It is because of the lack of leadership, lack of inspiration and lack of vision by President Zuma. [Applause.]
Then there was the Minister of Human Settlements, she is a remarkably thin-skinned politician for somebody with so much experience. Her speech was a classic display of condescension, arrogance and asininities. She referred to twitter ratings, Mickey Mouse and goofy and bats. I failed to understand what on earth she was trying to say. She quoted Wilton. I'd like to quote Shakespeare her speech was full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. [Applause.] [Laughter.]
My friend, the hon Sindi Chikunga, who I am afraid I got lost with all the gates but I noticed that in all the speech that she made, she made not one word of defence of defence of President Zuma.
I would like to address myself directly to someone who did not take part in this debate, the hon Jeremy Cronin. He lectured me as a first year student at UCT. Early in my second year he was detained and eventually convicted for what were then described as "offences against the state". He paid a terrible price for his beliefs, and I admired him for it. The hon Cronin ignited in me an aspiration that South Africa could become a nation united in its diversity, in which everything that was rotten and evil in the apartheid regime could and would be overcome.
Now, the very direct question that I would put to the hon Cronin is; is what we have now what you struggled for? Did your sacrifice justify the spawning of a new regime which, in most respects, is indistinguishable from the old? When you look around, and see failure, greed, nepotism, corruption and tender fraud are you not sickened to the core?
I know you are, and for every one of you there are ten other decent members of the ANC who are likewise appalled at what, in so short a time, we as a nation have become.
You, and the others you represent know that President Zuma is quite simply not worthy of his office and, must go, and quickly, for South Africa's sake. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon members, I whish to call on Deputy Minister ... [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: Madam Speaker, can I raise a point of order?
The SPEAKER: You should have raised the point of order when the hon member was still on the podium. [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: But I think it is important that you allow me to do that, Speaker. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: He is off the podium now ... [Interjections.]
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: May I address you hon Speaker?
The SPEAKER: On what hon Nzimande?
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: On the points that have been made by the hon member. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: No, hon Nzimande. He is gone! He has finished and gone.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Madam Speaker, hon members, the hon Selfe referred to the hon Cronin's sacrifice. I would just like to ask him, What was yours? [Interjections.]
Less than a year ago, on 7 May 2014 ...
The SPEAKER: Order, hon members!
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): ... the people of South Africa went to the polls to vote for the party of their choice to govern South Africa. A total of 18 650 000 South Africans cast their votes, which represented 73,48% of registered voters. Of these, almost 11 437 million, or 62% of the voters, voted for the ANC led by President Jacob Zuma, to govern South Africa - an overwhelming victory. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
The DA got just over 4 million votes - to be precise, 4 091 000. That amounted to 22,23% of the vote. [Interjections.] Before the 2014 elections, the DA confidently proclaimed that it expected to almost double its national vote to about 30%. The DA couldn't even reach 30%; it only got 22%. [Interjections.] So, if the hon Maimane wants to talk about no confidence, the voting public clearly had no confidence in the DA. [Interjections.]
The mighty Agang, who brought the previous motion, only got 52 000 votes - 0,28%. The EFF, who make a lot of noise here and whose hon member Sonti is now describing Shangaans, one of the population groups of our country, as foreigners, got 1,169 million or 6,35% of the vote.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, on a point of order: The hon member is casting aspersions on the hon Sonti. [Interjections.] He clarified that the anthropology of language in the townships, particularly in Gauteng, is such that that language refers to foreign African nationals, and therefore he is out of order ... [Interjections.] ... because the implication is that we are xenophobic, when we are not.
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, you are actually ... [Interjections.] Take a seat. You keep raising the issue of the hon Sonti. Hon Sonti is a different matter. [Interjections.] No. [Interjections.] I am saying you keep raising the issue of comrade ... of the hon Sonti. [Interjections.] You keep raising it. I mean, on the issue of the hon Sonti, you keep reacting to people who are at the podium. That's a point of debate. [Interjections.]
Mr K Z MORAPELA: Hon Speaker, can you please resolve the matter of that man on that side? [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Take a seat, hon member. Hon Masina, please take your seat. Let the hon Jeffery please continue with his speech.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Thank you, Speaker. I referred to the 2014 election and the overwhelming victory, but here we are, debating a motion of no confidence in the President. Obviously, the almost 38% of the voters who didn't vote for the ANC - and that includes, I would imagine, most of the opposition members of this House and a number of the commentators - did not want him to be President. One can assume that most still do not want him to be President, but unfortunately for the DA, the people of South Africa spoke 10 months ago. Nothing has substantially changed in terms of the points being raised by opposition speakers.
Hon Maimane, you are trying to undo the election results by this motion. [Interjections.] You are being disrespectful of democracy and contemptuous of the voters of South Africa, by moving this motion of no confidence. Incidentally, you liked referring to, or claimed that the President keeps saying he doesn't know, when he doesn't want to take responsibility for something. I assume, if you had answered the question around the drugs in your church, your response would've been, I did not know. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
The embarrassing disgrace that was the Agang motion, which we were meant to debate a fortnight ago, only served to affirm our long-standing view that such motions are an abuse of section 102 of the Constitution and a waste of Parliament's valuable time.
In this regard, I think it shows up the inadequacy of the majority judgment in the Constitutional Court, that any member may bring a motion of no confidence, without restrictions or thresholds. To call for a division, one needs a threshold, but to bring a motion of no confidence, which must be debated, one doesn't.
Incidentally, with Agang, I don't think many members of the public know who they are. They voted for somebody else - another lady, who has gone - and those two members are fighting each other and taking each other to court. [Interjections.]
A lot of Parliament's time has been wasted around Agang's motion, and this second motion from the DA further distracts Parliament from the real business of addressing the serious challenges confronting many South Africans. [Interjections.] Of course, the DA is used to wasting Parliament's time: motions of no confidence, walking out of plenaries and committees, intentionally trying to prevent quorums ... [Interjections.] It seems as if they resort to these tactics because their arguments have no substance. [Interjections.]
I was meant to be speaking on the accusation made in the motion on the right of access to quality education having been violated. The hon Maimane and hon Selfe said very little about that, if anything, so I am not going to say much. There are a lot of challenges with education, but there is a lot that has been done: increased access to education with over 8 million learners in our no-fee schools, up from 5 million in 2009; increasing student enrolment at universities, from 837 000 in 2009 to 938 000 in the 2012-13 financial year; increasing the amount of money given to the National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, and the number of students at university; increasing the pass rate, and so on.
I imagine you didn't want to talk much about education because of the problems in the Western Cape ... [Interjections.] ... the embarrassing issue of the situation of a high school in Bonnievale and the fact that it's taken you years to accommodate learners from that school in a prefabricated classroom. I understand there are similar issues in Piketberg.
The fact is that there are 10 500 children in the Western Cape who haven't managed to secure a place in school for the 2015 academic year. While this is going on, you, as the DA, are closing schools in the poorer areas, keeping them open in the richer areas. [Interjections.] Then there is also the issue of your paying more money to the richer quintiles. So, those are all issues that one could speak about. [Interjections.]
On the issue of disobeying the Public Protector, I really wish you would read the judgment of the Cape High Court in the case of yourselves, the DA v SABC & Others, and the finding of the Public Protector - the fact that the findings of and remedial action taken by the Public Protector are not binding, although it doesn't mean that these findings, recommendations and remedial action are mere recommendations which an organ of state may accept or reject. The Public Protector findings are not being ignored, however. Parliament, the President and the Special Investigating Unit, SIU, are all applying, or have applied their minds. So, please don't distort the facts to grab headlines.
On the issue of whether you can say stealing the money here or the President stole the money, I wish you would also read the judgment in that SMS case. It related to freedom of speech during an election campaign ... [Interjections.] ... and contrasting it with the Electoral Act. Parliament has different Rules for what you may say and how you may put forward criticism. [Interjections.]
As far as the politicisation of law-enforcement agencies, raised by the hon Swart is concerned, well, look. Firstly, the Scorpions were disbanded, not under President Zuma's watch as President. In addition, nobody, hon Swart - because we were on the committee together - could actually say how the Khampepe recommendations could be implemented.
Incidentally, hon Selfe, as far as the issue of the President's corruption charges is concerned, remember that they were thrown out of court by two separate high court judges. [Interjections.] So, good luck with your case.
Mr N S MATIASE: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order: I propose that you rule the member out of order for using the name, Jacob Zuma, and the words "stealing" and "corruption" in the same sentence, because in terms of your earlier ruling ...
The SPEAKER: Hon member, no. Hon member ...
Mr N S MATIASE: ... it is wrong to use the President's name and those words in the same sentence. [Interjections.] Can you please rule on that?
The SPEAKER: Please take your seat. [Interjections.]
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Hon Maimane, you accuse the President of showing disdain for Parliament, but it's you who are showing disdain for Parliament by bringing this motion of no confidence in the President, and wasting Parliament's time. If the Rules allowed it, I would love to have proposed a motion of no confidence in you, as Leader of the Opposition, for lack of leadership. [Interjections.] However, it actually wouldn't be worth the time.
Another example of the contempt that the DA, under your leadership, is showing is the way you frustrate the passing of important Bills by sending most of your members out of the House when you call for a division, thus depriving the House of a quorum. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order, hon members!
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Ministers, in particular, cannot be in the House all the time, as they are running departments which are based in the executive capital. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Don't scream! Don't scream, hon members!
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): All you are doing is providing a good argument as to why the executive and legislative capitals should be in the same place, and therefore why Parliament should move to Gauteng. [Interjections.]
What did the delaying of the passing of the Division of Revenue Bill achieve? If it were not passed, provinces would not be able to receive any money.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Speaker, on a point of order: Even if the DA was in the House, the ANC only had 183 votes. They wouldn't have been able to pass the Division of Revenue Act. It's their fault that the Act wasn't passed, not the opposition's! [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon member, your Chief Whip is on the floor and you are screaming! How do I hear your Chief Whip? [Interjections.] Hon member, please proceed.
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): Speaker, the hon Steenhuisen knows that if the DA hadn't sent their members out, there would have been a quorum. [Interjections.]
All you're doing is providing a good argument as to why the executive and legislative capitals should be in the same place ...
The SPEAKER: Order!
The DEPUTY MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR JUSTICE AND CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Mr J H Jeffery): ... and therefore why Parliament should move to Gauteng. [Interjections.]
The delay has just increased the pressure on the National Council of Provinces. However, I think the best example of where your party stands is the statement by your member, the hon McLoughlin at this very podium. When talking about the economy, he said that South Africa's problems didn't start in 1652, but in 1994. In other words, colonisation wasn't the problem; democracy was. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
As leader of the country, the President is discharging his responsibility, providing political leadership and strategic direction to the country in an excellent manner. Parties can table as many frivolous motions as they wish ... [Time expired.] [Interjections.] [Applause.]
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Speaker, I can really see why the hon Jeffery remains a Deputy Minister - and it would save us a lot if he stayed that way. [Interjections.]
Hon members, here is your simple choice. On your podium, you can face yes or no. On the matter of drugs, I will fight drugs wherever I go. [Interjections.] Wherever I go, we will fight them. Be that as it may. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Order!
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: The choice is yes or no, on your podium. Here are the choices: Yes, the President is a thief; or no, the President isn't a thief! [Interjections.] If you want the motion to stand, yes, the President must go and face charges of corruption; or no, the President mustn't go and face charges of corruption. Yes, the President has broken democracy; or ...
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Hon Speaker, you did rule on the issue of the word, "thief". [Interjections.] You did rule.
The SPEAKER: Yes.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: I would like you please, to rule again. In the same way as we would not be allowed to say that the hon Maimane is a drug dealer, we will not allow him to say the President is a thief, either. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Maimane, did you say the hon President is a thief?
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: I said people have a choice to vote. They can vote yes if they believe the President is a thief; or no if they don't believe he's a thief. [Interjections.] It's their choice to vote.
The SPEAKER: But, hon Maimane, you are bringing back the statement we had agreed you withdraw. [Interjections.] You are introducing that issue back, which I had asked you to withdraw.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: I'm putting a choice! I withdraw, hon Speaker. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Alright.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: You can choose either Nkandla or you can choose the people of South Africa and their houses. [Interjections.] That remains your choice. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker ...
The SPEAKER: Can you just stop the clock? Yes.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, the hon Deputy Minister of Justice and Correctional Services argued there that the judgment of the Constitutional Court had to do with freedom of speech. [Interjections.] I put it to you that, according to Rule 44, Members of Parliament are protected in terms of the provisions of the Constitution in as far as freedom of speech is concerned.
The SPEAKER: Except for when they are making unparliamentary statements.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: I hear you, Speaker. Don't interject. I want to finish. [Interjections.] So, I'm saying that there is a substantial difference between saying the President is a thief and saying people have an option to vote on whether the President is a thief or not ... [Interjections.] ... and I put it to you that that is exactly what the hon Deputy Minister kept saying - that we would be wrong to refer to the President as a thief. No one called him to order. He was not saying the President is a thief, although many of us think so, you know. [Interjections.] So, you must be consistent in the application of the Rules, hon Chairperson. The hon Maimane can ask if the President is a thief, or not. It's a question, and it is substantially different. [Interjections.]
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Yes, hon Mulder.
Dr C P MULDER: I rise on a point of order.
The SPEAKER: What's the point of order, hon Mulder?
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, the hon President is elected in the House after the elections in terms of Rule 8 of the Rules that say he is elected by the members of the House. Then it refers to section 86(1) and 86(2) of the Constitution. Now the motion of no confidence brought today by the Leader of the Opposition is in terms of section 102(2) of the Constitution and that section says the following:
If the National Assembly, by a vote supported by a majority of its members, passes a motion of no confidence in the President, the President and the other members of the Cabinet and any Deputy Minister must resign.
Now, the point I'm making is that the four speakers on behalf of the ruling party all have direct vested interests. Two Ministers and two Deputy Ministers were the only speakers who came to the rescue of the President. We did not hear from a single ordinary member of this House. [Applause.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Mulder, all the speakers who spoke for the ANC are Members of this Parliament I now wish to put the motion. Are there any objections? Hon Ndlozi, I'm proceeding to put the motion.
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Respectfully, hon Speaker,
The SPEAKER: What's the issue?
Mr M Q NDLOZI: We want to put it to you that the correct interpretation of the Constitutional Clause the hon Mulder has read, its implications are that, all who are hired and serve at the pleasure of the President must not vote. Members of the Cabinet and Deputy Ministers must not vote because they have a vested interest in that the plate of food that they eat every night is provided by the President. Therefore they have no conscience to participate in terms of vote on this motion. We appreciate their input, but we put it to you that Ministers and Deputy Ministers must not participate in this debate. They are hired by the President. [Interjections.]
The SPEAKER: Hon Ndlozi, you might argue a point, but there is no Rule providing for your point. These are all members of this House. These are all Members of Parliament and as such they enjoy the same rights as other Members of Parliament. [Interjections.]
Mr J S MALEMA: Hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Hon Malema.
Mr J S MALEMA: But the Constitution is higher than the Rules, and the Constitution ...
The SPEAKER: Where does the Constitution say they must not vote?
Mr J S MALEMA: It says that if the President leaves, they will have to leave. That has got direct implications for them. Comrade Jeff, you know very well, that if the President leaves, you are going. [Laughter.]
The SPEAKER: Hon members, please allow me to proceed with the motion. Hon Sisulu. Hon Buthelezi.
PRINCE M G BUTHELEZI: I just wanted to ask you a question. I just want to know, because I'm a bit confused whether in fact all the Deputy Ministers and Ministers didn't vote whether the ANC will not be in the majority. [Interjections.] Otherwise, - I have a right to ask a question - you have no right to because - this reminds of a book that I read when I was young by Swift entitled Gulliver's Travels where there were professors who were busy changing faeces into original food. [Laughter.]
The SPEAKER: Hon members, I believe that we should proceed with the motion then we will find out how we will fair after that. I now put the motion. Are there any objections to the motion?
The SPEAKER: Order, hon members! Can you take your seats, please?
The SPEAKER: Order! Order! They are just making sure that the system is ready for us in this very critical vote.
The LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, in the absence of the technology, can we use the secret ballot? I think it would be quicker. [Interjections.] [Laughter.] [Applause.]
The MINISTER OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING: Hon Speaker, the ANC moves for a show of hands. [Interjections.]
Dr C P MULDER: Hon Speaker, could you be so kind to investigate ...
Mr J S MALEMA: We object to that, Blade, please. [Laughter.]
Dr C P MULDER: Madam Speaker, can you investigate whether the executive perhaps jammed the voting system. [Interjections.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, can the ANC explain: What is the problem with a secret ballot? I mean, really, what is the crisis about having a secret ballot? [Interjections.] Isn't that how we voted for Number 1? So, let's have a secret ballot again, hon Speaker, because it looks like the system has been jammed. I said before there is a problem of service delivery in Parliament using a secret ballot will be key in a manual form.
The SPEAKER: Hon members; hon Ndlozi and hon Sisulu, please take your seats. The system is freezing ... [Interjections.] ... so, the engineers have been called.
The MINISTER OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS: Hon Speaker, may I address you? I wonder, hon Speaker, if it would be possible for us to do the voting tomorrow. The President is going to be the President of this country until 2019. There is no hurry. We were able to do this with the Division of Revenue Act; we can still come back tomorrow.
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: On a point of order! Point of order, Madam Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Hon Steenhuisen, what's the point of order?
The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Madam Speaker, I think it's important to place on record that we do not support the motion moved by the honourable Sisulu. There is a big difference here; the ANC couldn't get members into the House to pass the Division of Revenue Act; we have a quorum in the House today, and therefore voting must take place. I suggest we wait a little bit for system to boot up, or we move to have a secret ballot.
The SPEAKER: Yes, hon member that is what we are doing; we are waiting. They are actually in the basement attending to ... [Interjections.]
Ms D CARTER: Hon Speaker, could we possibly put a timeframe to it? If you're in a board meeting, and the system fails, you then go to a manual system. So, can we put a timeframe to it?
The SPEAKER: We know that, but we are not yet there.
The SPEAKER: Hon members, we propose that we suspend the business for five minutes and stay put; we suspend the business just to allow technicians to come in, but we stay put. You can rise just to stretch your body, but I request that we stay in the House.
The SPEAKER: Hon members, can we just ask a few members to test the system. We just want to test the system. Hon Maimane and other members, can you just press ‘Yes'? [Interjections.] That's how you're going vote, isn't it? We just want to see that it is now working.
Hon members, we are now ready to resume the proceedings. Voting will now commence.
Mr A M MPONTSHANE: Hon Speaker, I thought you were going to allow the bells to be rung for a few minutes, for the benefit of those who are outside, hon Speaker. There are still members who are outside, hon Speaker.
The SPEAKER: Are there many members who are still outside?
Mr S J MALEMA: Hon Speaker, one of the members who is not equal to us is not here. [Laughter.] So, it's important to ring the bells.
The SPEAKER: We will ring the bells for two minutes.
Hon MEMBERS: [Applause.]
Mr M Q NDLOZI: Hon Speaker, I wanted you to explain that we are clapping hands for Shenge because he has just been voted the President of the Republic. So he can go and sit ... [Laughter.]
AYES - 113: Alberts, A; America, D; Atkinson, P G; Bagraim, M; Baker, T E; Balindlela, Z B N; Basson, L J; Bergman, D; Bhanga, B M; Boshoff, H S; Bozzoli, B; Brauteseth, T J; Breytenbach, G; Cardo, M J; Carter, D; Cassim, Y; Chance, R W T; Davis, G R; De Freitas, M S F; De Kock, K; Dreyer, A M; Esau, S; Figg, M J; Figlan, A M; Filtane, M L W; Gana, S M; George, D T; Gqada, T; Groenewald, P J; Hadebe, T Z; Hill-Lewis, G G; Holomisa, B H; Hoosen, M H; Horn, W; Hunsinger, C H H; James, L V; James, W G; Jongbloed, Z; Joseph, B D; Ketabahle, V; Khubisa, N M; Kohler, D; Kopane, S P; Kruger, H C C; Krumbock, G R; Kwankwa, N L S; Lees, R A; Lekota, M G P; Lorimer, J R B; Lotriet, A; Louw, E N; Lovemore, A T; Mabika, M S; Mackay, G; Madisha, W M; Maimane, M A; Majeke, C N; Majola, T R; Malatsi, M S; Malema, J S; Marais, E J; Marais, S J F; Masango, S J; Mashabela, N R; Matiase, N S; Matsepe, C D; Maxon, H O; Maynier, D J; Mazzone, N W A; Mbatha, M S; Mbhele, Z N; Mc Gluwa, J J; Mcloughlin, A R; Mhlongo, T W; Mileham, K J; Mncwabe, S C; Morapela, K Z; Motau, S C; Moteka, P G; Mubu, K S; Mulaudzi, T E; Mulder, P W A; Mulder, C P; Ndlozi, M Q; Nqweniso, N V; Ollis, I M; Plouamma, M A; Redelinghuys, M H; Robinson, D; Ross, D C; Schmidt, H C; Selfe, J; Shelembe, M L; Shinn, M R; Sonti, N P; Stander, T; Steenhuisen, J H; Steenkamp, J; Steyn, A; Stubbe, D J; Swart, S N; Tarabella Marchesi, N I; Terblanche, J F; Van Dalen, P; Van Damme, P T; Van Der Walt, D; Van Der Westhuizen, A P; Van Dyk, V; Volmink, H C; Vos, J; Walters, T C R; Waters, M; Whitfield, A G.
NOES - 221: Abrahams, B L; Adams, F; Adams, P E; Bam-Mugwanya, V; Bapela, K O; Basson, J V; Bekwa, S D; Beukman, F; Bhengu, P; Bhengu, F; Bhengu, N R; Bilankulu, N K; Bongo, B T; Bonhomme, T J; Booi, M S; Boroto, M G; Boshielo, S P; Brown, L; Capa, R N; Capa, N; Carrim, Y I; Cele, B H; Cele, M A; Chikunga, L S; Chiloane, T D; Chohan, F I; Chueu, M P; Coleman, E M; Cronin, J P; Cwele, S C; Davies, R H; Dirks, M A; Dlakude, D E; Dlamini-Dubazana, Z S; Dlodlo, A; Dlomo, B J; Dlulane, B N; Dunjwa, M L; Frolick, C T; Fubbs, J L; Galo, M P; Gamede, D D; Gcwabaza, N E; Gigaba, K M N; Gina, N; Godi, N T; Goqwana, M B; Gumede, D M; Jafta, S M; Jeffery, J H; Joemat-Pettersson, T M; Johnson, M; Jonas, M H; Kalako, M U; Kekana, H B; Kekana, P S; Kekana, C D; Kekana, E; Kekana, M D; Kenye, T E; Khoarai, L P; Khosa, D H; Khoza, T Z M; Khoza, M B; Khunou, N P; Koornhof, G W; Kota-Fredricks, Z A; Kubayi, M T; Landers, L T; Lesoma, R M M; Letsatsi-Duba, D B; Loliwe, F S; Luyenge, Z; Luzipo, S; Maake, J J; Mabasa, X; Mabe, B P; Mabe, P P; Mabija, L; Mabilo, S P; Mabudafhasi, T R; Madella, A F; Maesela, P; Mafolo, M V; Mafu, N N; Magadla, N W; Magadzi, D P; Magwanishe, G; Mahambehlala, T; Mahlangu, J L; Mahlangu, D G; Mahlobo, M D; Maila, M S A; Majola, F Z; Makhubela-Mashele, L S; Makhubele, Z S; Makondo, T; Makwetla, S P; Malgas, H H; Maluleke, J M; Manana, D P; Manana, M N S; Manana, M C; Mantashe, P T; Maphatsoe, E R K; Mapulane, M P; Martins, B A D; Masango, M S A; Masehela, E K M; Mashatile, S P; Mashego-Dlamini, K C; Mashile, B L; Masina, M C; Masondo, N A; Masuku, M B; Masutha, T M; Mathale, C C; Mathebe, D H; Matlala, M H; Matshoba, M O; Matsimbi, C; Mavunda, R T; Maxegwana, C H M; Mbalula, F A; Mchunu, S; Mdakane, M R; Mfeketo, N C; Mjobo, L N; Mkhize, H B; Mmemezi, H M Z; Mmola, M P; Mmusi, S G; Mnganga - Gcabashe, L A; Mnguni, P J; Mnguni, D; Mnisi, N A; Mogotsi, V P; Mokoto, N R; Molebatsi, M A; Molewa, B E E; Moloi-Moropa, J C; Morutoa, M R; Mosala, I; Mothapo, M R M; Motimele, M S; Motshekga, M A; Motshekga, M S; Mpumlwana, L K B; Mthembu, N; Mthembu, J M; Mthethwa, E N; Mthethwa, E M; Mudau, A M; Muthambi, A F; Nchabeleng, M E; Ndaba, C N; Ndabeni-Abrahams, S T; Ndongeni, N; Nel, A C; Nene, N M; Nesi, B A; Ngcobo, B T; Ngwenya-Mabila, P C; Nkadimeng, M F; Nkwinti, G E; Nobanda, G N; November, N T; Ntombela, M L D; Ntshayisa, L M; Nxesi, T W; Nyalungu, R E; Nyambi, H V; Nzimande, B E; Oliphant, G G; Oosthuizen, G C; Patel, E; Peters, E D; Phaahla, M J; Phosa, Y N; Pikinini, I A; Pilane-Majake, M C C; Qikani, A D N; Radebe, B A; Radebe, J T; Radebe, G S; Ralegoma, S M; Ramatlakane, L; Ramokhoase, T R J E; Rantho, D Z; Raphuti, D D; Scheepers, M A; Semenya, M R; September, C C; Shope-Sithole, S C N; Sibande, M P; Sisulu, L N; Siwela, E K; Sizani, P S; Skosana, J J; Skwatsha, M; Smith, V G; Sotyu, M M; Surty, M E; Thomson, B; Tleane, S A; Tobias, T V; Tom, X S; Tongwane, T M A; Tseke, G K; Tseli, R M; Tsenoli, S L; Tsoleli, S P; Tsotetsi, D R; v R Koornhof, N J J; Van Rooyen, D D D; Van Schalkwyk, S R; Williams, A J; Xasa, T; Xego-Sovita, S T; Yengeni, L E; Zokwana, S.
ABSTAIN - 8: Buthelezi, M G; Esterhuizen, J A; Hlengwa, M; Mncwango, M A; Mpontshane, A M; Msimang, C T; Nkomo, S J; Sithole, K P.
Motion not agreed to.
Motion accordingly negatived.
The House adjourned at 18:54.
Source: Unrevised Transcript, Hansard
Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter