Deputy Speaker
I wish to start by thanking all the parties for their support of this Budget Vote. I would also like to express my sincere thanks to Members for their inputs and also for the spirit in which the debate was conducted. Your contributions are of tremendous importance and valuable and I assure you that they will be duly considered.
There are of course a few matters to which I would like to respond.
The issue was raised about Parliament not debating issues of national importance. Let me reiterate the process that is followed in this regard.
Section 42 of the Constitution provides that Parliament, as a representative of the people, should provide a national forum for public consideration of issues. This means that Parliament should afford the electorate a platform for public discourse on and be responsive to matters of national interest or importance.
The procedure through which the Assembly programmes matters of national importance for discussion, is by way of Members proposing subjects for discussion by way of notices of motion, when an opportunity to do so arises during the sitting of the House.
These notices are then discussed at the Chief Whips’ Forum and scheduled for discussion by the National Assembly Programming Committee. In the 4th Parliament a practice was started through the Chief Whips Forum for parties to submit topics for debates on a rotational basis.
Might I also add that the Chief Whips’ Forum is a multiparty body which takes collective decisions on the smooth running of the House.
As I made the point earlier, Members of Parliament must ensure that they are at pace or in step with our people at all times. I therefore urge Members to continue to propose debates and work through the relevant parliamentary structures to consider programming them more frequently in the future.
Honourable members, Support to Political Parties is of importance to the functioning of Parliament.
Let me highlight that over the years the amount provided to political parties to do their work has been increasing. Support to political parties funding for this financial year is R348.5 million, an increase of 5.3 per cent over the R331.1 million of 2013/14.
The R348.5 million for Political parties funding is divided into Political Support for R83.2 million, Constituency Support for R247.8 million and Party Leadership Support for R7.5 million.
Parliament annually determines an amount per member to be budgeted for in respect of constituency allowances. A constituency allowance is payable to all parties represented in Parliament and is paid to the party and not to individual members.
The total amount payable per party is determined by multiplying the number of seats per party by the amount determined per member.
Honourable members, with regard to the issue raised regarding replies to questions by the Executive, I am aware that the practice in the 4th Parliament was for the Speaker to write to the Leader of Government Business to raise this issue at Cabinet level to ensure compliance with the rules of Parliament. We will continue with this practice in the 5th Parliament to ensure enforcement of this important constitutional obligation.
Turning to the questions for this term, as Members are aware, in terms of the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act, Parliament is required to pass the budget by the end of July, therefore it was incumbent on the House to prioritise this matter.
In addition, the Chief Whip’s Forum is also dealing with the matter of the questions related to clusters and the matter is as yet not finalised.
Let me assure Honourable Members that in 2nd term there will be opportunity for questions to the Executive and let me add that there is no intention on my part to suppress this important oversight tool.
On the issue of Parmed membership, let me take some time to explain to Honourable Members the reasons for compulsory membership.
Firstly, while the Parliamentary and Provincial Medical Aid Scheme Act was first enacted in 1975, it was amended last in 1996 by the democratic Parliament.
Parliament has sought legal opinion on whether Parmed complies with ‘freedom of association’ as contained in section 18 and was advised that it is constitutional as it does not force membership of an ideological body and that compulsory membership is in the interest of the society as a whole. Even if it does restrict freedom of association, this complies with the limitation section which provides that it is reasonable and justifiable.
Parmed applies to judges, members of the Executive, the National Legislature by compulsion as the state must ensure that members of these bodies have adequate access to medical assistance so that they can perform their duties to the best of their ability and this is a condition of service as a Member of a Legislature, the Executive or the Judiciary.
Secondly there is a good reason why members of the Executive, the Judiciary and Parliament should not belong to privately owned schemes. It is important that they must at all times be perceived as not being conflicted. By ensuring that they are not subject to private medical schemes, no allegations can be made of a conflict of interest when any matter relating to medical schemes or health matters in general arise.
Thirdly, if membership of Parmed were made optional, as this is a closed fund with a restricted membership, there would be uncertainty as to the number of members and this will impact on the scheme and could make the entire scheme unviable or unstable.
Honourable members, with regards to re-establishment of the ad hoc committee on the Report of the Public Protector, it is important to understand that the re-establishment of the ad hoc committee is a matter that has to be decided by the House and not the Speaker.
As Honourable Members are aware, an announcement was made in the ATC of 17 July of a letter received from the Presidency indicating that since the President is out the country he will be in a position to submit the report referred to in his letter of 4 June soon after his return.
We should therefore await the communication from the President.
Yes, I agree with Honourable Gina that we need to address the issue of the decorum and discipline of Members in the House. Thanks to Honourable Dudley for your positive contribution in this regard.
In conclusion, I would again like to thank all of you for your contributions. As I have said, they have been noted and we will do our best to make sure that we address all your important contributions and concerns.
I thank you.
