DFFE Budget: Committee Report; Sustainable Small Scale Fisheries

Meeting report

Consideration and Adoption of the Draft Committee Report on Budget Vote 32: Summary of Amendments  

The Committee Members raised a number of issues that were to be responded to by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment or its entities, and enquired about these responses. It was indicated that the responses were prepared, but the Minister must sign off on the reply before it could be forwarded to the Committee. The Committee Secretary said she expects the response to arrive by the afternoon. A concern was raised about the late response by the Minister.

Committee Members indicated that the following matters are not mentioned in the Committee report, some of which are understandably due to delay in the Minister’s response.

The Committee requested that feedback must be provided on the tasks and functioning of the Presidential Climate Change Committee. If possible, a meeting must be arranged with the Committee.

The report did not mention that the Committee asked that Limpopo and Mpumalanga be separated in the forestry reporting. The discussion by the Committee around Fisheries Management was not reflected. Staff was requested at the discussions of the last and second last meetings.

The Committee Secretary was requested to correct the report by changing the comments under SANParks to reflect the request by the Committee to create a separate security line item in the budget. The Committee did not request the money to be ring-fenced. SANParks responded that they would look into the possibility of doing so.

Under the comments regarding iSimangaliso, the report was corrected to reflect the request by the Committee for the entity to re-evaluate its target for rhino poaching with a proposed zero target.

The report was amended under the discussion of SANBI to ask the question of what the Department or SANBI have planned for the people who do not willingly want to stop their canned lion activities. It was also requested that the report be corrected to add the concern raised around the termination of the agreement between SANBI and the Botanical Society after lifetime members invested thousands of rand into the gardens to ensure that they have access to those gardens.

The Committee added the outstanding request to the SAWS to provide a written submission around the number of weather stations that are still active.

The Committee agreed that the additional comments by the Members be added as recommendations and that the responses, which will be received from the Minister, be added to the report as Minister’s responses. They will not form part of the report.

The Committee agreed to add a recommendation asking what SANParks’ plan is for adaptation, resilience and mitigation around climate change.

It was agreed that the report would reflect that the Minister must submit a detailed response on all matters requested from the Department and entities within 60 days after adoption of the report in the National Assembly.

The report was adopted with the above amendments. The Democratic Alliance abstained.

Briefing: Parliamentarians for Global Action (PGA) on the Sustainable Small-Scale Fisheries

The Chairperson informed the Committee that the PGA would brief the Committee on sustainable small-scale fishing. He indicated that small-scale fishing has endured numerous challenges that include climate change, decline of fishing villages through poverty, and decline in fish stock, to name but a few.

Government is making progress in addressing the matter through the allocation of small-scale fishing licences, but this process has been very slow. The Portfolio Committee is tasked to oversee the small-scale fishing industry through an integrated support programme.

Ms Leyla Nikjou, Senior Advisor: Ocean Campaign, PGA, informed the Committee that the Secretary General of PGA, Ms Adams, had to leave due to other commitments.

Ms M Isaacs, PGA representative based at UWC, briefed the Committee on co-management and the role of the women. She said co-management decentralises the roles and responsibilities from the national Department to communities and improves user rights. The purpose was to move away from state-centralised management that had a lot of failures but also not to leave it to self-management. Essentially it is the sharing of responsibilities and not one of the two extremes.

If you look at how co-management was done in Southern Africa, some key points must be looked at. When co-management committees in villages were formed, there was immediate conflict with traditional authorities. There was a lack of access rights. The question is how you can manage the resource without access rights. The main purpose of co-management is to protect the resource and to download the monitoring and surveillance responsibilities.

Co-management can resolve the problems around small-scale fishing in South Africa. However, the reason co-management does not work is that it does not consider the power struggle between different stakeholders, e.g., traditional authorities and fishers. The Fisheries Department in South Africa has not adopted a new philosophy where you are truly looking at all the burdens, namely inequality, poverty and unemployment and how this impacts participatory democracy.

For co-management to be successful amongst small scale fishing, they need to be involved in implementing and evaluating fisheries policies. Currently, the evolution of power and responsibility to local communities is not taking place. Strengthening capacity is critical to success.

After working in the realm of fishing for the past 20-30 years, Ms Isaacs indicated that the role of women in the industry is disappearing. Women are caretakers, activists, businesswomen and entrepreneurs. They have experience in the industry, but are also very knowledgeable about the communities and their needs. There are discrepancies regarding the criteria of men and women concerning licences and quotas. Local committees are weak and do not address some of the surrounding problems of the fishing communities. Women are not well represented in these local communities. Litigation is the order of the day and should not be the first avenue to follow. This is not affordable for these communities and local communities must be engaged.

Ms Wilmien Wicomb, Legal Resources Centre, informed the Committee that the Environmental Law Institute had compiled a very helpful toolkit for regulating small-scale fishing. She indicated that she would highlight three of the five steps, because this is not the start of the regulation process; it might be a good time to pause and assess how successful it has been to date.

The first step is to know that before you start regulating a sector, you need to understand the sector. If regulations are drafted removed from the reality on the ground it will fail. After the Kenneth George judgement, there was consultation and a discussion process that took place over a period of seven years.

The policy was drafted and gazetted in 2012. The Marine Living Resources Act was amended, and the regulations to the Act formed the blueprint for the fishing industry. It is problematic that the regulations are in contradiction with the policy, and this is highly problematic.

Small-scale fishing has been in South Africa for centuries, and the communities have existing structures. Those structures must be strengthened and new structures must not be created to oppose the structures. The regulations do not understand the role of families and communities. “If you do not keep that in mind, you will tear communities apart.”

The second step is to understand the existing legal framework before starting to regulate. This is essential, as this country recognises customary law and indigenous law with to common law and existing legislation. Customary fishing rights are recognised in the Gombosi judgement. That is one of the things regulators should have looked at before drafting the regulations, but they did not.

Customary fishing rights and also customary structures have been ignored. The policy has been ignored, and the constitutional basis of the recognition of the small-scale sector was ignored. This industry is very different to the commercial industry, where the Minister has discretionary rights. This is based on Constitutional Rights.

Step three is to create appropriate frameworks for different context. “If you understand the sector and the legal framework, you will not be able to create the appropriate framework.” The co-ops created in a one-size-fits-all framework drafted in Pretoria resulted in communities being unable to understand and implement the constitution. There was an attempt not to repeat the failures in the land sector, but it is still necessary to capacity people to be able to implement on the ground.

Mr N Paulsen (EFF) said the current situation had reduced the quality of life of fishing communities. Poachers reduced fishing stock, and prices were set at unaffordable prices. A bigger percentage of the quota should be given to the small-scale fishers. He asked if fishing communities could be revived.

Ms T Mchunu (ANC) proposed that a second session should be scheduled with PGA, as time is limited and the topic is important because it creates jobs. She requested that two things be elaborated on: firstly, the contradictions between the regulations and the policy. She also asked that more information be provided about the recognition of indigenous and customary laws.

It was agreed that the meeting will reconvene on this matter on Wednesday, 10 May 2023, at 12:00.

The meeting was adjourned.