Chairperson, Deputy Minister, hon members, the National Environmental Management Act is now being amended to refine the integrated environmental management system in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. The Bill proposes new enabling provisions that make it possible for environmental management instruments, other than environmental impact assessments, to be introduced.
The Bill also seeks to provide for agreement between organs of state in order to enable them to align regulatory processes. The Bill provides enabling provisions in order to allow a process, conducted in terms of another regulatory system, to be used as a basis for granting environmental authorisations in terms of the Act. The Bill again proposes that the integrated environmental authorisation may be issued where different Acts regulate the same activity or where multiple authorisations require a similar process.
In order to give effect to the general objectives of integrated environmental management, as laid down in this Act, the potential consequences for or impact on the environment of listed activities or specified activities must be considered, investigated, assessed and reported on to the competent authority.
Consultation between competent authorities and consideration of legislative compliance is important. The Minister or MEC may consult with any organ of state administering the legislation relating to any aspect of any activity that also requires environmental authorisation under this Act in order to co-ordinate the respective requirements of such legislation and to avoid duplication. The Minister or MEC, in giving effect to Chapter 3 of the Constitution and section 24(4)(a)(i) of this Act, may after consultation with the organ of state contemplated in subsection (1) enter into a written agreement with the organ of state in order to avoid duplication in the submission of information, or the carrying out of a process relating to any aspect of any activity that also requires environmental authorisation under this Act.
We are happy that there is an alignment of environmental authorisation in this Bill. If the carrying out of a listed activity or specific activity contemplated in section 24 is also regulated in terms of another law or a specific environmental management Act, the authority empowered under that other law or specific environmental management Act to authorise that an activity and the competent authority empowered under Chapter 5 to issue an environmental authorisation in respect of that activity, may exercise their respective powers jointly by issuing separate authorisation or an integrated environmental authorisation.
South Africa needs an effective environmental management programme that will speed up development in all sectors. The Minister of Minerals and Energy, MEC or identified competent authority may require the submission of an environmental management development programme before considering an application for an environmental authorisation. The environmental management development programme must contain information on any proposed management, mitigation, protection or measures that will be undertaken to address the environmental impact that has been identified in a report contemplated in subsection 24(1A), including environmental impacts in respect of planning and design, preconstruction and construction activities. The rehabilitation of the environment is extremely important.
The environmental management programme must set out time periods in which the measures contemplated in the environmental management programme must be implemented. It must also contain measures regulating responsibilities for any environmental damage, pollution, pumping and treatment of extraneous water or ecological degradation as a result of prospecting or mining operations. The applicant must inform his or her employees of any environmental risk which may result from their work and risks must be dealt with in order to avoid pollution or the degradation of the environment. We support the amending Bill. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Chairperson, Deputy Minister, hon members, with all developments, particularly in a growing economy like ours where the state is a major role-player in infrastructure developments, environmental management is not an optional extra. This is even more so when much of these developments are aimed at correcting past economic and infrastructural imbalances in the rural areas of our country.
In the rural areas the environment has, until recently, remained untouched and unspoiled. The rapid expansion of mining in rural areas in recent years has, however, caused an even greater impact on the environment which cannot be allowed to continue unchecked.
The National Environmental Management Amendment Bill introduces a range of new environmental management instruments which must be welcomed. These include norms and standards and environmental management frameworks, all of which, if the associated regulations are drafted in good faith, will speed up approvals for appropriate developments without compromising the environment. It is pleasing to know that the portfolio committee accepted the DA's proposal to have the associated regulations for the environmental instruments brought back to Parliament for oversight after the Minister has drafted them.
The DA's spokesperson on environmental affairs, hon Gareth Morgan, has already dealt with much of the detail of the Bill as passed by the NA; therefore, I will refrain from going down that path. I am happy that the process in the NCOP has been thorough and that the further amendments introduced by the C version of the Bill and incorporated into the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill, Bill 36D of 2007, go further in strengthening the role of environmental assessment, particularly with regard to prospecting, mining and exploration.
I do believe, however, that the role of the Minister of Minerals and Energy should have been diluted rather than strengthened in regard to environmental assessment. That job is the job of Environmental Affairs and that is where it should be.
A very positive amendment is the insertion of the new subsection 24N(1A) which makes the submission of an environmental management programme compulsory in regard to prospecting, mining, exploration, reduction and related activities before an application for an environmental authorisation is considered.
I have said that I am happy that the process in the NCOP has been thorough. Also, I still feel that public hearings in the provinces in general should indeed still be directed at the people at large but that closer interaction with the industries and stakeholders involved should be sought. This is an area that needs serious attention, but it must go hand in hand with the proper redetermination of the NCOP cycle in regard to section 76 legislation.
The massive influx of legislation experienced this past year is not conducive to the formulation of good legislation. On the contrary, it is counterproductive and should never have been allowed. We are guilty of passing rushed laws which cannot be good for democracy.
The DA supported the passing of the Bill in the NA and now supports the provinces in passing the amendments of the NCOP. I thank you.
Ms Y NAHARA (KwaZulu-Natal): Thank you, Chairperson. The amendments made by the department do not need an explanation. If I could have done it my way, I would not have come here. The Deputy Minister, the hon Mabudafhasi, has given a very clear and thorough explanation as to where we are heading and what we want to do.
Hon Moatshe has given all the reasons why this Bill had to be amended, but just to make an input, I would like to say two things about the amendments. The first point concerns the provisions that the Bill seeks to address, namely to refine the integrated environmental management systems in order to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the system. The second point concerns the proposal that the integrated environmental authorisation be issued where different Acts provide for regulation and where multiple authorisation is required.
This is so important that I cannot emphasise it enough. From my personal experience, we needed these provisions yesterday. This will address one of the main problems, namely the delays in the EIAs that we experience in the provinces as well as many other issues concerning the environment.
You will find that there are accusations made by developers that this government is not serious about development. There is also conflict with our own small businesspeople who are unable to get the necessary authorisation in time. Project managers end up losing the very same jobs that we want to create for our people to the big developers or businesspeople who have the money to go to the private sector to do these assessments. As a result it has reduced the number of construction developers that we could have had by now.
It has also affected some of our people who have inherited land and who have wanted to do something different from agriculture or farming and who would have preferred to have community game reserves and other initiatives. To date, some of them did not achieve their goals because of the delays of the EIA and all the relevant issues. One cannot really overemphasise the need for these amendments to take place.
Having made this point, I would just like to say one thing about the previous speaker who said that he is happy that the portfolio committee has taken their proposals from the DA. I am not sure whether the speaker is correct. As the provinces we held public hearings and I can assure you that, as a chairperson in KwaZulu-Natal, I spoke to our own people who were talking about these issues.
I doubt that the DA is actually our teacher because our people know what they want and we were sure about what we wanted to amend. As I stand here, I can assure you the people in Nongoma know why I am here and they know why these amendments have to be made. I normally do not like to be told that someone did something for me, when I can do it myself.
Other than this, I really would not be doing justice to the matter after the chairperson, hon Moatshe, has explained the various issues that are so important to this Bill. The KwaZulu-Natal committees, both agriculture and provincial NCOP, met and considered the public hearing proposals and we included those we felt should be included. We deliberated extensively on this Bill and we ended up agreeing that we support this Bill fully with all the amendments. Let me end by saying that wherever you find "imbokotho" [rock], you have no doubt that things will go right. I thank the hon Minister.
Chairperson, we in South Africa, as in many developing countries and emerging economies, have to strike an equitable and workable balance between our many developmental needs and objectives and the preservation and protection of our environment.
If we are to achieve the high economic growth rates needed to prosper and free many of our people from the poverty in which they are now trapped, our environment will most definitely suffer and bear the brunt of our increased activity if we do not take the necessary measures to try to protect it.
It is for this reason that we must ensure that issues concerning our environment are taken seriously and that there is legislation in place to provide protection for the environment and ensure its sustainability.
The National Environmental Management Act provides for the overarching legislative framework for environmental governance in South Africa. There was widespread support for this Act, which has transformed the landscape of our environmental legislation.
The Bill before us today proposes a number of amendments to the principal Act which will strengthen it and ensure that objectives are reached. This Bill will also improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the integrated environmental management system by, amongst other things, moving away from the environmental impact assessment as the only environmental assessment tool, and enhancing environmental co-operation and co-ordination where an activity falls under the jurisdiction of more than one organ of state.
In a dynamic environment it is imperative that we are aware of the many changes and developments that occur and ensure that the necessary amendments are made to our legislation to ensure that it is still effective and able to achieve the objectives for which it was enacted.
The National Environmental Management Amendment Bill will do just that, and the amendments proposed will ensure that issues concerning our environment are given the attention they deserve. However, the deletion of "committee" and "forum" and replacing them with "the Minister may establish a forum or advisory committee", all by himself or herself, may be a point of concern. We are human beings and it is always wiser to work with people in committees or forums, rather than giving all the powers to the Minister to determine the committees or the forum that may assist with this job.
This is what the IFP has to say to you and the world. [Interjections.] Thank you very much.
Chairperson and hon members, the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill constitutes framework legislation for the fulfilment of responsibilities contained in section 24 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, and I quote:
Everyone has the right -
a) to an environment that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing; and b) to have the environment protected, for the benefit of present and future generations ...
The ACDP is delighted that what started out as a major concern in the mining industry in 2006 over unwarranted delays in the processing of environmental impact assessments, or EIAs, has now at last been resolved.
The National Environmental Management Amendment Bill created such a hullabaloo mainly because it attempts to resolve one of South Africa's leading "green" problems, which is mitigating the impact of prospecting and mining, particularly in highly sensitive areas such as wetlands. We have this Bill today as the result of an agreement between the Minister of Minerals and Energy and the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism on the subject of which department is to be responsible for mining- related environmental issues.
Also, an agreement was reached that the wording of the National Environmental Management Act, Nema, and other related environmental legislation was to be likewise amended as far as it was linked to mining and exploration issues in the same context.
Furthermore, the ACDP is pleased that both Ministers have at last agreed that there should be one environmental management system and that this system should be prescribed by the environmental authority. The Minister of Minerals and Energy had an existing mandate in terms of environmental management for mining and this must be retained, and the Minister of Environmental Affairs and Tourism was the custodian of the environment and must be enabled to fulfil this function, also in terms of mining.
The ACDP is fully satisfied that this Bill addresses the issues of the main problems facing this industry and we support this Bill. I thank you. [Applause.]
Order! Hon members, can I just remind you that it is unparliamentary for any member to take a nap in this House or even to sleep. I may be bound to name some names if I catch you doing that. [Interjections.]
Me E PRINS (Wes-Kaap): Dankie, Voorsitter. Ek is bewus van die besorgdhede wat geopper is deur die verskillende rolspelers met betrekking tot die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Nasionale Omgewingsbestuur. Ek glo nogtans dat hierdie wet 'n goeie raamwerk voorsien om ons gemeenskappe se grondwetlike regte, let wel, in die volgende opsigte, te beskerm: die reg tot 'n omgewing wat nie ons gesondheid en lewe bedreig nie; die reg dat ons omgewing deur redelike wetgewing en ander relevante maatstawwe beskerm word in soverre dit besoedeling en ekologiese verval betref; die reg dat omgewingsbewaring bevorder moet word en dat daar seker gemaak word dat volhoubare ekologiese ontwikkeling geskied; die reg dat natuurlike hulpbronne so benut word dat dit in lyn is met regverdigbare ekonomiese en maatskaplike ontwikkeling.
Die volgende punte het betrekking: die wet rasionaliseer die gebruik van "Environmental Impact Assessments" - omgewingsimpakstudies - deur meer buigbaarheid te skep in die aansoek van EIA prosesse. Baie rolspelers beskou die uitbreiding van diskresionre magte van owerhede as die afwatering van omgewingsbestuurbeginsels. Dit word erken dat diskresionre besluitneming 'n hor vlak van verantwoordlikheid vereis, maar ek glo dit is haalbaar.
In 'n ontwikkelende land het ons meer verfynde EIA prosesse nodig. Die wysigingswetsontwerp poog om hierdie buigbaarheid te voorsien, veral in die manier waarop daar met die minimum vereistes in artikel 24(4) gehandel word, en in die uitbou van 'n vrystellingsbepaling in artikel 24M.
Die daarstelling van gentegreerde bepalings om samewerking te verseker, soos vervat in artikel 24K, en samespanning van besluitneming soos vervat in artikel 24L, word gesteun. Deur die voorsiening van 'n bepaling wat ander regulerende prosesse erken, kan duplisering van regulering in sekere gevalle aangespreek word. Dit word nogtans erken dat die praktiese implementering van hierdie bepalings op 'n verantwoordelike manier gedoen moet word, met die beskerming van die omgewing as die eerste prioriteit.
Die daarstelling van gentigreerde omgewingsgoedkeurings is 'n positiewe stap. Hierdeur word verseker dat omgewingsgoedkeurings nie uitgereik word wat slegs op EIAs gebaseer is nie, maar ook in oorleg met lisensiringsprosesse voortspruitend uit enige van die omgewingsbestuurwette, byvoorbeeld, die wet op biodiversiteit, die National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act.
Dit verseker ook gentegreerde goedkeuringsprosesse met ander regeringsregulerende prosesse soos beplanning, water, erfenis-verwante permitte, ens.
Dit word weereens vereis dat die praktiese implementering van hierdie bepaling op 'n verantwoordelike manier gedoen word.
Die wysigingswetsontwerp bevat steeds sekere maatstawwe wat noodsaaklik is vir 'n effektiewe en genoegsame impakbeheerstelsel. Dit sluit in die minimum vereistes vir omgewingsgoedkeurings, waardeur gekwalifiseer word dat enige diskresie wat die Minister of enige bevoegde owerheid mag h, aan streng kriteria onderhewig is.
Die invoeging van publieke deelname as 'n vereiste vir alle EIAs is van kardinale belang. Dit sal verseker dat alle rolspelers goed ingelig is oor omgewingsregte. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Ms E PRINS (Western Cape): Thank you, Chairperson. I am aware of the concerns that were raised by the different role-players in respect of the National Environmental Management Amendment Bill. I, nevertheless, believe that this legislation provides a good framework to protect the constitutional rights of our communities, please note, in the following respects: the right to an environment which does not endanger our health and lives; the right to have our environment protected by reasonable legislation and other relevant measures insofar as pollution and ecological degradation are concerned; the right to promotion of conservation of the environment and to ensure that sustainable ecological development takes place; and the right to natural resources being utilised in such a way that it is in line with equitable economic and social development.
The following points refer: the Bill rationalises the use of environmental impact assessments by creating more flexibility in the application of EIA processes. Many role-players regard the expansion of discretionary powers of authorities as the dilution of environmental management principles. It is acknowledged that discretionary decision-making requires a higher level of responsibility, but I believe it is achievable.
In a developing country we need more refined EIA processes. The amending Bill attempts to provide this flexibility, especially in the manner in which the minimum requirements are dealt with in section 24(4), and in the development of an exemption provision in section 24M.
The creation of integrated provisions to ensure co-operation, as contained in section 24K, and co-operative decision-making as contained in section 24L, is supported. By way of the provision of a clause which acknowledges other processes, the duplication of regulation in certain cases can be addressed. It is, nevertheless, acknowledged that the practical implementation of these provisions must be done in a responsible manner, with the protection of the environment as the first priority.
The creation of integrated environmental authorisations is a positive step. This ensures that environmental authorisations which are based on EIAs only are not issued, but that consideration is also given to licensing processes arising from any of the environmental management Acts, for example, the Act dealing with biodiversity, the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act.
It also ensures integrated authorisation processes with other government regulatory processes like planning, water, heritage-related permits, etc.
It is once again required that the practical implementation of this provision takes place in a responsible manner.
The amending Bill still contains certain measures which are essential for an effective and adequate impact control system. These include the minimum requirements for environmental authorisations, whereby the qualification is made that any discretion which the Minister or any competent authority might have, be subject to strict criteria.
The inclusion of public participation as a requirement for all EIAs is of cardinal importance. This will ensure that all role-players are well informed about environmental rights.]
The introduction of tools other than EIAs for environmental management is a positive step. This will alleviate the unfortunate pressure that has been placed on the EIA tool to address all impacts in all instances. For example, we are looking forward to the use of norms and standards as an option to reduce the need for EIAs in instances where EIAs are overkill.
The stronger linkage that has been created between forward-planning tools and EIAs is another positive amendment. In the Western Cape we believe that effective land use and environmental planning and management, inclusive of EIAs, must be integrated to ensure effective promotion of sustainable development. This is emphasised by the fact that we have amalgamated environmental management and planning into a single department in the Western Cape.
One of the most significant aspects of the amending Bill, and probably the reason for the lengthy law reform process, is the inclusion of mining under the Nema umbrella. To me it makes perfect sense that mining, as one of the major industries responsible for physical land transformation, should be measured against the same standards as all other development activities. Challenges, however, will now be for the Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism and the Department of Minerals and Energy to consistently implement the amending Bill. Future challenges to ensure effective co-operation and alignment will be enormous and this law reform process is only the first step. Thank you.
Chairperson, it's quite interesting that the IFP is speaking to the world. I'm not sure whether they have turned into an international NGO, but I doubt if countries like Cuba will take what the IFP is saying seriously because they know that the ruling party is the ANC. When the ruling party of any country speaks people tend to listen carefully.
Hon Chairperson, as I was coming here, the hon Watson gave me a sweet - I'm not sure whether his intention was to try and sweeten my speech on the debate as such. So far there's nothing political which I heard him mentioning today other than to repeat what their leaders are saying in the