Hon Speaker, I think it is necessary just to follow up a little bit more on what my colleague the Deputy Minister of International Relations and Co-operation said in response to the hon Ngonyama. Hon Ngonyama, I want to say that I am disappointed in you. But that would imply I had some expectations of you. So, I can't even say that I am disappointed. [Laughter.]
What have you chosen to do? First of all, the hon Jacobus stood up and read an ANC statement on the Libyan situation, and I quote some of the things she said:
We - that is the ANC - strongly condemn the excessive use of force against peaceful protesters and call upon the Libyan authorities to end all acts of violence. We support the UN Security Council resolution ...
You then stand up and choose to quote the BBC quoting the Libyan government authorities on some spurious story about what the President said on a telephone call. The Deputy Minister has already clarified the matter. Yes, indeed President Zuma received a call. He did not initiate a call from Col Gaddafi ... [Interjections.]
He wanted to explain his side of the story.
The Deputy Minister very clearly said that we condemn the violence and that the violence must end. He also said that we as South Africa and the South African government support the UN Security Council resolution. I think it's very important to say that. It is very important as South Africans - all of us, regardless of our party political positions - not to fall into the game of forces outside of our country, whose interests are not in African lives and in African development, but oil wells. They are trying to cover up their complicity in supporting the regime in Libya. Let us not fall into that trap. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Order, hon members!
Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I didn't want to interrupt the hon Deputy Minister because he was making quite an interesting point. But the point of the matter is that one Deputy Minister has already replied to this particular statement. It's not usual ... [Interjections.]
Order! What is your point of order, hon member?
Well, the point, Mr Speaker, is that one doesn't have two people responding to one statement. I believe this is against the Rules of Statements to the House. Why are we having one response adding to another, sir?
Hon member, nothing precludes it, and members have a right to express their views and complement what has been said. [Interjections.]
Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Are you saying that we can have seven different responses ... [Interjections.]
Order! Hon member, please take your seat.
But Mr Speaker ... [Interjections.]
Order! No, this is not a point of order. I have already ruled on the matter.
Mr Speaker, on a point of order: I just want to have clarity about Rule 105(6). It says:
At the conclusion of statements by members, a Minister present may be given an opportunity to respond for not more than two minutes to any statement directed to that Minister or made in respect of that Minister's portfolio.
I think this is the Rule that the hon Whip of the DA is referring to, and I believe we should all abide by the Rules. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon member, we have ministerial responses. Questions have been raised and the Ministers are here to respond. There is a slot for ministerial responses. So, shall we continue?
Mr Speaker, on a point of order: Taking into account what we just heard from the hon Whip from Cope, why is the hon Deputy Minister of Transport responding to an issue on foreign affairs which has already been answered? Somewhere down the line, sir, we as the opposition are not allowed to stand up and make copious resolutions or statements on an issue. Why is the Cabinet allowed to do so?
Order! Ministers can respond on behalf of other Ministers. [Interjections.]
According to ... [Interjections.]
Order! Hon member, please take your seat. I have made a ruling on the matter.
Mr Speaker, on a point of order: We do not want to belabour the point. But the Rules are actually very clear, sir. Yes, another person may respond instead of the relevant Minister. But this refers to "a" Minister and not "any" Minister or Ministers. So, we really need to look at the detail of this.
Order! We will check this point and come back to you.