Hon Speaker, South Africa has emerged from a history of racial oppression and exclusion. Given the need to ensure inclusive and sustainable economic growth and development, as well as social cohesion, the democratic government continues to promote employment equity and diversity in the South African workplace.
This is the reason we have the Employment Equity Act of 1998 amongst our statutes. The law states that in determining whether an employer is implementing employment equity in compliance with this Act, the director- general or any person or body applying this Act must, amongst other factors, take into account the demographic profile of the national and regional economically active population.
The proposed amendments contained in the draft amending Bill currently being negotiated at the National Economic Development and Labour Council, Nedlac, seek to achieve a number of objectives. Amongst these is to ensure that all designated employers report on progress in implementing their employment equity plan annually. Another is to promote more effective compliance and enforcement. It also seeks to make the assessment of compliance less cumbersome and, where relevant, to make the assessment of equitable representation to be in relation to occupational levels, and not categories. Government will work very closely with the state law advisors to make sure that the final Employment Equity Amendment Bill is in compliance with the South African Constitution before it is signed into law.
It is important to note that the proposed changes to the law in the Employment Equity Amendment Bill refer to the demographic profile of the economically active population. The amendment removes the words "regional" and "national". As stated recently, the reason for the removal of the two elements is that employers have been enquiring over the years from the Department of Labour about how they should implement both the regional and national demographics of the economically active population in their workplace. As a result of these enquiries, the change is proposed. The intended outcome of the new proposed amendment is that employers will have the flexibility to decide whether to use regional or national demographics, depending on their operations.
We reiterate our assertion that these changes do not in any way negatively affect employment opportunities for the coloured or Indian population. In fact, the law will make it easier for employers to comply with the law and create more job opportunities for all the designated groups. It is intended to open up more job opportunities. I thank you, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
Hon Speaker, Mr President, the apartheid government forced some of us to live in certain areas through the introduction of the Group Areas Act, influx control, and so on. The net effect of this Bill, if it is passed in its current form, will again see some of us being forced to move to certain areas to increase our chances of finding work.
Mr President, you know it is because of apartheid legislation that our people are so deeply divided on the basis of race. Again, sir, our people are being divided on the basis of race through the introduction of this Bill. There have been several calls, nationally, to withdraw this Bill in its current form because of the damage it is causing. Will the President support this call to withdraw this Bill?
Hon Speaker, I do not have any basis on which to support this call. Firstly, this Bill is coming to this Parliament for all of us to have time to make a contribution, change it, amend it, and have it the way we want it. It is a very funny thing that the Bill is discussed in Parliament even before it comes before Parliament for debate. Generally, when we make laws in this country, the entire nation is given an opportunity to comment, amend, chop and change, or whatever, and this will come here. If you do not like the Bill as it stands in its current form, you will then have an opportunity to say how you would like it to be. You will have the opportunity to persuade the members of this Parliament to agree with the correct and the most progressive positions.
Therefore, I do not think we should prejudge the work of this Parliament. Even those who are making the call are actually aborting the work of this Parliament. This Parliament must have an opportunity to discuss the Bill and have it the way we want it to be. Thank you, hon Speaker. [Applause.]
Sepikara, ke a leboga. Mopresidente, bjalo ka ge mokgatlo wo o etelet?ego pele wa ANC o phegelela gore o age naga ye e nago le tekatekano le temokrasi kaye e nago le ponelopele ya go aga naga ye kaone, na go na le se o ka se dirago bjalo ka Mopresidente wa Repabliki ka kgoelet?o ye ya gore go se ke gwa ba le molao wa go phethagat?a tekatekano, bjalo ka ge re tseba mo re t?wago gona? (Translation of Sepedi paragraph follows.)
[Mr S G THOBEJANE: Hon President the ANC-led government continues to promote equality and democracy with a vision of building a better country. Since we know where we are coming from, is there anything you can do as the President of the Republic about the call to withdraw the Bill?]
Mr Speaker, I am not sure whether I properly heard the hon member. Could the Speaker help me by restating the question? I don't want to try to answer the question when I did not get it clearly.
I would try, hon President, but let me volunteer somebody who would do a better job, the Deputy President. [Laughter.] There is help coming, hon President.
Mr Speaker, essentially, the hon member was keen to know from the President whether or not the need to try to create an egalitarian society by removing the gaps between the various strata of the South African society still exists. That question is based on his understanding of this piece of legislation, namely that it seeks to correct those imbalances between the various sections of the South African society. Thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Speaker, the Deputy President confirmed my understanding. I was not sure, but he has absolutely confirmed that I had heard the question clearly. I just did not want to doubt even a little bit. Thank you very much, Deputy President, for the interpretation.
This law is trying to deal with the legacies we have, which separated us in every respect. One of those areas is job opportunities as certain groups were not allowed to do certain kinds of jobs. We are saying that we need a society that is equal, where we will get equal opportunities, irrespective of what grouping we come from. This is exactly what it is doing. That is why it is so important that we must do it, because it cannot happen on its own. We were divided by law, ordinance, practice, and by everything. We have to have instruments to unite us, and this is one of the instruments that are doing so. Thank you.
Mr President, I ask this question of you: Are you willing to reconsider the collection of demographic statistics which are used to measure, amongst other things, equity targets and affirmative action goals - targets based on apartheid era race classification - and replace that system with one that is based on contemporary fact-based economic criteria that measure real and current disadvantage? If you are not willing to reconsider that, please tell us why not? [Interjections.]
Hon Speaker, I think we are doing everything to bring equity on the basis of what exists, because we were divided in every respect. Some people were disadvantaged while others were advantaged. We can't do that overnight. We have got to take time and have measures and instruments to ensure we move in the process, because some people are terribly disadvantaged. The majority that cannot speak has, actually, not started moving from the state of being disadvantaged.
Whatever we can do that would help us to move towards equity must be looked at and talked about. If you have ideas that you can present to the country so that they are utilised, we are open and ready to discuss those to find the best methods we could use to bring equity. Thank you.
Mr President, as the IFP we will support any instrument that is meant to address inequities of the past. I think you are well aware, Mr President - being from KwaZulu-Natal like some of us here - that, in the past, Indians and coloureds were pronounced by the then National Party - sorry the then National Party government is not here and I am sorry I used my hand ... [Interjections.] [Laughter.]
Why did you point this way? [Laughter.]
I think it was just a force of habit; we have remnants of the then National Party government. [Laughter.] The former National Party government pronounced that Indians and coloureds should not work north of the Tugela River; they should only be in the south. But fortunately for us in those days - during the days of the then KwaZulu government under the leadership of Prince Buthelezi - Prince Buthelezi rejected what the National Party had said and allowed Indians and coloureds to work even north of the Tugela River. Mr President, I think we don't want to go ... [Time expired.]
Order! Hon member, your time has expired. [Interjections.] Hon President, would you like to answer the unasked question? [Laughter.]
No. I can't answer the unasked question. [Laughter.] I did not get what the question was; I just heard the explanation leading up to the question. So, I don't want to be presumptuous and answer questions that have not been asked, unfortunately.