Chairperson, hon Minister, hon members, guests and friends, last week I again had the privilege of casting my democratic vote on who should govern. This has not always been the case in South Africa. Just 18 years ago, the majority of South Africans couldn't do that.
However, regardless of the outcomes, victory always goes to this democracy that was created by the ANC. We should all celebrate this democracy, because working together, we really can do more.
It is only through democratic consensus that progress can take place. The massive number of job losses that this country has experienced over the past two years has led to the untold suffering of those families that now have none or very little income. This government has put in place some very comprehensive measures to try to alleviate this problem.
One of these initiatives is Productivity South Africa. This institution strives to make businesses more productive and, as such, stay in business. Countless jobs have been saved by the interventions of this important entity. It is vital that countless more jobs are saved, and this can be achieved by the allocation of more funds to Productivity South Africa.
I feel honoured to be giving this speech during workers' month. In his welcoming address to the 25th anniversary of Cosatu celebrations on 4 December 2010, the general secretary of Cosatu said:
We are workers of South Africa, united under the banner of Cosatu. We are the creators of the wealth that is enjoyed by a small minority, which has hijacked the wealth we create for their private use.
This statement is true. How many of you South Africans think that gold and platinum just pop out of the ground in shiny blocks, packaged, weighed and stamped? Who do you thing builds your fixed assets, generates your products? Who do you think ploughs the fields, sows the seeds and harvests the food? Men of South Africa, when you get home in the evening, who do you think cleaned the house and fed the kids? Workers are the creators. Workers do the work.
In South Africa there is no black or white, there are just haves and have- nots, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. Everything that was and that will be manufactured, cleaned and produced, has been and will be manufactured, cleaned and produced by workers. Workers do the work.
An informed working class will never democratically choose a system that doesn't protect workers' rights. That is why, with foresight and vision, the ANC-led, Nelson Mandela government created the National Economic Development and Labour Council, Nedlac. The Nedlac founding declaration states:
The National Economic Development and Labour Council is the vehicle by which government, labour, business and community organisations will seek to co-operate, through problem-solving and negotiation, on economic, labour and development issues, and related challenges facing the country.
Nedlac will conduct its work in four broad areas, covering public finance and monetary policy, labour market policy, trade and industrial policy, and development policy. These four broad areas exist in Nedlac as the public finance and monetary chamber, the labour market chamber, the trade and industrial chamber and the development chamber. It is in these chambers that decision-makers from business, labour and government need to congregate, engage and debate until consensus is reached.
We cannot afford to have junior officials representing business, government and labour in Nedlac. This Parliament expects decision-makers with a rank not less than deputy directors-general to attend chamber meetings.
These deputy directors-general representing various government departments and their peers within business and labour must work tirelessly to reach consensus on issues raised in Nedlac. South Africa, it is your collective ability to reach consensus that gives us as South Africans a moral authority greater than anywhere else in the world.
Nedlac was established on Saturday, 18 February 1995, in Midrand, Gauteng, by the then Mandela administration in order to unite South Africans in dialogue and help create a nonracist, nonsexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa.
It is vital that this institution gets more resources, including the recognition of its strategic importance to further the aims of the national democratic revolution. These resources include the ability to attract and employ skilled professionals and retain them. More financial resources must be given to Nedlac so that the institution can keep up with the demands placed upon it and effectively render the mandated obligations.
The total budget for Nedlac for the 2011-12 financial year is R24,8 million. This is clearly not enough money for an organisation that is expected to facilitate consensus between organised labour, organised business, government and community organisations around public finance and monetary policy, labour market policy, trade and industrial policy and development policy. More money needs to be allocated to this vital institution as soon as possible.
The ANC's position, as stated on the occasion of the 82nd anniversary of the ANC on 8 January 1994, by the then president Nelson Mandela, was:
It is critically important that the trade union movement should continue to make its contribution to the development of a national consensus with regard to the objective of building a prosperous economy which would end unemployment, provide a living wage for all, raise levels of productivity and international competitiveness and ensure proper participation by workers in decision-making in their places of work.
Nedlac is vital, because debate is the only way to reach consensus. In general, organised labour engages the employer through a middle structure - the Bargaining Council. When it comes to peaceful engagement in South Africa between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, Nedlac is the point of the sword.
Business, labour and government need to make Nedlac a major priority. A broad spectrum of consensus needs to be met in order to help achieve our developmental state. Working together we can do more.
South Africa, if Nedlac fails, we all fail. "Working together, we can do more" are not just words. The ANC government has established this institution for exactly that purpose - working together for the betterment of all South Africans and the creation of a nonracist, nonsexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa - prosperous for everyone.
The DA's "half a loaf is better than none" position sounds very similar to that infamous quote just before the French Revolution: "Let them eat cake". This of course is coming from an organisation that doesn't have a labour policy in their so-called open, or what we have now come to call "opportunistic", society plan. We all know what happened shortly after "Let them eat cake" was repeated over and over again to the poorest of the poor.
It is only through consensus between decision-makers representing the constituencies of government, labour and business that we can genuinely transform our society from haves and have-nots into a nonracist, nonsexist, democratic and prosperous South Africa. It is only through consensus that we can create a better life for all; because working together we can do more. Thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, Minister of Labour and your department, hon members, fellow South Africans, I would like to start off by asking a question: Would it matter if workers' rights were human rights? The answer is undoubtedly a big yes.
In recognition of workers' rights as human rights, the Bill of Rights protects the fundamental workers' rights, such as labour relations, which is found in section 23 of the Constitution; freedom of association, found in section 18 of the Constitution; and the protection against slavery, servitude or forced labour which is also found in section 13 of the same Constitution.
Chairperson, the ANC has asked me to speak on three public entities, namely the Unemployment Insurance Fund, UIF, the Compensation Fund, and the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, CCMA. The ANC regards these three public entities as critical institutions to deepen workers' rights. The ANC calls on the Department of Labour to move with speed to improve services that are provided by the above three public entities. The ANC has always appreciated the efforts and measures employed by the UIF entity in order to improve revenue collection and general administration efficiency. However, the ANC has consistently stated that the fund focus should not exclusively be to increase reserves without workers benefiting from it. Hence we will continue to support initiatives aimed at training, development and placing unemployment first.
We further support a decision by the UIF to extend beneficiary coverage to include public servants. This is another way of making sure that this service is delivered to all workers and their dependants.
In addition, the UIF has informed the committee that it is in the process of considering extension of UIF benefits to learnerships, which are estimated to be approximately 94 000 per annum. This inclusion will reasonably contribute towards the fight against the youth unemployment.
Furthermore, the ANC supports the fund's consideration of the inclusion of approximately 80 000 migrant workers into the beneficiary and contributing population. These efforts are just a few examples of how government will rally the country behind meaningful economic transformation and job creation, but within the confines of the new growth fund.
When the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration was established, it was expected that it would resolve disputes much more effectively and that the national settlement rate would increase, thereby reducing strikes and lockouts. By providing training it was expected that employers and workers would learn about the correct procedure and code of conduct which would ultimately result in a lower caseload for the CCMA.
We have witnessed relatively high national settlements of disputes since the CCMA took over. This institution still needs to improve the dispute resolution rate, which was 11% below its target of 70% in the 2009-10 financial year.
We appreciate the reduction of reviews of arbitration awards. This has been attributed mainly to quality training that the institution had introduced for its commissioners. Since 2008, the CCMA has managed to conduct a high level of conciliation within the statutory timeframe of 30 days and has significantly reduced the number of late awards by 73%.
However, there has been an increase in noncompliance with arbitration awards, especially within the small- and medium-sized employers who are further contributing to poor workers being denied justice.
For the first time, hon Minister, the DA has talked sense in saying that once workers who benefit from of the Compensation Fund become disabled, they need to be linked to the Sheltered Employment Factories. I think this is the first time since I became an MP - and I asked myself if I was actually hearing a member of the DA saying that. [Applause.]
This public entity has been faced with complex challenges that range from corrupt officials to intricate administrative challenges such as huge backlogs and poor IT performance.
We acknowledge that the Compensation Fund is working hard to address its challenges. We call on the Minister and the department to provide the resources that are required to meet the administration challenges faced by the Compensation Fund.
The ANC calls upon employers and their associations to prioritise occupational health and safety in workplaces in order to avoid occupational injuries and diseases. Our call is informed by one of our historical documents the ANC called "Ready to govern". This refers to the rights of the youth: The youth has a right to a stable family life and care, free of occupational injuries and diseases.
The youth also has a right to work within a safe and healthy environment. Hence we call on employers to make it a point for the Occupational Health and Safety Act that exists to be looked at in order to avoid the Compensation Fund having to continue paying people who are injured and who contract diseases as a result of the ignorance of the employers.
There are approximately 1,2 million domestic workers in the country, who also have dependants, meaning that when a domestic worker is injured at work, the whole family will lose its income, because employers of domestic workers are not covered by the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act.
Therefore, the department, in assisting those vulnerable workers, must find a way of incorporating the employers of domestic workers in order for them to contribute towards the Compensation Fund. The only recourse is for domestic workers to sue their employers, but that is unlikely, given the financial implications of such action.
During our deliberations with the department on its strategic plan, we raised concerns around this issue and we hope our concerns will be attended to in order to assist these vulnerable workers.
Before I sit down, Chairperson, let me just speak on two points ...
The ANC supports the Budget Vote. [Time expired.][Applause.]
Chair, hon Minister, hon Chair of the Committee on Labour and fellow South Africans, I thank you all. Let me take this opportunity to caution my friend, hon Nchabeleng, that apartheid died and was buried in 1994. [Interjections.] And let us not relive the past or we will never be able to make any contribution that would put this country forward. Apartheid is gone and forgotten.
Let me also in the same breath say that the demands of communism in this world should have signalled ... [Interjections.]
Order! Please give the speaker a chance.
Let me also in the same breath say that the demands of communism in this world should have signalled to South African communists that communism has no future in this world, but it seems that South African communists cannot learn from history and that is unfortunate. [Interjections.]
Hela monna! [My goodness!] Hang on! Order! Hon Boinamo, can't you hear me? I have been calling for order and you keep on speaking, going on and on. I am trying to protect you, chief. Members, please give the member an opportunity to express his view. [Interjections.] Please! Order! Carry on, hon Boinamo.
Chair, as leaders we are custodians of the hopes and aspirations of our nation, so let us not play with the emotions of our people. Our country ranks amongst the highest in terms of unemployment. Government has promised to create five million jobs by 2020. However, this might just be one of those hollow promises.
Statistics SA's quarterly Labour Force Survey for the third quarter of 2010 records the fact that one in four South Africans - 25,3% - is unemployed at present. If we use government's official definition, including discouraged job seekers, the figure rises to one in three, which is 33,1%. This amounts to 6,4 million South Africans who are unable to find work, support their families or build towards their hopes and aspirations.
An endeavour that affects the labour market must, therefore, be meticulously contemplated. Attempts that can help build an environment conducive to significant job creation have to be urgently considered. In the same way, measures that may exacerbate the unemployment crisis have to be avoided at all costs.
The DA unequivocally supports measures that safeguard the rights of employees; exploitative labour practices have no place in our hard-earned democracy. However, I want to tell you that we hold that legitimate calls for fair labour laws have been hijacked by a self-serving interest group, which is now using claims of exploitation as a ruse to boost its membership numbers. The DA declares that the four Labour Bills that were gazetted on 17 December 2010 are designed partly to address the legitimate problems and partly to appease Cosatu, Congress of South African Trade Unions, and boost the number of unionised workers. We assert that they are misguided and do not serve the interests of the masses of this country.
In principle, the DA has no objection to employees being unionised, neither do we object in principle to an interest group acting to defend its own interests.
The problem is with the Cabinet and the Department of Labour, who are acceding to Cosatu's demands with little regard to vulnerable workers who stand to lose jobs, or to the plight of the unemployed who will find it harder than ever to find jobs, should these measures be promulgated.
As the Department of Labour's own impact assessment has indicated, the cost of relatively few new permanent, and therefore potentially unionised jobs will be the destruction of hundreds of thousands, and quite possibly a million jobs in the South African economy.
The equation is simple; you can either have a few more permanent jobs, and a lot more unemployment, or you can have more temporary jobs, and a lot less unemployment.
Clearly Cosatu would prefer the former option, for it provides them with the opportunity to boost their membership numbers and thus collect more affiliation fees, but the vast majority of South Africans would prefer the latter. This, ultimately, is why we believe these proposed measures are wrong-minded and need to be reconsidered.
The impact assessment commissioned on this matter by the Department of Labour says that the jobs of 2,13 million South Africans classified as fixed-term, temporary or seasonal workers will be placed in jeopardy by these legislative measures.
Not all these workers will lose their jobs - some temporary workers might be rehired in a permanent capacity. However, the majority will be made redundant, with the impact assessment going as far as to conclude that the end result would have serious destabilising effects in the labour market. This is a quite unprecedented level of condemnation in a government- commissioned report.
The DA holds that the creation of a vibrant, growing economy must be at the heart of the effort to address unemployment and alleviate poverty in South Africa. This is essentially the standard by which these proposed amendments must be judged.
Will they help to create quality jobs, and enhance skills development? Will they help to alleviate poverty, based on the studies available to us and our careful assessment of these provisions set in these legislative proposals? The DA's answer to these questions is no!
Between our catastrophic levels of unemployment and the prospect of an economy with full employment stands the impenetrable barrier of our labour laws. These wicked laws are not only throwing millions of our people into the dustbins of joblessness, are not only crippling our economy, are not only the primary reason for South Africa's being amongst the most unequal societies in the world, but they are a violation of human rights. Our labour laws deny South Africans a fundamental right - the right to work.
The South African economy is performing badly despite our vast natural resources, well-managed national finances and considerable industrial experience; we should be growing rapidly and lifting our people out of abject poverty. Instead, we have failed since 1994 even to reach 6% growth. We are easily exceeded by other developing countries. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Chair, hon Minister, hon members, the newly appointed director-general, leaders of trade unions and other stakeholders who are present here, we want to focus on the fact that the labour laws amendments are an entrenchment of our democracy. These amendments also mean the deepening of freedom for the majority of workers who have a lot of confidence in the ANC-led government and the legislative process, as has been shown.
Unlike hon Ollis and the DA, we are not going to excitedly celebrate that six out of ten of the electorate voted for the ANC and reaffirmed its mandate, because we represent all South Africans. [Applause.] In fact, the one out of four is merely DA plus ID, so there is nothing new that we have seen. [Applause.] That is why earlier on we were not even worried about giving you the few minutes that were allocated to the ID, because you are just one and the same thing. There is no difference. We just saw a mathematical addition between the DA and the ID.
What is also important, which we must emphasise, is that we all agree that apartheid is dead; it was buried. Many in your bench did not like or celebrate the death of apartheid, but were happy to join your ranks because they find some level of compromise and flirting with the apartheid system. [Interjections.]
Although apartheid has died, many workers in the factories still experience and see the scars of apartheid. [Interjections.] They are born in them. [Interjections.] It is still there, and it is something that we cannot deny. It is the labour amendment laws that seek to reverse the scars of apartheid that are still there. For them, the factory has not changed. There is still a mlungu [bureaucrat], who is generally white, and there is still a low-ranked worker in the factory, who is generally black. So, that is what they see on a daily basis in practice. [Interjections.]
So, hon members of the DA cannot just come here and tell us we must accept that apartheid is dead without us basically going into the foundation of the fact that we still experience, as does many of our people, the consequences of apartheid 17 years later. In many instances, apartheid was perpetrated by the very same people whom the DA seeks to represent in this House. [Applause.]
The labour laws of this country will remain irrelevant to the majority of South Africans and workers if they do not seek to protect them and their rights. The freedom guaranteed through the struggles against apartheid and its defeat, and the ushering in of democracy in 1994, will remain meaningless if they are not for the protection of the majority of workers in this particular country.
A nucleus for the ANC's approach to change the conditions of the ordinary workers remains in the Freedom Charter which states:
All who work shall be free to form trade unions, to elect their officers and to make wage agreements with their employers.
This particular right is also stipulated in our Constitution and in the Labour Relations Act. Unfortunately, what we have seen from the DA and the IFP, is that when there is a lack of ideas on what we need to do in order to create jobs for the majority of our workers, the first point of attack has always remained the trade unions.
They wish to ensure that we protect the rights of chief executive officers to earn R60 million in bonuses while workers remain at the lower rung of the share in the economy of this country.
The Freedom Charter goes on to say:
The state shall recognise the right and duty of all to work.
As part of upholding all those responsibilities, the ANC says that the right to work does not mean to have a job and remain poor. That is what we have seen and that is why these discussions about the Labour Relations Amendment Bill remain, particularly in terms of the definition of who an employer is and who an employee is, but, more importantly, on the role of the labour brokers.
Yes, we agree that, in many instances, for workers who have never been able to have access to a job or who would ordinarily not have worked, there has been a facilitation of work through labour brokers. The reality is, however, that at the end of the day, the people who benefit from that kind of a relationship remain the labour brokers, while the workers mainly have only been able to get enough money to get to work. They can't even change the conditions which they find themselves in. If the so-called good labour brokers - and we want to continue to argue this stipulation in the policies gazetted - want to protect the worst of the labour brokers, then it means that we will have no option but to look again at this entire notion of allowing labour brokers to become the major beneficiaries of this kind of employment relationships, while workers themselves do not benefit.
There are allegations that have been repeated here. The notion that labour brokers create jobs is false. Labour brokers actually exist because there are vacancies to be filled. I think that we must not come here and drum up hysteria and say people are going to lose jobs just because there is a discussion on whether labour brokers will be there or not.
Moving forward, part of the things which are in the Freedom Charter in terms of the ANC's purpose of ensuring that the rights of workers are protected is the notion of equal work and equal pay. Historically, this is due to the fact that a lot of companies have gone on without being monitored, using tests which ultimately discriminate against workers on the basis of their race, sex or disabilities, and so forth.
They have gone on unnoticed and have continued to perpetrate the racial apartheid laws because - which is something we have consistently raised within the portfolio committee - it is the role of labour inspectors to do so. Minister, we have to ensure that we invest a lot of money in this issue in order to ensure that the notion of equal pay is put into place.
One of the things which the DA and some other so-called intellectuals, or whatever, have wanted to perpetrate through the so-called Jimmy Manyi saga ... [Interjections.] I don't know what your relationship with Jimmy Manyi is. I thought it is, actually, hon Ollis, beyond politics. You are so infatuated with him that all the problems and everything else that have to do with the problems in labour have to do with Jimmy Manyi. [Interjections.]
However, one of the things which we missed with regard to the new Labour Relations Amendment Bill has been the question of permanent employees. I mentioned earlier on, for instance, that the CEO of Pick n Pay earned more than R60 million, while workers at Pick n Pay have been in temporary employment for more than 20 years.
What must we say to those workers? We must respect the fact that Pick n Pay has a right to decide how much it pays its CEO, whereas the workers of Pick n Pay, who are the ones who actually create the wealth, who are the ones who actually lead to a situation wherein Pick n Pay's profit soars, who are the ones who ensured that the democracy we are enjoying has given him and the board of directors that right to pay him that R60 million ... We must shut our eyes and say that it is in the name of profit maximisation. It is the capitalist system; we must accept it. There is no future for any other economic system.
Is that what we should be explaining to our workers? [Interjections.] That is why it is important to ensure that through these labour laws, the notion of permanent jobs versus temporary jobs helps workers realise their democracy and their freedom.
Finally, we have to invest, and we are happy that a lot of resources have been invested in the Department of Labour in order to make sure that after amendments there is going to be a whole range of discussions and engagements throughout this term of office. I like the fact that, when you came here, you said that the elections are over and that there will be no politicking.
Since the elections are over, we hope that you will now be able to tap into your very bankrupt intellectual energy, so that we will be able to ensure that we help not only those who are seeking to profit from the exploitation of workers, but also the workers themselves.
There can be no one who comes out and says that apartheid has come to an end whereas they want to consistently defend the laws which were the veins of that apartheid system. [Interjections.] That is what we are saying with this new labour legislation and we hope that you will join in; not in representation of one out of four, but in representation of all South Africans - black, white, Indian, coloured, and everybody. Thank you very much, Chair. [Applause.]
Chairperson, firstly I want to thank all the participants in this debate, as well as everybody who attended this debate. I won't respond to all of the issues that were raised, but I just want to respond to some of them.
I want to appeal to the hon members that when we start presenting the budget debate, as the department, some of them must really listen very carefully; particularly when it comes to some of the issues that we raised during the budget speech.
One such issue relates to the processing of claims. Yes, we did acknowledge the pace with which the claims were being processed. We have said that the turnaround strategy is in an advanced stage and we are decentralising the processing of claims. That will ensure that the claims are processed more quickly.
Another issue that we need to look at is inspections. We do inspections to make sure that workers are protected and that they work in a safe environment. At the same time, however, we do inspections to assist the companies or employers so that they are aware as to whether or not the conditions in which they are doing production are environmentally friendly.
We can prevent a lot of injuries, provided that the employers also take part in making sure that the workers are aware of or are trained on safety measures in the companies. With regard to whether or not the department is delivering for all, the answer is yes, because whenever we do inspections, we assist both the workers and the employers.
On the issue of Public Service employment, we are not going to wait for the proposed amendment to be finalised, because we have a responsibility to register job seekers, as well as those who were retrenched. We also have the responsibility to try and counsel the job seekers on career paths, because you will find that some of them took certain subjects during their schooling days, but applied for positions that do not talk to what they studied. That is what we are doing as the department.
At the same time we try to match and place those job seekers in various places. Therefore, we can't wait for the proposed amendment that is before Nedlac. We are also going to attend to that particular issue, because I think that it has taken a very long time for Nedlac to finalise that process. I know that there are people who are speaking on behalf of other people. I don't think that we can come here or go wherever in public and say that this is what is going to happen, because I'm still waiting for the report from our social partners in Nedlac. I respect the responsibility of all those social partners. The other issue that I want to address is that of saying that this legislation is based on what Mr Manyi said when he was ... [Interjections.] No, it's not over. I've got 10 minutes. Unfortunately I was the House Chair previously, so I know how these clocks work. [Laughter.] Sometimes they do their own thing at the wrong time.
I just want to respond on the issue of what was said by Mr Manyi. I think that we must determine the capacity in which Mr Manyi said what he said at that stage. Yes, he was the director-general, but Mr Manyi was addressing the Black Management Forum, BMF, which he addressed in his capacity as its president, not as the director-general of the department.
Therefore, we must determine that and not push Jimmy Manyi to wear a hat that he was not wearing. [Applause.] I think that the hon members should get the footage of the SABC ... [Interjections.] Then it means that you did not listen to what Manyi said from the beginning, particularly what he said in KwaZulu-Natal. He was there as the president of the BMF, not as the director-general of the department. Therefore ... [Interjections.]
Order, hon members, order! Let us allow the Minister to respond to the debate.
No, my time is not up and that's the unfortunate part of it. You must also ask your Whips how they allocate time, before you come and complain here. I think we must wait for the process of Nedlac to be finalised and then, when it's your turn as parliamentarians to deliberate on those proposed amendments, that's when you can also try to convince each other on what that legislation should look like.
I want to say that you must consider what has been said by the public. I have not even said what the public said, but I know that as Members of Parliament you are going to do public hearings; therefore, you must wait for that moment.
I also want to give clarity on certain issues, because it seems as if you are saying that the Department of Labour is working for Cosatu, or whatever. As the Department of Labour we are working with three federations, that is Cosatu, the Federation of Unions of South Africa, Fedusa, and Nactwu.
We also include the organised businesses as our social partners. That is why, in most cases, whenever we deal with labour issues we involve both organised labour and businesses.
If you remember - I do believe that you always watch the news - we had the business summit and later had the labour job summit. Those are the things that I want to clarify because, yes, we may have the alliance with Cosatu, but some of you also have an alliance with Fedusa, but we don't complain about that. It's unfortunate that in most cases you go out and speak on behalf of the federations without their mandate. I think that we must wait for the processes to unfold. [Interjections.]
You also raised the issue of factories being closed in Newcastle because of the Bargaining Council's decisions. As a country we have legislation that allows companies to apply for exemptions. If those companies don't want to do so, we can't force them to apply. Therefore, I think that we need to accept that it was their decision not to apply for the exemptions.
I also want to touch on the issue of labour brokers. I said that there are labour brokers that have negative tendencies. For example, at Shoprite Checkers and Rainbow Chickens in KwaZulu-Natal there were two incidents in which workers were killed by machines.
When the families went there to claim, Rainbow Chickens said that the guy was employed by a labour broker and the company, therefore, can't pay anything for that particular person. They don't even get pensions when they leave these companies, while you as Members of Parliament enjoy the fact that when you leave Parliament you will get pensions. I think that we must look into those issues and determine how we should protect our vulnerable workers in this country. We must also make sure that whoever invests in this country complies with the laws of the country. That's when we will be able to be proud and say that we protect both the employers and the employees, particularly the employees.
By the way, when strikes are taking place in some instances, you must not undermine workers and think that they don't understand the financial implications in those particular companies. Workers know how much profit was made, and therefore, they also want to get something out of that. You can't pay a person a bonus of R1 million while you can't afford to pay just R300, as an increment, for a lower-paid worker in that particular company. I think that we must look at those things.
Lastly, I just want to say that these proposed amendments are based on the international conventions - of which organised businesses and labour from South Africa are signatories - on how we should treat workers as social partners.
I believe, hon Ollis, that you will be in Geneva and you will be able to interrogate those decisions, and even if you are not able to convince other people, you will be bound by those decisions that are going to be taken in the ILO.
Finally, I just want to say to the hon members that, as Members of Parliament, they have the responsibility to do oversight, and oversight is done in different forms. If you want information, you have to tell the department that, as the portfolio committee, you are going to have a meeting and these are the issues you would like the department to come and address you on. That way you will get the correct information, rather than working on assumptions. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.