Hon Chairperson and hon members, we are discussing the Report of the Committee on Private Members' Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions on the Legislative Proposal to Regulate the Business Interests of State Employees, sponsored by the hon I O Davidson of the DA.
The Committee on Private Members' Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions, having considered the legislative proposal to regulate the business interests of state employees in terms of Rule 211 of the Rules of National Assembly, having consulted with the Portfolio Committee on Public Service and Administration, and the Ministry of Public Service and Administration, and having had the presentation by hon Davidson, recommends that permission not be granted to the member to proceed with the legislative proposal.
The committee wishes to make the following observations with regard to its recommendation. Firstly, the legislative proposal of the hon Davidson pre- empts legislation soon to be introduced by the Department of Public Service and Administration. Secondly, the objectives of the legislative proposal are largely similar to the legislation envisaged in the Public Sector Integrity Management Framework published by the Department of Public Service and Administration. Thirdly, the legislation envisaged in the framework will apply to public servants in the national, provincial and local government spheres in relation to the regulation of their business interests when doing business with the state.
Fourthly, the proposed legislation will cover the acceptance of gifts, hospitality and other benefits. It will cover disclosure of financial interests of public servants, and it will amend the financial disclosure form of public servants. It will give conditions for public servants with business interests seeking to conduct business with government. It will place restrictions on public servants doing remunerative work outside the Public Service, and it will regulate post-Public-Service employment.
Fifthly, the proposed legislation will, in addition, provide for the appointment of an Ethics Office to ensure compliance, as well as provide for employment agreements of public servants to include specific key performance areas that will bind and commit employees to complying with the measures.
It is further envisaged that a special unit will be established, which will liaise closely with the Ethics Office to investigate all instances of conflict of interest and to ensure that disciplinary measures are taken when necessary.
Finally, the undertaking of the Minister for the Public Service and Administration that the proposed legislation will be tabled in Parliament before the end of the 2011-12 financial year was specifically noted. The committee resolves that, in its monitoring, the progress made by the department will always be under scrutiny. We move that this report be adopted by the House. Thank you.
There was no debate.
Hon House Chairperson, I move:
That the Report be adopted.
Thank you, hon member. A request has been received that there be declarations of vote. I will now allow for declarations.
Declarations of vote:
Thank you, Mr Chairman. I gladly follow the hon member Thobejane. The DA will support this report, but we need to point out why we are doing so with some reservations.
This private member's legislative proposal by Mr Davidson aims to regulate business interests of state employees. It is based on existing legislation already in operation in the Western Cape.
The Committee on Private Members' Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions considers proposals in terms of six technical criteria, one of which is whether government is intending to introduce similar legislation soon.
The committee was informed in person by the then Minister for the Public Service and Administration, Minister Baloyi, that government was indeed going to introduce its own legislation that would cover the ambit of the proposal. Minister Baloyi confirmed that government's legislation would be introduced before the end of the current financial year. That submission formed the basis for the committee's resolution to recommend that the proposal of Mr Davidson should not proceed, since it pre-empted similar legislation to be introduced by government.
Mr Chairman, a worrying factor, though, is that government has a very bad record when it comes to giving undertakings on its own legislative plans. On 18 August this year, I pointed out in a declaration of vote on another proposal by the DA that was blocked on the basis that it pre-empted government legislation, that that particular legislation was at that stage already four months late. It is now a further three months later, and sadly there is still no sign of the promised Executive Members' Ethics Bill by government. The committee took a similar resolution in respect of the proposal to repeal the South African Boxing Act. Government's deadline for the introduction of its own Bill has now also passed and the promised legislation is nowhere to be seen. And now in this case we are again forced to accept government's word.
I urge the new Minister for the Public Service and Administration to personally involve himself in the matter and to ensure that undertakings and deadlines are met. For this committee, the Committee on Private Members' Legislative Proposals and Special Petitions, to be able to do its work and to be taken seriously, it needs the support and cooperation of government. We will support this report before the House, but we urge the executive to take this committee and Parliament seriously. Thank you.
Thank you, House Chairperson. I think it is not fair for the hon member to come here and re-read what we as the committee agreed upon. We as the committee agreed on the recommendations; we understand what the rules say in regard to how we should operate; and I feel that it is not fair to this House and the public for the DA to come and grandstand on what was agreed upon in the committee and the concerns that are recorded as part of the report.
I do not want to speak for long, Chair, but let me say that I don't think standing and showing mistrust in the executive is fair. We have members of the executive who have treated Parliament with respect, and what is happening here in what hon member Pretorius is doing is, he is casting doubt on the executive in regard to the commitment that they have made to Parliament, and I don't think it is fair.
As a committee we have committed ourselves to monitoring what needs to happen, as part of the work that we do, and the commitment that the Minister has made. I don't think there is anything that warrants our coming and saying we don't think it is going to happen. There is proof that the Minister for the Public Service and Administration is currently busy with the process and they have presented where they are in terms of their progress. I think they should be allowed space and come to Parliament to report, as they have promised to do.
So we should not give the public an impression that the executive does not keep to the commitments that they make, or that they do not deliver on the commitments that they make to Parliament, because that would be incorrect, and I think that we need to set the record straight on behalf of the committee as well. Thank you very much, Chair.
Motion agreed to.
Report accordingly adopted.