Hon Deputy Speaker, hon members, one of the contentious issues raised by some of the organisations that made submissions, particularly institutions of higher education, was the matter of trade restrictions placed on council members and employees of universities. Azapo believes that it is unethical for people who sit in council meetings and on other council committees to do business with those universities. They are part of the budgeting process; they know what has been allocated and for what. That they are expected to recuse themselves when their tenders are considered does not erase the fact that they have inside information and therefore have an unfair advantage over the other competitors.
Briefly stated, Azapo says: Under no circumstances should council members have business dealings with their universities. Those individuals who decide to do business with universities should decline appointment to university councils.
We have grudgingly accepted conditions under which members of staff can be allowed to do business with their universities. If we are serious in our fight against corruption and graft, we cannot allow a situation where college council members take turns allocating business to each other while arguing that they were not there when decisions to award contracts were made. Basically, what happens is that while a member has recused himself or herself, the others are made to take care of his or her interests. So, they take turns awarding business to each other. Azapo therefore supports the Higher Education Laws Amendment Bill.
Deputy Speaker, hon Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Members of Parliament and the newly appointed director-general, I greet you all this afternoon. The Higher Education Laws Amendment Bill seeks to further transform and strengthen the system of higher education. The Bill is meant to attend to technical amendments in order to conform to the changes introduced by the President in this Fourth Parliament.
Notably there were gaps in the principal Act with regard to the regulation of the conduct of members of council, members of committees of council and employees at public institutions of higher education engaging in business with the relevant or their own public institutions of higher education. This tendency presents a possible conflict of interest.
In pursuit of this objective, it was necessary to introduce this section into law for proper administration of the regulatory framework, thereby managing the conflict or possible conflict of interest that may arise.
This is to curb the potential danger that existed over the years in this regard, wherein those involved, particularly those in governance and management of such institutions and in supply chain positions, would engage in apparent corrupt practices with impunity, either, firstly, because their institutions did not have adequate measures in this regard or, secondly, because the definition of "conflict of interest" was narrow, with a lack of enforcement measures and/or an apparent neglect of rules and regulations, or there simply was interference with such rules and regulations.
This provision will therefore ensure that there is a legal perspective and basis for national interpretation. This should not be interpreted as interference with the autonomy and academic freedom of institutions of higher learning inasmuch as this is an ongoing debate. Rather, it is important that public funds allocated to these institutions are not used to enrich individuals but instead are accounted for by instituting water-tight measures and mechanisms.
We are equally interested in and concerned about the participation of students in tender committees and activities. There are serious implications in this regard. We may witness strike action based on tenders that went wrong or brought conflict to students and management. Those who intend engaging in business with the relevant institutions should have declared their interest and, if they are the sole providers of such a product, declared that their products are unique and that it is in the best interests of that particular institution. Failure to declare constitutes an offence and should be punishable.
Mfumo wa ANC wu lava ku enghenisa xandla eka ku herisa maendlelo lama ma nga na xiave lexikulu eka timhaka ta vukungundzwana etiyunivhesiti hi ku antswisa Nawumbisi lowu.
Tiyunivhesiti a ti ri na matirhelo, swinawanawana na maendlelo ya tona hi ku hambanahambana ka tona laha tikweni ra hina. A ku nga ri na nawu lowu a wu kombisa leswaku swirho swa huvo ya yunivhesiti kumbe swirho swa tikomiti ta huvo na vatirhi va yunivhesiti yoleyo va fanele ku tikhoma hi ndlela yihi loko va lava ku enghenela mabindzu na yunivhesiti leyi va tirhaka eka yona.
Mutirhi wa yunivhesiti kumbe xirho xa huvo kumbe komiti ya huvo ya yunivhesiti loyi a lavaka ku enghenela eka swa mabindzu na yunivhesiti yoleyo, u va na nkwetlembetano embilwini eka leswi swi nga lulamela yena kumbe yunivhesiti. Ku navela ka yena ni ka yunivhesiti a ku fani.
Nawu lowu wu sivela xiyimo lexi hikuva xi bihile, xi endla leswaku lava va nga ehandle ka yunivhesiti yoleyo va nga khomiwi hi mfanelo. Va tsandzekisiwa ku enghenela eka swa mabindzu na yunivhesiti yoleyo.
Loko munhu a fanele ku endla bindzu na yunivhesiti, hi tlhelo a ri un'wana wa lava vuriweke laha henhla, u fanele a tiva leswaku: bindzu ra yena a ri fani na ra munhu un'wana kumbe khamphani yin'wana, hi yena ntsena a endlaka bindzu ra muxaka wolowo, naswona hi ku endlisa sweswo swi yisa ku humelela ni ku tsakela ka yunivhesiti emahlweni.
Ehandle ka swona vanhu lava khumbekaka va fanele ku kombisa eka tikomiti leti va nga swirho eka tona, leti vona kumbe lava nga ekusuhi na vona kumbe maxaka ya vona va lavaka ku bindzula hi ku xaviselana na yunivhesiti.
Loko swo tshuka swi kumeka leswaku leswi swi vuriweke laha henhla swi humelerile ku ta va nandzu wa vugevenga hi ku ya hi Nawu lowu.
Hi na ku tshemba leswaku hinkwavo lava va nga eka swiyimo leswi hi vulavulaka hi swona va ta landzelela ni ku xixima nawu lowu hi ku hetiseka. Lava nga ta honisa nawu lowu va ta xupuriwa. (Translation of Xitsonga paragraphs follows.)
[The ANC government wants to contribute towards the eradication of processes that contribute immensely to issues of corruption in universities by amending this Act.
Universities had their own ways of operation, rules and regulations in our country. There was no rule which stipulated how members of the university council or committee members of the council and employees of that university should conduct themselves if they wanted to engage in business with the university that they are employed at. A university employee or a member of the council or executive committee of the university who wants to engage in business with that particular university, has a conflict of interest with regard to what is good for him or the university. His interest differs from that of the university.
The Bill prevents this situation because it is bad; it causes the people who are outside that university to be treated unfairly. They are prevented from engaging in business with that university.
If a person wants to engage in business practices with the university while, on the other hand, he is one of the aforementioned, he should ensure that: his business or company is unique, that he is the only one doing that kind of business, and by so doing it is in the best interest of the university.
Apart from that, the people involved should declare to the committees that they are members of, that which they, their associates or relatives want to benefit from by engaging in business with the university.
If it is found that the aforementioned has occurred, it will be a criminal offence, according to this Bill.
We believe that all those who are in the situations that we are talking about will fully adhere to and comply with this Bill. Those who transgress will be punished.]
Hon Dexter never discussed or debated this Bill with us in the committee, and that is where the initial discussions are supposed to take place. Coming to debate that at this level may not be wrong, but you are bound to be out of context. Since the departure of Rev Dandala, Cope - both inside and outside - is out of the race. They need not be taken seriously.
Muhlonipheki Xipikara, inkomu. [Va ba mavoko.] [Hon Speaker, thank you.] [Applause.]]
Chairperson, let me once more thank my party, the ANC, for its support, as well as all the other parties that actually supported this.
Hon Kloppers-Lourens, I think that what you are raising is a bit like splitting hairs, because if the National Student Financial Aid Scheme, NSFAS, has to be put under administration precisely because there is a threat to its optimal functioning, why not draw those monies from the NSFAS? That process is aimed at enhancing the functionality and positive impact of the NSFAS. However, I do take the point that you are making, hon Kloppers-Lourens, that we have to make sure that things do not fall through the cracks; that when we do away with the unconstitutional section, we do not open a gap for people not to pay and for us not to be able to recover monies owed. We take that point. That is why we said we have prioritised that and we are working at looking urgently at a system that will actually replace this.
It is very interesting, nevertheless, that I do not know why the DA would support these principles and then waver. If you will allow me, Chair, to talk to my benches on this side, I can say that maybe what this is reflecting is a fundamental process that is taking place within the DA. The DA is divided, essentially between two strata. [Interjections.] The one stratum is your Progressive Federal Party, PFP, type of old liberals, like my good friend who has gone, Mike Ellis, and the other is a hard-line rightist stratum that came from the National Party to come together to form the DA.
Like Marthinus van Schalkwyk.
Increasingly - no, Marthinus is progressive. [Laughter.] Increasingly, this rightist faction is actually taking over the DA in terms of its orientation.
On a point of order, Madam Chair: Are we debating this Bill, or we are talking about the DA, because we are supporting this Bill. Perhaps you aren't aware of that, Chair? [Interjections.]
I think it is important when we debate that we also analyse the behaviour of certain political entities towards the Bill and the material basis of their attitude to what we are doing.
Bab' uMpontshane engifuna ukukusho nje kule zinto ozishoyo ngikuzwa kahle kakhulu. Azikho izimali ze-NSFAS ezibuyela emuva. Uma kukhona inyuvesi engezukuzisebenzisa siyazithatha sizise lapho zidingeka khona. Amanyuvesi asathi abafundi abahluphekayo abakhokhe imali yokubhalisa, usitshele baba uma uzwa ngawo ngoba aphula umthetho nomgomo kahulumeni. Nama-Credit Bureau siwakhiphile ngoNSFAS sisaxoxa namanyuvesi ukuthi abakhiphe labafundi ngoba abanye basasele ngoba befakwe amanyuvesi, hhayi ngoba befakwe i-National Student Financial Aid Scheme. Ngiyabonga kakhulu.
Cha ngaphambi kokuba ngihlale phansi nansi into yokugcina engifuna ukuyisho. Angizukumphendula umhlonishwa uDexter. [Kuphele isikhathi.] [Ubuwelewele.] (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[Mr Mpontshane, what I would like to say is that I completely understand what you are saying. No NSFAS funds are sent back. If a university does not use the funds, we take them to where they are needed. You should tell us about the universities that still insist that poor students pay the registration fee, sir, because they are contravening government policy. The credit bureaus have been removed from the NSFAS and we are in talks with the universities to remove the names of those students who were blacklisted by the universities and not by the National Student Financial Aid Scheme. Thank you very much.
Before I sit, I would like to say one last thing. I will not reply to hon Dexter. [Time expired.] [Interjections.]]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time.