House Chair, the ACDP rises to support this report as previous speakers have indicated the convention established in the SKA was signed on 19 March this year by... and it's important to note all the different the different countries that are involved. The United Kingdom, the People's Republic of China, Portugal, Italy, Netherlands, Australia and South Africa. When fully deployed the SKA will consist of an array of 4000 antennas and be 50 times more sensitive than the Hubble Space Telescope even though it will be ground based. This is a phenomenal project.
South Africa will be one of the three host countries along side the UK and Australia and it will in our view give greater clarity on the wonders of carefully designed and created universe. There is indeed a creator of the heavens and the earth, a God whom we serve, an intelligent designer.
The ACDP agrees with the committees comment and this is incisive, why South Africa? This is a new day for Africa that after the few times that Africa was called a dark continent now that seems to be working to its advantage as the pristine clear skies and the radio s** are perfect for the SKA observatory in Karoo.
The project has yielded impressive economic benefits already for the area. Some 420 million has already been spent through construction of Meerkat and KAT7, some 7284 job opportunities have been created. So, why this convention? The convention is an intergovernmental organisation that is being created which will according to the officials be the best legal entity for this project as it will be implemented in terms of international binding law.
This has the benefit of diplomatic privileges and immunities to facilitate a project of this size. It will also assist with design policy such as procurement which is best suited for the project. Most importantly, in bid intergovernmental commitment at the highest political level hardly an imperialistic attitude or convention.
Certain attitudes were raised in the committee such as why New Zealand has withdrawn. Now in the case of New Zealand we understand it was due to budgetary constraints. The other question related to the removal of 133 000 hectares of land from farming and the question is whether tourism to the area will compensate for the loss of income from agriculture. This clearly needs to be closely monitored and one trusts that a project of this size will include and increase tourism to the area. Thank you. The ACDP will support this.