Deputy Speaker and hon members, I have always wanted to say "and people in the gallery" and today I can say that, because there are some in the gallery. I've noticed some colleagues come here and talk about people in the gallery while there is nobody in the gallery. However, coming back to the business of the day, the IFP will support the amendments contained in this Bill. However, we are also concerned about the cost implications, which hon George has indicated and where there will be an additional liability of R4,735 billion to National Treasury. I hope that an in-principle decision has been taken by the Ministers' Committee on the Budget, MinComBud, to provide this additional funding in 2012, otherwise this Bill cannot be enacted in the form that we think it will be.
I would also like to say we support the "clean break" principle. I understand that this already applies to the Political Office Bearers Pension Scheme, where this principle is in effect. But the question is: Is there such a thing as a clean break? What if people who are divorced today find in a year's time that they want to get back together? What happens then?
Furthermore, I am aware - and colleagues might be aware - of divorce arrangements that take place for convenience; people live together all their lives, but legally they are divorced. They do that for various reasons, some being business reasons, tax avoidance and so forth. I do hope that this enactment here does not allow these loopholes to be exploited, where people would see a cash cow in the pension fund and decide to divorce, take half the money and continue living together. These are some of the things that will have to be monitored very closely by the pension fund board itself over time.
In essence, though, we support the principles that are contained in this pension law amending Bill.