Chairperson, at the outset I want to clearly indicate that the DP and the DA fully support the ratification of the Abuja Treaty. The Abuja Treaty of 3 June 1991, together with the Algiers summit of July 1999 and the Sirte summit of September 1999, has far-reaching financial and legislative implications for South Africa. The importance of the Abuja Treaty for South Africa cannot be overstressed, and very important planning, decision-making and legislation will have to follow.
The objectives of the Abuja Treaty clearly indicate the far-reaching and important implications:
(a) To promote economic, social and cultural development and the integration of African economies ...
(b) To establish, on a continental scale, a framework for the development, mobilisation and utilisation of the human and material resources of Africa in order to achieve self-reliant development;
(c) To promote co-operation in all fields of human endeavour in order to raise the standard of living of African peoples, and maintain and enhance economic stability, foster close and peaceful relations among member states and contribute to the progress, development and economic integration of the continent; and,
(d) To co-ordinate and harmonise policies among existing and future economic communities in order to foster the gradual establishment of the community.
These are very important objectives, and I think we can all subscribe to them.
If one also analyses the stages of implementation of the Abuja Treaty, important consequences follow. The stages are as follows: stage 1, strengthening and creating regional economic communities, the RECs, such as SADC and Comesa, within the first five years; stage 2, stabilisation of tariff and other barriers to regional trade and sectorial integration; stage 3, the establishment of a free-trade area, after another 10 years; stage 4, harmonisation of tariff and nontariff systems, after another two years; stage 5, establishment of a common market and the adoption of common policies, after another four years; and, stage 6, the integration of all sectors, establishment of a central bank and a single African currency, setting up an African monetary union and creating and electing the first Pan-African Parliament.
The Sirte summit moved all these important consequences closer, and therefore underlines their importance.
Let me summarise the most important decisions to be made: the elimination of trade barriers, the establishment of a free-trade area and the establishment of a common market, a single African central bank, single African currency, single African monetary union and the Pan-African Parliament.
Die vraag is natuurlik nou of Suid-Afrika werklik die gevolge van al hierdie implikasies van die Abuja-verdrag wil dra. Is 'n enkele geldeenheid werklik prakties? Soek ons een sentrale bank? Wil ons een gentegreerde parlement h? Wat beteken dit vir ons soewereiniteit? Wat duidelik hier noodsaaklik is, is vir Suid-Afrika om leiding te neem en duidelike rigting aan te dui.
Daarom moet ons so gou as moontlik deel word van die onderhandelings. Die vraag moet egter gevra word of ons hierdie leiding en rigting kan verskaf. As ons in die onlangse verlede terugkyk na die Zimbabwe-debakel en die leiding wat daar verskaf is, en na die hele fiasko omtrent die MIV/vigspandemie, dan moet 'n mens wonder.
Hierdie swak leiding en verkeerde interpretasie en rigtinggewing het Suid- Afrika internasionaal onberekenbare skade berokken. Dit is waarom daar so min vertroue in die land is en waarom geen noemenswaardige investering volg nie. Dit is natuurlik ook van die belangrike redes waarom Suid-Afrika se ekonomie nie genoegsaam groei en genoeg werkgeleenthede skep nie. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The question now, of course, is whether South Africa really wants to bear the consequences of all these implications of the Abuja Treaty. Is a single monetary unit really practical? Do we want one central bank? Do we want one integrated parliament? What does this mean as far as our sovereignty is concerned? What is clearly essential here is for South Africa to take the lead and to provide clear direction.
For this reason we must take part in the negotiations as soon as possible. The question that must be asked, however, is whether we are able to provide this leadership and direction. When one looks back, in the recent past, to the Zimbabwe debacle and the leadership that was provided there, and to the whole fiasco surrounding the HIV/AIDS pandemic, one wonders.
This poor leadership and incorrect interpretation and direction have caused South Africa incalculable harm internationally. That is why there is so little confidence in the country and why no investment of any significance is forthcoming. This is naturally also one of the important reasons why the South African economy is not showing satisfactory growth and creating sufficient job opportunities.]
In conclusion, I want to quote from the latest Leadership magazine, the November 2000 edition. Hopefully most of our members are getting the magazine and are reading it. Russell Loubser, the Executive President of the Johannesburg Stock Exchange says the following, and I quote:
To stop major companies taking their listing to new shores, the JSE must become competitive or align with other bourses.
I quote again:
Traditional stock exchanges will have to adapt or die. The JSE appears to be moving in the right direction.
With globalisation and the Abuja Treaty, we will have to become competitive and we will have to adapt or die. With the opportunities of the Abuja Treaty, we will have to give leadership and indicate the right direction.
The question thus is: Will the Minister and the executive lead us in the right direction at the right pace? [Interjections.] I want to urge the Minister and the executive to keep us timeously informed about the very important legislation that will have to follow and the important decisions on the Abuja Treaty. They should please give Parliament timeous warnings to play its critical role in the legislation and decisions. [Time expired.] [Applause.]