Chairperson, hon Minister, special delegates and members, the National Health Laboratory Service Bill before us today, as the Minister has already indicated, represents the culmination of a long process of discussions and consultations which started as early as 1998, and is another step towards the transformation of the health sector.
The purpose of this Bill, as stated in its preamble, is, firstly, the establishment of a single national public entity that will provide laboratory services in the country; secondly, the restructuring and transformation of the public health sector laboratory services; and thirdly, the development of policies that will enable this entity to provide health laboratory services as the preferred service provider for the public health sector.
Government's programme of transforming the state demands that we develop efficient, user-friendly and accountable governance structures, recognise the Public Service to more effectively meet the priorities of social delivery, and support the ongoing transformation of public institutions to ensure that their resources and skills contribute to accelerated change.
State-owned laboratories, dotted all over the country and duplicating services, definitely did not live up to the objectives outlined above. Rather, the practice currently in place lends itself to huge amounts of wastage and poor management of both financial and human resources.
It is commonly believed that the so-called urban provinces have generally better access to specialised services. Gauteng has 57 laboratories, 23 of which are state-owned, whereas the Northern Cape has zero state laboratories and only three belonging to the SAIMR. The statistics confirm that state-owned laboratories, especially in rural areas, are inequitably spread across the nine provinces. The Bill before us is intended to redress this inequity. The Bill is also intended to ensure that the norms and standards are maintained across all laboratories in the country.
It is recognised that the amalgamation of the various laboratory services into a single parastatal unit will be a complex one, and will present many challenges to those participating in the process. Some of these challenges and concerns articulated through our provinces are concerns about job security, redeployment or transfers, future relations between unions and employers in the new entity, and so on.
These insecurities are very valid and understandable, particularly when a number of organisations or bodies are merged into one. What we always have to keep in mind are the principles that underpin any human resource transition process. Regarding the first principle - professionalism, we should always ensure that staff of a national parastatal consist of persons of the highest professional standard and competency to ensure quality service delivery. The second is accountability. Each and every new employee within this new entity should be made aware of their responsibility to both the state and the public, as the ultimate beneficiary of the services. Thirdly, there should be transparency. If decisions are taken without proper consultation, the fears and concerns that I mentioned earlier will continually arise, and the provision of a secure and professional environment will not be realised.
Fourthly, this process should be inclusive. It is important that all persons and groupings that will be affected by this process are properly consulted on issues that will affect them.
It is evident, throughout the Bill before us today, that these principles will be, and would continue to be, adhered to. Over a period of time workshops were held with all stakeholders in eight of the nine provinces, and there were four common positive outcomes identified that will arise out of this amalgamation process.
Firstly, there would be a better service to clients; secondly, there would be standardisation, or a common management structure; thirdly, there would be improved access to career opportunities and training, and lastly, there would be standardised benefits and conditions of employment, amongst other things.
By highlighting these positives, I am by no means diminishing or negating the serious concerns articulated around possible retrenchments and transfers that I mentioned earlier on. These are concerns that were not only raised by the current employees and their various representatives, but also by the respective provinces, as the Minister pointed out. After intense engagement around this matter, we were assured by the department, and the leader of the task team, that these concerns were given serious consideration, that job losses, if these were to occur at all, would be very minimal, and that alternatives, such as reskilling and retraining, were being considered. This is one of the matters that is currently on the table of the Interim Negotiating Forum for discussion.
Some of the significant amendments that we agreed upon will be elaborated upon by my colleagues who will speak after me, and some of these have already been touched on by the hon the Minister. I must say that we were all of one mind that this Bill, with the amendments as proposed, goes a long way in the creation of quality service delivery and in making accessible a highly specialised service to not only our fellow South Africans in the most remote areas of our country, but also to the Southern African region, and indeed the continent.
In concluding, I want to also thank the Minister and her department for assisting us throughout the Bill. It was definitely a painstaking exercise that we went through. I also want to thank the task team that was with us throughout the process, and the members of the committee and their respective provinces.
In conclusion, I want to present the committee report, as tabled in the ATC, for adoption by this House. I must add that all provinces but one, the Western Cape, voted in favour of the Bill as amended: B52-2000. [Applause.]