Mevrou die Voorsitter, agb Minister en lede van die Huis, graag wil ek 'n paar aspekte en implikasies van die betrokke wetgewing bespreek. In die eerste plek dien dit vermeld te word dat dit die portefeuljekomitee van die Nasionale Vergadering weke geneem het om di wetgewing deur te werk, maar die gekose komitee van di Huis het slegs een uur daarvoor gekry. Alhoewel dit artikel 75-wetgewing is, ontstaan die vraag op sigself of dit die Huis se funksie is om maar net kennis te neem en daarna 'n stempel op te sit ter bekragtiging. Dit sal jammer wees as die NRP slegs 'n nabootser en 'n slaafse meeloper is van die Nasionale Vergadering. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.] Die uiteinde daarvan sal wees dat die NRP dan gesien kan word as 'n administratiewe liggaam wat slegs dien as 'n rubberstempel, of ``a bloody nuisance'', soos beskryf in 'n artikel oor die NRP in 'n naweekkoerant verlede week.
In die tweede plek gee die Grondwet in artikels 40 en 41 volwaardige status aan plaaslike regering as 'n sfeer van regering. Tog is hierdie wetgewing nie juis 'n erkenning van daardie grondwetlike status nie, soos blyk uit die voorskriftelikheid met die skep van meganismes om plaaslike regering te reguleer. Agt hoofstukke van die wetsontwerp gee magte aan die Minister. Die verlede het egter bewys dat diktatoriale magte diktators skep.
Die wetsontwerp l sterk klem op gemeenskapsbetrokkenheid, en dit word verwelkom dat die gemeenskap aan boord geneem word, gesien in die lig van deelnemende regering. Wanneer die gemeenskap egter dieselfde status kry as 'n politieke struktuur, maar uitgesluit word van regsaanspreeklikheid, ontstaan daar vrae wat roep om beantwoord te word.
Ten slotte, alles is darem nie negatief nie. Daar is baie goeie dinge in die betrokke wetgewing wat dividende kan lewer indien dit reg bestuur word, soos die privatisering van dienste waar dit moontlik is, asook gentegreerde ontwikkelingsbeplanning wat langtermynvoordele kan inhou.
Ook die verskaffing van basiese dienste en die betaling daarvoor is 'n stap in die regte rigting, maar dit sal 'n proses wees om hierdie wetgewing beslag te laat kry.
In die lig daarvan kan die Nuwe NP nie daarvoor stem nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr J HORNE: Madam Chair, hon Minister and members of the Council, I would like to discuss a few aspects and implications of the relevant legislation. Firstly, it should be mentioned that it took the portfolio committee of the National Assembly weeks to work through this legislation, whereas the select committee of this Council was given only one hour to do so.
Although we are dealing with section 75 legislation, the question arises as to whether it is the function of the Council simply to take cognisance of legislation and then to rubber-stamp it. It would be a pity if the NCOP were merely to copy and follow slavishly in the footsteps of the National Assembly. [Interjections.] This would result in the NCOP's being seen as an administrative body which merely serves as a rubber stamp, or a ``bloody nuisance'', as described in an article on the NCOP in a weekend newspaper last week.
Secondly, sections 40 and 41 of the Constitution accord full status to local government as a sphere of government. Even so, this legislation is not actually an acknowledgement of that constitutional status, as is apparent from the prescriptiveness in the creation of mechanisms to regulate local government. Eight chapters of the Bill grant powers to the Minister. However, the past has proved that dictatorial powers create dictators.
The Bill places strong emphasis on community involvement, and we welcome the fact that the community is being taken on board in view of participatory governance. However, when the community is accorded the same status as a political structure, but is excluded from legal accountability, questions arise which need to be answered.
In conclusion, not everything is negative. There are many good things in the relevant legislation which could yield good returns if correctly managed, such as the privatisation of services where possible, as well as integrated development planning which could have long-term benefits.
The provision of basic services and payment for such services are also a step in the right direction, but it will involve an entire process to give substance to this legislation.
In view of this, the New NP cannot vote for this legislation.]