Chairperson, I've observed that I've been given the name of B J, but nevertheless, it's OK. [Interjections.] No, the smoking debate is over now. [Laughter.]
Chairperson, hon members and comrades, as we present this piece of legislation before this House for adoption, perhaps it would also be important for us to remind ourselves of the fact that it is this very same House that adopted the Housing Consumers Protection Measures Act, Act 95 of 1998, hereafter known as the principal Act.
It was as a result of that Act that the Minister of Housing was able to establish an institution referred to as the National Home Builders' Registration Council, with the sole mandate of protecting housing consumers and in this instance the poor. In terms of section 14 of the Act, all houses of which construction commenced after 1 December 1999 should have been enrolled in or registered with the NHBRC in a manner prescribed in the Act.
It is worth noting that this Act was not passed in this House first by mistake. It was as a result of a commitment that our government had made to our people in 1994. It was a further reminder of, and also consistent with the Freedom Charter's clause that states that there shall be houses, security and comfort. At the passing of this Act we knew very well that the Freedom Charter did not say there shall be houses with structural defects and leaking roofs, or unsafe and unfinished houses for all, hence the enactment of the Act.
The Act was also consistent with the Reconstruction and Development Programme and the election manifesto of 1994, which in the main called on government for a commitment to build houses for all our people. Through that commitment it was not just a question of building houses or structures, but building homes for our people, for whom such structures would restore the dignity of our people and reassure them of their humanness and their pride.
However, albeit with good intentions, the bad still surfaced its head, even with the existence of that Act. Like any other piece of legislation, there are those who at times will be left out and there are those people who will at all times seek to find ways of bypassing the law and continue with their ill deeds.
It is worth noting that at the national level we've seen many unfinished houses, and houses built and finished with major structural defects; we've also heard of contractors who just vanished without even having started on a single house, and worst of all, you then find the NHBRC, established for purposes of protecting the poor and the weak, being left extremely powerless, owing to the fact that in most cases these contractors are not even registered with the council, therefore leaving the poor and the vulnerable with these kinds of houses, and as a result a bad image is then created of our government.
As a result of the above observations the Minister has found it necessary to make amendments to the principal Act of 1998. In the main, the amendments seek to protect and further extend the protection that was found in the principal Act in order to protect the poor and vulnerable against unscrupulous home builders in our country and, furthermore, to give some more clarity to some definitions, for instance the inclusion of unregistered home builders such as the unemployed youth and women.
Noting that this is a section 76 Bill, we had to take our people along in the process of these amendments, because they are the major beneficiaries.
The House will note that for this year Parliament adopted a theme that says Masijule Ngengxoxo Mzansi, which in the main reinforces the principle as expressed in the Freedom Charter that says the people shall govern. As a result, as a committee, we held public hearings in most provinces, except for one province, of course. Through this exercise our people were able to make their voices heard on the said amendments. It was during these hearings that it became clear that our people expressed their profound appreciation for what government seeks to do in terms of protecting them against shoddy work during the construction of their houses.
Most provinces endorsed the amendments as proposed by the department, although some raised some concerns with regard to the role of the NHBRC. While they welcomed the fact that all contractors would have to register with the NHBRC and the fact that with this Bill, late enrolments would also be considered, including owner-builders, there was a common concern raised by provinces about the accessibility of the NHBRC.
We note, however, that this was a matter of which the NHBRC took note and further committed itself to ensure that it would enhance and improve on their work. Our people confirmed the fact that there was no better - over and above these concerns, I must emphasise this - insurance for them than the NHBRC.
It would be unfair of me not to make note of the fact that one of the most interesting and welcome amendments was the inclusion now of "roof leaks" as part of the insured work that would be covered by the NHBRC. We will know that in the principal Act only the top structure, excluding the roof, was recognised as insured by the NHBRC.
To quote, for instance, Mr Kobus in one of the public hearings I attended in the Northern Cape, he had this to say in terms of the roof leaks:
Van nou af sal ek dan nie meer probleme h met tyd nie, want in die verlede gedurende die somer moes ek onnodig vroeg opstaan, want die son skyn reg op my gesig deur die dak van my huis. [From now on I won't have problems with time anymore, because in the past during summer I had to get up unnecessarily early as the sun used to shine directly onto my face through the roof of my house.]
[Interjections.] The other concern raised by our people during the hearings was the fact that we needed to take note of the rural housing question and to ensure that no one was left out and marginalised. In that context our people believe that provinces should be empowered to deal with the unregistered contractors to prevent them from getting paid for jobs badly done or not done at all.
Therefore, with the late enrolments these are the kinds of problems that will be resolved. With the clause that deals with late enrolments, these are the kinds of problems that will, of course, then receive attention and our people's problems will be resolved and their dignity will be restored.
It is this kind of people's forum that assisted us as a committee to arrive at the conclusion that our people are happy with the amendments as proposed by the department.
The other interesting amendment that was introduced was the simplified process of appeal. Because of the complexity of this appeal process it also created a lot of confusion where you would find that our people would not even know what to do and end up giving up, remaining with this structure that you would call a house, but which would not necessarily be one.
In conclusion, as a result of these amendments it is the view of the committee that the department has truly demonstrated its commitment to the developmental goals of government. It is this kind of legislation that protects our people against unscrupulous builders who have no interest in building a better life for our people but who rob them of the last opportunity to be seen as a people capable of living a decent life with their children.
For that, as a committee, we put these amendments before this House for adoption, because we believe that this is the only way to accelerate the creation of a better life for the poor of our people. Lastly, as we further conclude, we have noted that this debate is taking place on a very important day, because of members who will be going back home to interact with the poor and vulnerable, and those who have in the main been affected by these unscrupulous home builders.
Therefore we take this opportunity to ask that members will take note and utilise the following two weeks to also seek to popularise these amendments that have been brought about in the principal Act. I thank you. [Interjections.]