Chairperson, this was clearly a very entertaining debate this afternoon. I liked the way in which the hon Asiya stretched from youth in 1987 to diamonds. I liked it.
I think it's necessary to record the fact that the history of this country has been shaped by the quantum of these stones that have been found. There is an interesting bit of that history that suggests that the original De Beers farm where the diamonds were discovered in 1867 was in fact in the Republic of the Orange Free State, and the border was moved.
All of these are part of our history and, I think, understanding this issue, understanding the transfer of wealth, understanding the construction of a South African global monopoly, in fact, in the management of diamonds, it is important in understanding the context of this legislation.
It surely can't be correct that all of the wealth can be removed, and nothing remains - no jobs, no wealth, and so, in the letter and spirit of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, we establish natural patrimony over our mineral rights and so we must use it to the benefit of all South Africans. That's the objective of this legislation. [Interjections.] The hon Bekker says that De Beers removed a truckload of diamonds!
There are two points to make. I read something, a few weeks ago, in a Sunday newspaper. The journalist writes, because he doesn't ask questions, that a new train line will be constructed to carry diamonds. Now, you need to find a heck of a lot of these things to construct a train line to carry diamonds!
The second point to make is: We don't know what the truckload is worth, because it could be highly valued gems, or they could be industrial diamonds, and so, part of managing this is understanding the detail and ensuring that the diamond trader has the requisite skills and capabilities in place.
Essentially, I think, that the legislative arrangement here must lay the basis for an ease of administration to ensure that those who extract the diamonds from the earth either commit to a legitimate business, or they steal. That, I think, is what we must try and do. I have looked at mineral legislations from around the world and I am pretty sure that in some of these areas, we actually are quite tame.
It is a very necessary step forward and as I said earlier, I am very encouraged by the way in which we are being egged on by the hon Sonia Gandhi and others from around the world to actually take this up more seriously.
Against this background, I am concerned that the hon Marais says that the DA will not support this legislation. It's fine if people don't want to comply. They can leave our diamonds and go away. It's as simple as that. We are saying that it's not a revenue measure. The hon Bekker was clear about this. It's not a revenue measure. It's using our natural resources to improve the quality of life of more people than just those who happen to have the licence. If that doesn't accord with the principles that the DA supports, well, that's tough.
I am glad that the majority of parties in this House supports it. I think that it's a very progressive step, and one that we must support and ensure that, from time to time, the administrators will come back to Parliament and report on the progress in respect of this legislation. It's one of those things that we want to measure.
In respect of the hon Likotsi, I have a bit of a problem, sir. You spoke about the mineral wealth of Azania. I have looked again at the Bill. It's the Republic of South Africa Diamond Export Levy Bill. So, it only covers South Africa. It doesn't cover Azania. Thanks for the support anyway. Thanks so much. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.