Hon Speaker, I would like to thank all the parties that supported this amending Bill. I also need to point out that this amending Bill further provides for the establishment of national institutes with a specific scope or application. It also aims to accommodate the establishment of, amongst other things, the planned national institute for humanities and social sciences, as the current legislation makes no reference to any such provisions.
Hon Wilmot James, I hope you will be pleased about this intervention because the correct emphasis on science, technology, engineering and maths has had an unintended consequence in our institutions. There is not enough attention being paid to strengthening the social sciences. In fact, in many institutions, social science, research and the teaching of social sciences are in decline, yet social sciences are very fundamental to the development of our country, our national identity, the development of culture and the promotion of critical thinking skills.
I would also like to say, though, that the DA cannot have their cake and eat it. They can't say that we are rushing this legislation through because of the Central University of Technology matter. I thought they would be taking credit because it was the DA that raised this matter. They can't, at the same time, then be celebrating that we lost in court, especially in the face of a very damning report by the independent assessor about the extent of maladministration in that university.
Again, as I said, they can't blame me for problems in our universities, but not want legislation that will give me power to effectively intervene. I have no interest in micromanaging universities. I also have no interest in closing space for there to be academic freedom and autonomy. I know knowledge production requires the freedom to think, but, at the same time, we can't be powerless Ministers unless the DA approves of what we do. We don't account to the DA; we account to this House.
The DA is silent about instances of abuse of autonomy in order to pursue antitransformation measures by some universities, because autonomy is not inherently progressive. It's progressive only if it is used to advance academic freedom, not to defend corruption, which some institutions do.
Engifuna ukukusho kwilungu uBhanga wukuthi akuve kubuhlungu uma iqabane selilahlekelwe yipolitiki. Ayivalelisi ipolitiki uma seyihamba. [Ihlombe.] Zolo lokhu uBhanga ubesho zonke lezi zinto esizishoyo kodwa ngoba useku- Cope namhlanje, ipolitiki isihambile, usekhuluma izilimi kuhle kwalaba bantu ababephuze leliya wayini uJesu aliphendula lingamanzi. [Uhleko.]
Siyabonga kakhulu niseseke kulo Mthethosivivinywa. Ngiyabonga. (Translation of isiZulu paragraphs follows.)
[What I want to say to hon Bhanga is that it is indeed sad for the comrade to lose political principles. When political principles leave you, they do not say goodbye. [Applause.] Not long ago hon Bhanga shared the same sentiments as us, but now that he is with Cope, the political principles are gone; he now speaks in tongues like those people who were drinking the wine that Jesus turned from water. [Laughter.]
Thank you very much for supporting this Bill. Thank you.]
Debate concluded.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance, Congress of the People and Independent Democrats dissenting).