Deputy Speaker, I would like to thank the committee for the work they have done in processing this Bill to the point that we are here today, considering it in the House. As all members have correctly pointed out, it primarily seeks to provide for the implementation of the "clean break" principle on divorce and pensions, which is currently not provided for, as well as for the implementation of the revised nonstatutory forces pension dispensation, as was approved by Cabinet.
The main issue raised by other parties seems to be the financial implications. Let me start by saying that the matter before the House today is but one of those matters that seek to address and redress the disparities of our past. Therefore the issue of financial implications has actually been looked at and, as National Treasury, we have undertaken to proceed with actuarial due diligence, as even hon George has indicated.
But I don't think it is fair to say that this is an irresponsible way of processing legislation. We did indicate that, as we proceed with the uptake - as in all pension matters - it won't place undue pressure on our fiscus. This is not the first pension matter that we have processed, and we have done so in the past.
I want to say that our former combatants paid a price that cannot be equalled by the amounts that we are talking about today, be it R7 billion or R4,7 billion. Whatever the figure, which is still to be verified, our combatants paid with their lives to bring about the liberation that we enjoy today. [Applause.]
I therefore think this House will take to heart that this is the time to bring about equity and fairness and to make sure that our former combatants are not left out there, while the people who served the system have been taken care of. [Interjections.]
Some concern was also expressed about the fact that the cost implications had to be appropriated by Parliament. Indeed, no appropriation will be carried out without coming through to this House. So, it is Parliament that will deal with this. We also indicated that it will be National Treasury's Budget Programme 7 that will carry the costs, and not the respective departments, as has been misrepresented here.
I do not want to bore you with the figures, because at the end of the day they will also still have to come to Parliament. But we would like to take this opportunity to thank the committee for having processed this legislation and Parliament for considering it today and for appreciating its urgency and importance in addressing these issues.
Regarding the "clean break" aspect, we have a court case, as you might know, which also necessitated that this matter be dealt with expeditiously.
Debate concluded.
Question put: That the Bill be read a second time.
Bill read a second time (Democratic Alliance dissenting).