Deputy Speaker, I think the view we have taken during the recession we experienced last year, is that we need to bring in new tools to manage job losses. As we gain experience in this, one of the critical issues would be to do the cost-benefit analysis
The first thing that we are doing now through the work of the IDC is to measure the cost per job for all the interventions that we undertake. That figure is monitored constantly to see whether, in fact, through our interventions, we are increasing the number of jobs per million rand that is utilised. I thought I should also indicate that these are not passive subsidies. In a number of cases, they are a bridging means to get companies back into viability.
On the website of one company that utilised the public resources, Bell Equipment, they say the following, and I quote:
After the very tough 2009, due to the global recession, Bell Equipment has announced a profit for the first six months of 2010.
Bell was one of the earliest in the industry to be hit, in view of their make-to-stock requirement, but now it is one of the first to recover. They then go on to say, and I quote Gary Bell:
We appreciate the support received from government and the IDC loans. We look forward to further engagement on ways in which we can further increase local employment and develop the local supply base. So far this year, Bell has been able to re-employ 250 people at the Richards Bay plant and this number will increase as demand improves further.
The point is that these interventions are intended to bring companies back to viability, and to the extent that we achieve that and that we keep the cost of support for each job as low as possible, they constitute an effective and good intervention. Thank you.
Position regarding adequacy of steps taken by cellular phone operators to extend coverage to rural areas
273. Mr K M Zondi (IFP) asked the Minister of Communications:
Whether he has found that the steps taken by cellular phone operators to extend coverage of their services to rural areas have proved to be adequate; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details?