Chairperson, thank you to all the members for their contributions. Whether it came from the 21st century or the 19th century, it still was a very important contribution. Hon Oriani-Ambrosini and I will always have some differences about which century we live in and which philosophy is relevant. That is a fact of life that we have to live with.
The words "the developmental state" have been used quite frequently today. I think it would be useful, as I said on 1 July 2009 to hon George, if we could build a few ideological or philosophical bridges amongst ourselves. We can neither imagine that the ideological state is here because we proclaim it, nor imagine, certainly in the current context of the last two years, that it will disappear because we don't want it. The fact of the matter is that the nature of the state, market, multilateral institutions, financial regulators and the role of rating agencies are all up in the air, as hon Koornhof said.
If we stick to blinkered approaches to these questions, we might score political points. That I also said on 1 July 2009. It doesn't advance the argument. It doesn't enable us to get a better command of what the crises are that we are dealing with now and how we, as South Africans, approach these crises and create a basis for national consensus amongst ourselves. None of the books that we have read and written up to now have any application today.
The new books are being written and the scripts are being retold in one way or another. The challenge for us is whether we will engage with these political exchanges that have no meaning or whether, through the political exchanges, we can enrich the kind of strategic direction the South African economy takes. That is the challenge that we have to take on.
We can spend two and a half hours here - with great respect - and go through the rituals that parliamentarians are required to go through. What value are we then adding to the very people, in whose name we say government must operate better, more efficiently, save more money, do procurement better, etc? We do little.
I would seriously ask that we rethink the way in which we approach some of these questions. Even the role of the advanced economies and of the emerging economies and what lessons they could teach each other, are changing.
Mr Robeni, who is called Dr Doom sometimes, in the Financial Times this weekend, says that the tables have turned in the last couple of months. The emerging market economies can teach the so-called emerged economies how to manage their fiscus; how not to get into debt traps; how to ensure that they get the right kind of assistance from the state and how not to overextend the kind of assistance they give to their citizens, so that they don't overreach themselves as societies. Today all of you should go and visit the Western world and tell them how we did it in South Africa. We should do so with pride. [Applause.]
We can score some cheap points, but it doesn't really advance the case in any way. Why can't we stand up as true patriotic South Africans and recognise that we do have some difficulties in our ranks. We will deal with those difficulties in time. Which country doesn't have difficulties?
Now, 30 days, as my colleague, the Deputy Minister said, away from the World Cup, it is time to put our shoulders back, hold our heads high and be proud of what we have achieved in this country, notwithstanding the debate, discourse and criticism that we might get, and more importantly the criticism that we have of ourselves.
It is in this context that I want to appeal to the chairperson, Mr Mufamadi, that we need to work towards some consensus on how we approach key national issues. The Reserve Bank Bill shouldn't be turned into a political football. We might disagree about Hitachi and the role of the ANC. I have said publically that the ANC will, in time, do the right thing concerning this matter, but the World Bank loan should not have led to the kind of discourse that we had from certain parties.
Parties were trying to shoot down $3,75 billion that we actually need, which we can't get at this stage from higher tariffs and which we can't and don't want to get from other forms of borrowing. We are trying to find a package solution to a problem that we have all inherited. We can't shy away from it now. Let's find the solutions and let's work together in order to find the solutions. The appeal, Mr Mufamadi, would be how we get our act together and find some consensus around these issues.
Around tenderpreneurs, procurement, etc, we can today stand up with pride and say that we told you so. Nobody pointed this out. We, as the ANC and as the new administration, pointed out the problems in local government, provincial government and national government. We said what the problems are and that we must confront this as a society and as a government. It is not a government problem. It is a social problem today. This social problem arises from our history, when we deprived millions of people of economic opportunities in our country for more than a century. Today we are paying the price for that. We must actually acknowledge it.
We don't have solutions. Black Economic Empowerment, BEE, and the other things we are doing are not providing all of the solutions. Do we now bash each other's heads in or do we find constructive solutions to some of these problems to approach things in a different way? My submission is that we should work together to find a different way of handling this.
There was the question about the letter to procurement around the tender register. Some of those issues, Dr George, are legal procedural issues which require that the courts decide about a name and our court system doesn't work fast enough, regrettably. You also made reference to bullying by Sars. As a former commissioner, I have to defend Sars. More importantly, we must be careful that we are not becoming a mini United States where it is possible for certain interest groups to now lobby Members of Parliament. I am not saying that this happens in this case.
There is a big lobby out there which says: Leave us alone, give us freedom of operation on the tax side and whenever Sars catches us out, then it is one thing or another. On behalf of the Sars management, I can certainly say that they operate with the greatest integrity. If there are problems, bring them to our attention and we will deal with them.
Mr Koornhof actually made some very important points in relation to the current crisis and I hinted at that earlier on. We should bring that on board, Mr Mufamadi, in the finance committee. We should ask what these crises actually mean and what it means for the establishment, as you pointed out, for the developmental state.
I can't but fully endorse, as I have done in the original speech as well, the Tennyson study about CEOs and their salaries. I was a little bit more polite than Mr Koornhof, but let us confront the question. The divide between rich and poor in South Africa is unacceptable. The rate at which CEOs and others are awarding themselves salary increases is also unacceptable. We should say with one voice that this is a recipe for a future disaster, not the current ones that we are facing now.
This is about making choices as a society in terms of what kind of society we want to be. You can't on the one hand say that we are coming from 19th century socialism if we ask for better equity in our society. We can't attach labels to one another if we are saying that the divide is an unjust divide. Without focussed attention by all political parties, and society more generally, on how we produce a socially just society in South Africa, we are just exacerbating the inequality and that study just amplifies that particular question.
Mr Koornhof, you raised important questions about remuneration committees and the role of boards. I think they all work within a particular mindset and a particular paradigm. Unless they get kicked out of that mindset and a new set of parameters are established, nothing will happen. We, therefore, have another challenge. If Government says too much about this, then we are interfering in the private sector. If we don't say enough, then we are not doing enough for the private sector. So, one can't win with this one. Thank you for raising this debate. I hope that other Members of Parliament will join the debate and bring to the fore some of the challenges that we have.
We look forward to Mr Oriani-Ambrosini's vision realising itself at some stage somewhere. Like many other speakers, we talk about the imbalance between the five million taxpayers and the many millions that we have to support through that tax space. That is a product of our history. That is not a product of something that we whirled for ourselves. The challenge for us, when we talk about restructuring the economy and approaching job creation differently and not getting involved in rhetorical debates, from whichever direction the rhetorical debate comes, is to get serious about these issues and not score political points.
We are waiting for the formulae, wherever they might come from. Young people today desperately need jobs. Who has the formula? If we have it, we will put the state resources behind them and ensure that we can deliver the jobs that they require. Until then, I think we are scoring petty points if we keep pointing to this divide. That is the historical structure of our economy today and we have to work diligently with one another to ensure that we move in a different direction.
Hon Luyenge pointed out the many things that we need to do. I want to thank him for diligently going through all of the Treasury material. The hon Dubazana also made some important points about the necessity to restructure procurement and to look at value for money in the way in which we actually operate.
The hon Swart raised the fraud issue and the role of audit committees as well as the importance of distinguishing between party and state. We agree with that. Let us make that a culture in South Africa. We are still 15 or 16 years old and we are not doing enough to embed the right kind of culture and practices in South African society which will enable us to take some of those ideas further.
We agree on the need for job creation. We have all been saying it, but there is still a poverty of concrete ideas that can be implemented tomorrow, that will make an actual difference. There are lots of ideas, policies and papers, but what we do, is the challenge that we face.
The hon Sibhida raised some important questions. There is no deliberate overestimation or underestimation. I must tell her that respectfully. Estimation - as you can see all the economists are getting everything wrong - is a difficult science. I can't even call it science at this point in time. If you look at the numbers, we are doing reasonably well in situations where there are no extraordinary events that intervene in our environment.
The emphasis that you place on the balance between education and enforcement is something that Sars has pioneered over the years. Your approach to Foreign Direct Investment, FDI, and what we need to do to get the balance right in our own country, is certainly a refreshing one. In conclusion, I want to thank all the members and the parties for supporting this Budget Vote. I want to thank the chairperson, Mr Mufamadi, and his committee and Mr Sogoni and his committee. I want to thank the leadership of the various institutions, some of whom are here on my left, not politically speaking, for their contribution to the kind of results that we get year in and year out. Thank you. [Applause.]