Wednesday, 22^nd December, 2021

 

The House met at 0900 hours

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM

 

PRAYER

_______

 

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

CLARITY ON WHY THE 2022 ESTIMATES OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE, THAT IS THE YELLOW BOOK, IS REFERRING TO THE DRAFT, EIGHTH NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (ENDP)

 

The Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane): Madam Speaker, I thank you for allowing me to provide clarity on why the 2022 Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure, that is the Yellow Book, is referring to the draft, Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP).

 

Madam Speaker, may I begin by stating that with the coming to the end of the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), it was imperative and the requirements by law that a successor plan be put in place. Therefore, in view of this, the Government, in 2021, commenced the formulation of the ENDP for the period 2022 to 2026.

 

Madam Speaker, this successor plan is still work in progress. We made reference to it in the Yellow Book to reflect this spirit. To correct for facts and reflect the provisions on the National Planning and Budgeting Act No. 1 of 2020, I have circulated the corrigendum that will remove reference to the draft ENDP.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Madam Speaker: Before we proceed, I did not see that there was an hon. Member indicating to raise a point of order when the hon. Minister was making the ministerial statement. I believe Hon. Mpundu wanted to raise a point of order. Since we have by passed that position, you may raise it tomorrow. The hon. Minister was on the Floor and I did not see that you had indicated. As you noticed, I waited a bit before I called on the hon. Minister. So, if you have any point of order to raise, you can raise it tomorrow.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: It is very urgent, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: You can raise it later. Is it a matter of urgent public importance or is it just a point of order?

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, it is point of order and it is very urgent.

 

Madam Speaker: Okay, you can raise it later.

 

Hon. Members are now free to ask question on points of clarification on the ministerial statement given by the hon. the Minister of Finance and National Planning.

 

Mr Mundubile (Mporokoso): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for this opportunity to ask a question.

 

Madam Speaker, we are grateful that the hon. Minister has come up with that amendment because it was of serious concern that there was constant reference to the draft Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP). Our further concern is that the hon. Minister has referred to a national development plan without specifying which national development plan it is. Could he be more clear as to whether he is refereeing to the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), being the only national development plan that is in existence as provide for by the Act.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for that question and let me remind him of the genesis of this matter. A week ago, the hon. Members on the left said asked a question. Our colleagues said that the Government had couched or made a Budget for 2022 but that that Budget should be on the basis of a development plan. They further said that in our Budget, we referred to that development plan as the draft ENDP but not the final and wondered why we did that.

 

Madam Speaker, the answer is that, ideally, by the time the United Party for National Development (UPND) was coming into office, the ENDP should have already been completed by the Government that was in place in view of the fact that it there was a general election coming. This Administration came in, but there was no national development plan except a draft. In the meantime, it needed to formulate a Budget, but how would it formulate a Budget in the absence of a complete national development plan? The fallback position was to use the draft that was there already. This is what we did. So, since the hon. Member asked why we used a draft, this plan uses a draft and all the other information knowledge that we have about this economy to create the Budget that we are talking about for next year. In short, in the absence of a plan, when we came into office, the Budget that had to be couched was one based on the draft because there was nothing that was available and then all the other information that we had to create the Budget.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, I appreciate the hon. Minister’s response.

 

Madam Speaker, I will refer the hon. Minister to the Planning and Budgeting Act of 2020, Section 23(1) states as follows:

 

“The Minister shall lay before the National Assembly the National Development Plan for approval.

 

(2)        Subject to the Constitution except as otherwise resolved by the National Assembly, programmes and projects for national character in an approved National Development Plan and spanning beyond the life span of the National Development Plan period shall be binding on successive Governments.”

 

Madam Speaker, we have had the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) and before the conclusion of the Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP), this plan was available. The hon. Minister had time and we are just trying to help him because we do not want to plunge into a crisis. We have a law and since the Constitution is very clear on this matter, would it not be reasonable and ideal to just say this was an omission and for the purpose of making progress, we will put remedial measures and indicate the national development plan on which the Budget is going to be anchored? Would that not be progress enough?

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I just want to say that in the ideal world, you do a plan then the financing, in the name of the Budget, comes to back that plan. I am saying that it was the Government that was in place …

 

Mr Syakalima: The PF!

 

Dr Musokotwane: … – yes, the PF– is responsibility to ensure that it completed the ENDP before the elections. It must have completed the ENDP, …

 

Hon. PF Members: Question!

 

Dr Musokotwane: … so that by the time the elections were over, a successive Government would find the plan in place and then, the Budget would ride onto that. However, by August, there was no complete ENDP. There was nothing. Our colleagues did not do it. So, the question then is: Does the country remain without a Budget because there is no plan? Clearly, that does not make sense. Therefore, the only practical thing to do was to look at the draft and on top of that, the 7NDP; the one that is still running until the end of this year. So, that is what I meant by saying all the other information that was available.

 

Madam Speaker, for example, in the 7NDP, there was a provision for hiring adequate number of teachers, but the previous Government never hired teachers. Why? This was because the money was used to pay the debts, so, there was no money to pay teachers. Therefore, some of the things that were in the 7NDP were clearly not implemented, but they are important issues. Therefore, it made sense that as we created the Budget for 2022, it was important to consider the elements that were in the 7NDP, which have not been implemented and implement them because they are still relevant.

 

Hon. Government Members: Correct!

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Let us consult quietly and listen to the answers so that we do not repeat the same questions over and over.

 

Mr B. Mpundu (Kamfinsa): Madam Speaker, allow me to thank the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning for coming to this House and acknowledging that there was a serious error in the manner in which the Yellow Book was prepared. It is important that before we finally approve the budget, correct measures have been put in place.

 

Madam Speaker, it is also important that our hon. Colleagues from the Executive Arm of Government acknowledge that our role is basically to point out things that we feel should be corrected before we put into effect a law which allows for the Budget to be approved. So, it is important that this is put on record that the observation was made by hon. Colleagues on the left side of the House, which is not a bad thing. Actually, it is a good thing that we are working together to do the right thing.

 

Madam Speaker, my follow-up question relates to an observation which I have made and this will lead to the question. Previously, the Ministry of National Development Planning was a separate ministry and the Ministry of Finance was also a separate ministry. Is this observation we have made about the correction that we are making today a sign that we clearly need a separate ministry in charge of national development planning to ensure that when there is a draft national development plan and Government changes, the ministry in charge of national development planning can simply come to the Floor of the House and say we need this development plan to be approved because a national development planning is approved by Parliament. It is the job of the National Assembly to approve a national development planning. So, my question is: Is this a sign that we clearly need a separate Ministry of National Development Planning?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for that question. Let me remind the House that it was the responsibility of the previous Government to ensure that by the time it left, …

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: … a development plan was in place.

 

Madam Speaker, at the time when the Government failed to develop the ENDP to conclusion, those people had a fully-fledged Ministry of National Development Planning.

 

Mr Syakalima: Yes!

 

Dr Musokotwane: They had the ministry. So, if what the hon. Member is saying is correct, then, of course, by now, we would have the ENDP because the planning ministry was there, but in spite of having the whole planning ministry, nothing was done.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I urge my hon. Colleagues to go to google and check what is obtaining in neighbouring countries. If they check in Namibia, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda and Kenya, they will hardly see a stand-alone planning ministry anywhere because those have a tendency of creating the kind of problem that we are talking about now. This is because people plan on one side and the financial plan sits on another side, but they do not talk to each other.

 

Madam Speaker, what we have now is in line with what we see elsewhere in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region. Therefore, the problem that exists now is that the ENDP was not created. Going forward, that will not be there because the left hand and the right hand will be in one body.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kasandwe (Bangweulu): Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister is now proposing that the 2022 Budget be anchored on the national development plan which is not mentioned. I am riding on the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition. The National Planning and Budgeting Act, Article 42(1) states as follows:

 

“(1) Subject to the Constitution, the national budget shall operationalise the implementation of the National Development Plan.”

 

So, in this case, which specific national development plan will the 2022 Budget be operationalised? We still have the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) until 31^st December, 2021, and let me again quote the National Planning and Budgeting Act, Article 53 on Savings and Transitional Provisions which states as follows:

 

“This Act shall not invalidate any Appropriation Act, Supplementary Appropriation Act or Excess Expenditure Appropriation Act, Long Term Plan or National Development Plan or other planning or fiscal measure or framework that was in force before the coming into operation of this Act.”

 

Madam Speaker, the 7NDP was launched before this Act was passed. Would it not be prudent for the hon. Minister to simply anchor the 2022 Budget on the 7NDP until the Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP) is brought to the House to be approved because there is a transition period? He can still anchor the 2022 Budget on the 7NDP. So, what is so difficult in the hon. Minister’s opinion to anchor this budget we are discussing on the 7NDP?

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I think at this stage we are just repeating the same arguments that have been presented before because as the hon. Member correctly says, a budget must be anchored on a plan. The existing plan ends at the end of this year, in fact in a few days time. That plan will lapse but the budget that we are talking about now is the budget for 2022. Meanwhile the plan has lapsed. The plan that should have been completed by our hon. colleagues there in August is not in place.

 

Hon. PF Members: Question!

 

Hon. UPND Members: Yes!

 

Mr Tayali: You should learn to be honest.

 

Dr Musokotwane: They did not do it.

 

Hon. PF Members: Question!

 

Dr Musokotwane: They did a draft. So, we have to be practical here. The practical measure is to say we refer to the draft ENDP. They are the same ones who complained.

 

Interruptions

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, the complaint that is on the Floor is why did you refer to the draft ENDP. So, we said, okay, if you do not want that, we will refer to a plan. A plan for us is a continuation of –

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Can we have some order so that the hon. Minister can answer the questions and to avoid repeating the same questions because the hon. Minister is trying to clarify but it appears the answers are not getting to the people who are asking questions. So, let us listen to the answers and then we can ask questions. Hon. Minister, proceed.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The practical sensible thing in the absence of an approved plan is to go to the partially made plan and also carry over some of the items that were in the 7NDP. Some of these things that are in the plan – It is idealistic to imagine that because it was in the 7NDP, it will not be relevant in the ENDP. It is not like that. I gave an example that under the 7NDP, there was item for hiring teachers but no teachers were hired in the last five years.

 

Mr Kang’ombe: In the last five years?

 

Hon. UPND Member: Twenty!

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, under the circumstances, can you now say that because in the 7NDP there was a provision for hiring teachers but too few of them were hired in actual practice, therefore, we abandon the hiring of teachers going forward? No, it is still relevant. The issue of building clinics is still relevant.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: The issue of hiring doctors and medical staff is still relevant. The issue of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) is still relevant.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: So, Madam Speaker, what is the problem here?

 

Laughter

 

Mr Tayali: There is no problem.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Why are people failing to understand these simple things?

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Mr Chilangwa(Kawambwa): Madam Speaker, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to ask the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning a follow-up question, who is sitting there, and I feel sorry for him …

 

Mr Kampyongo: Pressure!

 

Mr Chilangwa: … because of pressure. In one breath, he said no single teacher was hired in the last five years. This is Parliament, when we answer, we must be factual and then he turned around and said that the previous Government did not leave the Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP) but meanwhile it left a draft. I am finding it very difficult to make head from tail from …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Chilangwa: …what the hon. Minister is trying to explain because this is a constitutional issue. What we are discussing here is a constitutional matter and must not be trivialised. It must be taken with the seriousness that it deserves. The PF Government left the budget in process. The UPND Government came in and finalised it and brought it to this House. It did that. It found a draft national development plan on which it anchored the Budget we are debating on. What was so difficult for them to work on that draft national development plan they found and bring it here so that we approve it and then anchor the Budget on it? I am finding it very difficult to understand what the hon. Minister is saying. Can he be categorical and man enough …

 

Mr Kampyongo: Ah!

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Hon. UPND Members: Question!

 

Mr Chilangwa: … and admit failure where there is failure.

 

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kawambwa!

 

Mr Chilangwa: Yes.

 

Madam Speaker: The phrase ‘man enough’ is unparliamentary. Please, withdraw.

 

Mr Chilangwa: I withdraw the phrase ‘man enough’ and I replace it with can the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning be brave enough and admit failure where it is. We all want to pass this Budget…

 

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

 

Mr Chilangwa: … and we are going to help do that. We are together.

 

Mr Miyutu: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Miyutu: Madam Speaker, I am rising on this point of order in relation to our Standing Order 65, which deals with content of speech. The hon. Member alluded to the point of starting up the Budget for 2022. In his statement, he has indicated that before the United Party for National Development (UPND) came into power, the Patriotic Front (PF) had started the process of budgeting for 2022. In his speech, however, he has not indicated that there was a plan in place. Is he in order to avoid mentioning the fact that there was no plan when they were budgeting for 2022? I seek your ruling on this matter.

 

Madam Speaker: Thank you for the point of order. I think the hon. Member for Kawambwa was still debating and asking his question. However, what I am seeing is that we are being repetitive. We are asking the same question in different forms. We cannot continue going on asking questions.

 

Hon. Member for Kawambwa, please, ask the question and be factual and be brave – Brief and to the point.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Speaker: Sorry, I meant brief. So, be brief.

 

Mr Chilangwa: Madam Speaker, I will be very brave and I am grateful for that counsel.

 

Hon. PF Members: Also be man enough.

 

Mr Chilangwa: I will also be man enough.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Chilangwa: Madam Speaker, I feel sorry for the hon. Member for Kalabo Central, but it is alright. It is understood.

 

Madam Speaker, I was trying to belabour a point whereby in one breath, the hon. Minister has acknowledged that there was a draft ENDP, just like the budgeting process is. So, it was up to him and the team to use that, conclude it and bring it here. Alternatively, however, the law says there is a transitional period. So, he should not shy away from the fact that he can use the transitional period to anchor his Budget on the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP). My question, therefore, is: Hon. Minister, what is your problem?

 

Laughter

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Well, the hon. Minister is here. Let him answer the question if there is any problem.

 

Mr Sing’ombe: There is no problem.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for bringing a light moment to the House through his question. There is no problem on this side. The problem is on his side.

 

Laughter

 

Dr Musokotwane: The problem is on that side because they are failing to admit that they should have completed the ENDP by the time of the elections. That is where the problem is because they do not do it.

 

Madam Speaker, everyone knows that to create a budget, the plan must be available. So, for one to say the plan and the Budget should have been done at the same time is very puzzling. It is extremely puzzling and, maybe, this is why we saw the kind of economic problems that we saw in the last ten years.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam Speaker: The hon. Member for Bwacha, and this will be the last question.

 

Mr Mushanga (Bwacha): Madam Speaker, thank you very much –

 

Mr Kampyongo: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Kampyongo: Madam Speaker, I apologise to my hon. Colleague for disturbing his thought process as he is trying to pose a question.

 

Madam Speaker, my point of order is anchored on Standing Order 65(b), which states that the information we debate here must be actual and verifiable. The hon. Minister is from one of the ministries which have reliable competent professionals. He has been there before and he has gone back there now. Is he in order to leave this august House in suspense as to which national development plan is going to be operationalised through the Budget that is under current discussion?

 

Madam Speaker, this is a constitutional matter and we are trying to be helpful. We know for sure that you cannot operationalise a draft national development plan. So, is the hon. Minister in order to leave this august House and the national at large in suspense as to which national development plan is going to be operationalised through this Budget that we are considering now? I seek your serious guidance so that in this session we have, we can provide direction as to how we are going to proceed on behalf of the people of Zambia.

 

Madam Speaker: The hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning issued a ministerial statement just to outline and indicate to the House which national development plan the Budget is anchored on and the whole debate about what is going on currently is surrounding that issue. So, whether the issue is we are not getting each other’s answers or we are doing a blame game, I now also do not understand because one side is blaming the other and the other side is blaming the other. The hon. Minister is going to indicate what national development plan will be used and I think he has indicated in his answers.

 

Hon. PF Members: No, he has not.

 

Madam Speaker: Let us give the hon. Member for Bwacha a chance to ask a question and then the hon. Minister can take advantage of his response to clear that point.

 

Mr Mushanga: Madam Speaker, thank you so much for according me an opportunity to also contribute to the matter on the Floor of the House. The hon. Minister has indicated that his administration decided to refer to the uncompleted plan, which is the Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP). If I recall very well, Parliament started sitting in September and we have had September, October, November and December. So, why did the hon. Minister’s administration or office not prioritise the completion of the ENDP, which is a draft and was almost completed, before embarking on the 2022 National Budget? I believe we had all the time, as Parliament.

 

Madam Speaker, that is my question and I guess it is very different from all the questions which have been posed so far.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, since is this the last question, as you indicated, let me clarify once and for all by way of repeating myself. The law says that when you make a budget, it must be anchored on a development plan. Our hon. Colleagues in the Patriotic Front (PF) had five whole years to do the ENDP. By the time we were going to the elections, which they knew they were losing, …

 

Laughter

 

Hon. Government Members: Hammer!

 

Dr Musokotwane: … they should have known that since there is a budget that is coming, by August the plan must be ready so that as their hon. Colleagues of the UPND take over, they have the plan that is completed and then they can link the Budget to that plan. When August came, they had not yet completed the ENDP. There was only a draft. So, since our colleagues in five years did not complete the ENDP, we decided to anchor the Budget on the draft ENDP they left behind and that is what we did. The same people who did not complete the plan are now asking why we used their plan.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: This is the insincerity of our colleagues in the PF that we talk about. The hon. Member is asking why we did not do both at the same time. However, a plan must first of all be completed and then the Budget is made. So, in the absence of a Budget, what do we do? What is the practical thing to do? What should this country have done? Postponed the Budget and have no Budget? So, we made the Budget based on their draft, plus the things that they failed to do under the 7NDP.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: That is what is in the Budget. In the 7NDP, the PF Government that created that plan wanted to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio. It did not do it. So, we decided to do the good thing that was in the 7DNP, which is to increase the number of teachers and they are still complaining.

 

Laughter

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, in the plan, they said they were going to employ more nurses and doctors to replace those who they were firing who they said were members of the UPND. Did they do it? They did not. So, going forth, we will do these things that they did not do. We will hire doctors and nurses. We will construct classrooms because they were in the 7NDP and they did not prioritise them. So, there is nothing confusing here other than those wishing to confuse themselves.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: I suggest the parties engage each other outside to find out, but let us make progress.

 

_______

 

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

 

ADDITIONAL SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN NALOLO DISTRICT

 

105. Mr Wamunyima (Nalolo) asked the Minister of Education:

 

1. whether the Government has any plans to construct additional secondary schools in Nalolo District;
2. if so, when the plans will be implemented; and
3. what measures the Government is taking to improve the teacher-pupil ratio in all the secondary schools in the district.

 

The Minister of Education (Mr Syakalima): Madam Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the Government plans to construct secondary schools countrywide and Nalolo District is no exception.

 

Madam Speaker, the plans to construct secondary schools will commence in 2022, and will be implemented by the Ministry of Education and the Zambia Education Enhancement Project (ZEEP) over a period of five years.

 

Madam Speaker, the Government plans to recruit 30,000 teachers next year to improve the teacher-pupil ratio countrywide and, again, Nalolo District is no exception.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Nalolo, do you have any supplementary question?

 

Mr Wamunyima: Yes, Madam Speaker. I thank the hon. Minister for the brief answer. There are only three secondary schools in Nalolo, and two are in Nalolo East and one is in Nalolo West, which has a population of over 40,000 people. The hon. Minister said that Nalolo is no exception but what exactly does he mean because a district that has a population of over 63,000 people cannot have three secondary schools? There are only three teachers from Grades 1 to 7 at primary schools like Yande Primary School. How will the Government distribute the 30,000 teachers it intends to employ? Will it be equitably based on the absence of the teachers? Can the hon. Minister kindly guide us.

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, I said that Nalolo is no exception, and the hon. Member should appreciate that the zone we are allocating a day secondary school is Yeta and the proposed site is Lukuma. In terms of reducing the teacher-pupil ratio, the President and the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning indicated that 30,000 teachers will be distributed equitably.

 

Madam Speaker, one realises that the distribution of the eighty-two secondary schools, which were under the World Bank, was skewed. The North-Western Province, Copperbelt Province and the Western Province had zero, yet this Government’s clarion call is that resources must be distributed equitably. So, as regards balancing the distribution of the 120 secondary schools, we took it upon ourselves to ensure the number of schools for those provinces which were on top of the list is equal to those provinces that had nothing. Thus, the number of schools for the North-Western Province, the Western Province and Copperbelt Province, which had zero, is almost equal to those provinces that benefited from the eighty-two secondary schools. So, in the North-Western Province, there could be twenty-two and Muchinga, which had more at that time, has twenty-three because we added eight to the fifteen that it had. So, we will balance the act because the President said that Zambia is one and we must share national resources equitably. Equity is not about being equal; it is about being fair to everybody.

 

Madam Speaker, I want to state that in the distribution of 30,000 teachers, you will see equity for the first time in every constituency. This is why the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) amount of K25.7 million is across the board. So, everybody has a reason to be excited over what we want to do as a nation and gone are the days when other people will feel disadvantaged in their own country.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, resources come from the same basket. If we have K5, let us share that K5 as a country. I can assure my colleague from Nalolo that no one will feel left behind. We want to be practical in the way we do things, let alone in education because education for us is the best equaliser. A girl in Lundazi, Isoka and Kapinjimpanga must benefit from the resources of the country, no matter how little they are.

 

Madam Speaker, I understand that we have a deficit of 45,000 teachers, yet we have 55,000 teachers on the street. Is it not a good thing that we will employ 30,000 teachers, breaking the record fifty-seven years after Independence? So, everybody has a reason to be excited. Going forward, we will ensure that we put in place mechanisms so that a teacher who goes to teach in Nalolo remains there and provides a service, and we will not overpopulate teachers in one area or the other. I hope that with this lengthy answer I have given to the hon. Member for Nalolo, I have answered many questions that hon. Members wanted to ask me.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: Thank you. The list is long. So, please, as we ask questions, let us not ask questions that have already been answered. All the questions should arise from the question asked by the hon. Member for Nalolo.

 

Mr M. Tembo (Kaumbwe): Madam Speaker, thank you for allowing the people of Kaumbwe to ask a supplementary question.

 

Madam Speaker, the people of Kaumbwe would like to know the criteria that the Government will use to allocate or rather distribute the secondary schools. The hon. Minister said that Zambia is one and that they will distribute the resources equitably. In Kaumbwe Constituency, which has a population of 55,000, there is not even a single secondary school. I am even wondering how we will distribute the bursaries for secondary schools because all the pupils go to secondary schools that are not in my constituency.

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, I really did not understand the hon. Member’s question because he has just mixed up things. He has talked about the distribution of secondary schools and also, the bursaries. Anyway, I stated the criterion that will be used to distribute the secondary schools and there some provinces that benefited from the eighty-two secondary schools. The balancing act was to look at provinces. So, if a province had for example, twelve secondary schools, it will probably be allocated eight secondary schools.

 

Madam Speaker, for ease of reference, out of the eighty-two secondary schools, the Eastern Province had fourteen secondary schools, Luapula Province had thirteen secondary schools, Copperbelt Province had zero secondary schools, Muchinga Province had thirteen secondary schools, the Southern Province had twelve secondary schools, the North-Western Province had zero secondary schools, the Western Province had zero secondary schools, the Northern Province had eight secondary schools, Lusaka Province had nine secondary schools and Central Province had thirteen secondary schools.

 

Madam Speaker, the new allocation is that the Eastern Province has been allocated eight secondary schools, making it twenty-two. Previously, Luapula Province had thirteen secondary schools and it has now been allocated ten, making it twenty-three. Copperbelt Province had zero secondary schools and it has been allocated fifteen. We appreciate that the rural parts of the Copperbelt were not given anything. In the urban areas, the number of schools was higher than in the rural parts of Copperbelt. So, we allocated fifteen secondary schools to the Copperbelt Province.

 

Madam Speaker, previously, Muchinga Province had thirteen secondary schools and now it has been allocated nine, which comes to twenty-two secondary schools. The Southern Province had twelve secondary schools and now, there are about nineteen secondary schools. The North-Western Province had zero and now, it has twenty-one secondary schools. The Western Province had zero and now it has twenty-two secondary schools. The Northern Province had eight secondary schools and now it has been allocated fifteen, making it twenty-three. Lusaka Province had nine secondary schools and it has been allocated six secondary schools, making it fifteen. Central province had thirteen secondary schools and now it has been given seventeen secondary schools, making it twenty secondary schools. This is what equity entails.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Syakalima: So, we took care of literally everybody taking into account how rural the province is and, certainly, how poverty stricken the province is. If people cannot get equity out of this, where else can they get it? Our colleagues in the North-Western Province, Copperbelt Province and the Western Province were crying because they had literally zero. So, how do they allocate zero to Western Province when they know the poverty levels in the province? It was as unacceptable as it could be unacceptable today if I said we ignore certain provinces because they got this and that. No! Equity demands that we balance. It is not equal as I said because the Northern Province and Luapula Province tops the league with twenty-three secondary schools. So, which fairness would be people talk about apart from this?

 

Hon. Government Members: Chilangwa!

 

Madam Speaker: Order! Let us not mention other hon. Members. That is going to –

 

Mr Chilangwa: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Kawambwa, I am just coming to your aid by protecting you and, again, you want to raise a point of order.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Speaker: Proceed, hon. Minister.

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, I am just trying to show our colleagues that we want to be on equal footing in every sphere, if they like, of human endeavour.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Syakalima: So, this is just the beginning. Has one ever imagined how after five years, every Zambian will feel proud of being a Zambian because every Zambian will be taken care of and more so, the education system? That is what makes a country. The education system makes a country. It mirrors how the country behaves. A country’s economy goes down if its education system is not right. A country can talk about anything but if it has not taken care of its education system, it is a broken country. So, in a way, we are just trying to show our colleagues that even the little that we have will be distributed equitably.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr J. Chibuye (Roan): Madam Speaker, it makes good hearing to note that the New Dawn Administration is considering constructing schools in various corners of this nation equitably. Recently, the hon. Minister stood on the Floor of this House and mentioned that the ministry is scouting for close to K70 million to repair the damaged various school infrastructure across the nation. It means the ministry has a double task to do, that of repairing and constructing new structures. My question is: Is the ministry considering constituting a stakeholder task force of experts to ensure that the job that will be done in terms of constructing the schools is standard and quality with good workmanship? I believe the hon. Minister may soon stand on the Floor of this House to tell the nation the number of classrooms that have had their roofs blown off. Can the hon. Minister assure the nation that he will work to ensure that the products that will be delivered to the Government in terms of school infrastructure are of good standard and quality which will stand the test of time to save Government resources?

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, although the question is not tied to the Nalolo issue, I think he has brought up something that needs to be addressed.

 

Madam Speaker, I am not quite sure whether I still remember the time or the day when the hon. Minister of Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development talked about standardising how houses, schools and hospitals infrastructure will cost and what quality is needed. So, I think my hon. Colleague is working out such things so that even with the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), no one will come up and say a 1×3 classroom is K500,000 in Roan, but cost K200,000 somewhere else. The monies will be utilised in a manner that is prudent. So, no one is going to make a makeup on what the hon. Minister of Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development is going to tell us.

 

Mr Nkandu: Like the way they were doing.

 

Mr Syakalima: Like the way some people were doing, I do not know, somewhere there (pointing to the left).

 

Laughter

 

Mr Syakalima: So, the hon. Member of Parliament for Roan is rest assured that we are working towards that issue. Again, we want to make a clarion call. In the vocabulary of Africa, there is no maintenance. This is why, if you check, the CDF has been increased in order to maintain structures. We utilise structures in this country, and elsewhere is Africa, until they are so much dilapidated that we cannot even repair them and all we have to do is bring them down. So, we need to have the word ‘maintenance’ in our vocabulary so that rebuilding is not entertained. If a building is constructed to last twenty-five or thirty years, it can only do so if it is being maintained. So, that will be taken care of, and I thank the hon. Member for raising that matter.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: As we ask questions, let us stick to the question that has been as asked by the hon. Member for Nalolo and let us be brief because we are taking too much time on this question.

 

Mr Chinkuli (Kanyama): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to comment and probably ask one or two questions on the question asked by the hon. Member of Parliament for Nalolo.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for the answers, especially where he echoed education being the great equaliser. It is where inequalities of opportunities and poverty can be reduced.

 

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister will agree with me that Kanyama is highly populated and, as a result, it calls for a higher demand in early education, health and any other facilities. The hon. Minister will further agree with me that Kanyama has two Government schools. Comparing the population to the schools in the area, does the hon. Minister not think the people of Kanyama will be denied the opportunity to have this equaliser, which should help them develop themselves and the community at large?

 

Madam Speaker: The question on the Floor of the House relates to Nalolo. I do not know how we are stretching it to Kanyama.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Speaker: If the hon. Member for Kanyama Constituency has a specific question, I suggest he puts in a particular question. I, therefore, call on the hon. Member for Nalolo.

 

Mr Wamunyima: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for his response. However, I re-emphasise that the largest population of Nalolo Constituency is in Nalolo West and it only has one secondary school. The proposed school the hon. Minister mentioned, Likuma, is in Nalolo East. It will make Nalolo East have an additional secondary school to make them three.

 

Madam Speaker, my point is that on the western side of the Zambezi, we have a population of over 40,000 people and the demand to have an additional secondary school is on the western side. Pupils walk over 70 km from Shekela Ward to access secondary education. I do not know what the hon. Minister’s position is because my specific question is also meant to say that in equitable distribution, there is also the need to look at the distances that the pupils walk.

 

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, in fact, the allocation is actually provisional. The hon. Member is the one who traversed the constituency. For instance, yesterday, I was just changing a secondary school in Lundazi. The hon. Member of Parliament came and told me that there was already a secondary school where we were proposing to put one. We were basing the points on the information from the Provincial Education Officers (PEOs) and the District Education Board Secretaries (DEBS). So, if the hon. Member wishes to change, it is himself who has to come, check and instruct where the large population is. So, this thing is not cast in concrete, no. He can still come through. I am just waiting for the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to write me something. However, as of now, since the hon. Member knows where there is a big population is, he can still come through and change.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

______

 

MOTION

 

INTRODUCE LEGISLATION ON LIFESTYLE AUDIT

 

Mr Jamba (Mwembezhi): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that this House urges the Government to introduce legislation on lifestyle audit in order to enhance the fight against corruption.

 

Madam Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

 

Mr Anakoka (Luena): Madam Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.

 

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I wish to sincerely thank you for giving me this opportunity to move this Private Members’ Motion urging the Government to introduce legislation on lifestyle audit in order to enhance the fight against corruption.

 

Madam Speaker, from the outset, I must mention that this Motion is not targeted at any individual, but is aimed at ensuring that institutions that are mandated to fight corruption are given the necessary leverage to rid our country of this vicious scourge.

 

Madam Speaker, it goes without saying that corruption has many damaging effects on society. It weakens institutions which are critical for good governance, democracy and the rule of law. In addition, it leads to widespread economic inefficiencies, which exacerbate social inequalities. Further, corruption distorts competition in the market place. For instance, when corruption is endemic with high levels of patronage and cronyism, merit is awarding contracts and jobs is ignored in preference for politically connected individuals and companies which, in most cases, lack the necessary capacity to deliver the desired results. In such instances, quality, price and service no longer determine who should be awarded a contract, but the willingness to pay bribes determines who wins and who loses contracts. Consequently, the Government does not get value for money.

 

Madam Speaker, I am cognisant of the fact that without adequate legislation, it will be difficult for institutions that have been mandated to fight corruption and abate the heightened situation to do so effectively. It is for this reason that a legal framework applicable in this cause has been put in place which includes the following pieces of legislation:

1. the Anti Corruption Commission Act No. 3 of 2012;
2. the Plea Negotiations and Agreements Act No. 20 of 2010;
3. the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act No. 19 of 2010;
4. the Financial Intelligence Centre (Amendment) Act No. 16 of 2020; and
5. the Prohibition and Prevention of Money Laundering (Amendment) Act No. 44 of 2010.

 

Madam Speaker, while noting the aforementioned legal frameworks, I am of the considered view that the fight against corruption will not yield positive results without provision for lifestyle audits. It is for this reason that I have been compelled to move this Motion to ensure that the necessary legislation on lifestyle audits is introduced to augment the existing legal framework.

Madam Speaker, if introduced, the law will make sure that seemingly affluent individuals whose wealth appears to have been acquired using questionable means are subjected to lifestyle audits. This will help to determine the source of their wealth.

Madam Speaker, I must emphasise that lifestyle audits should not be limited to politicians and public officials because ordinary citizens and family members are sometimes used to conceal proceeds of crime and corruption, as we have seen in the recent past. Therefore, everyone, as long as there is probable cause, should be subjected to a lifestyle audit.

Madam Speaker, I should add that lifestyle audits are a widely used tool for detecting and preventing corruption as well as ensuring accountability for public resources. They are not meant to victimise any individuals as they are typically conducted on those whose visible lifestyle or standard of living appears to exceed their own income levels. If the audit shows a mismatch between a person’s known income and assets as compared to their lifestyle and spending patterns, then there is an increased risk that the person is deriving alternative income from sources that are or could be illegal, including embezzlement and corruption.

Madam Speaker, in view of the above, innocent people who make an honest living should not shudder at the thought of undergoing a lifestyle audit. As a matter of fact, even those who have allegedly acquired wealth illegally should embrace lifestyle audits as they can eventually prove their innocence if the allegations are not true.

Madam Speaker, at this juncture, allow me to refer to some countries that are implementing lifestyle audits. In South Africa, lifestyle audits are used to detect tax evasion. By identifying previously undisclosed assets and sources of income, tax authorities can increase the revenue collected. In Kenya, lifestyle audits have been presented as a panacea for corruption. To underscore that belief, the Senate, in October 2021, passed the Lifestyle Audit Bill of 2021. In Malawi, the 1996 Corrupt Practices Act empowers the Anti Corruption Bureau to investigate any public officer when there are reasonable grounds to believe that they maintain a standard of living above which is commensurate with their present or past official emoluments or other known sources of income.

Madam Speaker, as I conclude, allow me to mention that organisations such as the Transparency International Zambia and Action Aid Zambia as well as other civil rights activists have been calling for lifestyles audits on all public officials. This Motion, therefore, is representing the voices of the masses. Hon. Members of Parliament, as representatives of the people, will do well to heed the people’s call.

Madam Speaker, just to add, as I am concluding, there are people who are doing a lot of hard work. They have been working and running businesses for thirty to forty years. They have been asking me and other people whether it means they do not know how to do business when they see some people come into some offices at a level of K2 million worth of assets and within three years record up to K23 million. People are asking if it is that they do not know what they are doing, or that some people are smarter.

Madam Speaker, with the aforesaid, I once again wish to thank you for giving me this opportunity to move this Motion. I beg to move.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Anakoka (Luena): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for the opportunity to second this very important Motion. Motions such as this one require no arguments. This kind of Motion seeks to take the fight against corruption from theory into practice.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Anakoka: Madam Speaker, the people of Luena, Shiwang’andu, Kaputa and Malambo know very well that one of the reasons they are still languishing in poverty, aside from the incompetence that has been displayed by some previous regimes, is corruption. They have seen their leaders becoming stinking rich while their lives remain in misery.

Madam Speaker, this Motion is premised on the realisation that whilst we have got legal frameworks at the moment, the people who have been seeking to deprive our population of its  God-given resources have been staying one step ahead of the current legal framework.

Madam Speaker, I note that the focus in the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, the Anti-Corruption Commission Act and the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) Act is for people who actually participate in the transactions, meanwhile many people have been left to enjoy their ill-gotten wealth without being called to account and this Motion will close that loophole.

Madam Speaker, we have situations where people own mansions, but there are no records to show that they own those mansions. Meanwhile, they are enjoying the luxury. With the current legislative framework, if there are two people who illegally allocate public resources to themselves, one builds a house and the other decides to go on holiday around the world for one year, the one who has built a house is likely to be caught for being in possession of assets suspected to be proceeds of crime while the one who has enjoyed going around the world for one year is likely to escape because of lack of legal provisions to deal with the situation. A lifestyle audit will make everybody account for how they live.

Hon. Government Members: Especially the PF!

Mr Anakoka: Madam Speaker, the nation has witnessed in the past how people almost ended up with miracle money. We need to ensure that the chance to enjoy the proceeds of crime is closed at every stage.

Madam Speaker, in talking about the lifestyle audit, we should not only stop at leaders. We should ensure that senior Government officers, directors, board members and everybody who has access directly or indirectly, and this includes business people who do business with the Government should also be accountable through this life style audit.

 

Madam Speaker, we are aware that people are able to hide their ill-gotten wealth by going to the bank to borrow K200,000, only to go and build a lodge worth K20 million and when they are called to account, they say I got a loan. Sometimes, they escape through that. However, a lifestyle audit will ensure that what reflects in how they are living is accounted for.

 

Madam Speaker, in supporting this Motion, we are mindful that a law such as this one can easily be abused. This Government, as it has been indicated time and again by His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, is not a vindictive Government. Therefore, in developing or strengthening the legislative framework to introduce lifestyle audit, the issue of human rights will certainly be at the centre.

 

Madam Speaker, we do not want a lifestyle itself to become an offence. However, we want a lifestyle to be an indicator of what might be happening and that people would not become inconvenienced so that they cannot enjoy their freedom, especially the freedom that they recently brought for themselves on 12^th August. We can see that there is no malice in the current prosecutions that are going on; people are being called to account according to the law.

 

Hon. Member: Question!

 

Mr Anakoka: Madam Speaker, a lifestyle audit is an important tool. As the mover of the Motion has already indicated, it is where the world is going to ensure that people who are able to bypass the transactions through the financial system and escape detection are caught when they begin to enjoy the proceeds of that crime. So, this Motion is only calling for people to decide one or two things. Either you support corruption, in which case you will be against this Motion, or you want zero tolerance on corruption in which case you will support this Motion.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Anakoka: Madam Speaker, I am sure that even our hon. Colleagues on your left do not support corruption and, therefore, I do not expect people to oppose this well intended Motion. Having said so, on behalf the people of Luena, we fully support this Motion and we wish it was here yesterday so that it is brought into effect as soon as possible in order for resources to be channelled to our people in the rural communities and not for people to be doing personal empowerment in their pockets.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: Before I call on the Leader of the Opposition, there is an indication by the hon. Member of Parliament for Chipangali to render his maiden speech and to also debate the Motion.

 

Mr Lubusha (Chipangali): Madam Speaker, thank you so much for giving me this opportunity to deliver my maiden speech on behalf of the good people of Chipangali.

 

Madam Speaker, I rise to this occasion to present my maiden speech by joining fellow hon. Members of the House who have come before me in congratulating you on your election as Speaker of the National Assembly. I also wish to extend my heartfelt congratulations to all fellow parliamentarians for having been elected as representatives in their respective constituencies.

 

Madam Speaker, with your permission, am I allowed to drop the mask a little bit?

 

Madam Speaker: No!

 

Hon. Members: No!

 

Mr Lubusha: Madam Speaker, allow me to sincerely thank our two able Paramount Chiefs, His Majesty Kalonga Gawa Undi and His Majesty Nkhosi Yama Nkhosi Mpezeni as well as all the nine Chiefs of Chipangali, namely Chief Mnukwa, Cheif Chanje, Chief Mshawa, Chieftainess Mkanda, Chief Kapatamoyo, Chief Chinunda, Chief Saili, acting Chief Chikuwe and acting Chief Mafuta for their immeasurable contribution towards ensuring a better Chipangali for all of us their subjects.

 

Madam Speaker, special gratitude to the former President Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, the former Vice-President Her Honour Mrs Inonge Mutukwa Wina, the Patriotic Front (PF) Central Committee, the Eastern Provincial Committee, the Chipangali District Committee, the Chipangali Constituency Committee and all the ward officials for having adopted me to be their representative.

 

Madam Speaker, former President Edgar Chagwa Lungu did not only promise the people of Zambia, but he also made sure that development was taken to all parts of the country including Chipangali Constituency ...

 

Hon.PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubusha: ...where for the first time, we have a mini hospital under construction. His development agenda was and is a marvel because he neither looked at political affiliation nor region. This cannot go without mention because what we are witnessing now, with the current leadership, is different from what the people of Zambia were promised during the campaigns.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubusha: Madam Speaker, special gratitude to the church and all the distinguished clergys for the moral and spiritual support. I thank my beloved wife, Ezzy Lubusha, my beloved children; Misozi, Mukuka, Melayi and Chagwa, for always giving me measurable support love, encouragement and motivation.

 

Madam Speaker, I am grateful to God and the good of Chipangali for making it possible for me to be their representative in Parliament. I will not disappoint, but endeavour to do the best of my ability.

 

Madam Speaker, my political journey started in 2001 while doing my secondary school education at Chama High School. At a tender age of eighteen, when I just completed school, I served as branch chairperson of the PF in 2002 and rose through the ranks and files of the party with my current position being the provincial party chairperson for the Eastern Province and member of the central committee for the former ruling party, the mighty PF.

 

Madam Speaker, I rise to bring to your attention that I believe in politics of empowering the people that gave me this mandate and while in this House, I will endeavour to defend, speak and participate in making laws that empower people of Chipangali and Zambia at large.

 

Madam Speaker, the following are strides that the good people of Chipangali expect me to do as I debate on different Motions that will be presented in the House.

 

Water Reticulation

 

Madam Speaker, the people of Chipangali expect me to stand in the gap and deliberate matters that will help improve their access to clean drinking water. We all know how valuable this natural resource is to mankind. This remains a priority on my journey as their representative.

 

Community Corporate Responsibility

 

Madam Speaker, together as residents of Chipangali, we want to restore the glory for devolution and peaceful co-existence among different stakeholders and communities through our national motto; One Zambia One Nation. We want every corner of the constituency to get involved in the constituency development agenda without leaving anyone behind.

 

Madam Speaker, as you may be aware, our brother and leader, the PF Chairperson for the North-Western Province and a member of the Central Committee (MCC), Jackson Kungo, lost his life gruesomely under the hands of his own brothers and sisters simply because he held different political views. Zambian as country should not be a Christian nation only on our lips.

 

Flagging off of the Construction of peri-urban and Rehabilitation of Feeder Roads

 

Madam Speaker, ours is about sustainable development and it is for this reason that all round infrastructure development is key in opening other economic doors. For this reason, roads in Chipangali are being worked on and have to be upgraded to bituminous standard by the so-called New Dawn Government.

 

Empowerment Programmes

 

Madam Speaker, in order to enhance the output for Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) such as taxi operators, marketeers, subsistence farmers, among others, we shall continue advocating for programmes such as financial aid support to the aforementioned so that their businesses may flourish. This programme includes people born differently and those with special cases. We look forward to putting the interest of the youths and women in all our programmes in Chipangali.

 

Health Care Service

 

Madam Speaker, it is my desire that no family in Chipangali should travel long distances to access health care services. Therefore, residents want more health posts and a general hospital to be constructed.

 

Provision of Quality Education

 

Madam Speaker, the education sector is one of the critical areas that need urgent attention. More schools need to be upgraded and more need to be built to meet the growing population of Chipangali. The teacher-pupil ratio is imbalanced.

 

Agriculture

 

Madam Speaker, Chipangali has vast land and good soils for agriculture. We shall work hard to make sure that the constituency contributes to the national food basket.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: Will you debate the Motion on the Floor now or later?

 

Mr Lubusha: Madam Speaker, I will debate later.

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, thank you so much for giving me this opportunity to make a few comments on the Motion moved by the hon. Member for Mwembezhi, in which Motion he is urging this august House to introduce legislation on a lifestyle audit, which was seconded by the hon. Member of Parliament for Luena who is a dear colleague.

 

Madam Speaker, I want to put on record, from the outset, that we on your left hand side have no objection at all to this Motion. In as much as we appreciate the Motion, it would have also been prudent for our hon. Colleagues; the mover and the seconder, to look at other pieces of legislation that are already in place and point out the weaknesses that could be in those pieces of legislation. I appreciate that he made reference to the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act, the Financial Intelligence Centre Act among others. He should have gone further to refer to the Public Finance Management Act, which is a current one, in order for him to have a complete analysis of what they are seeking to achieve. I heard him say that this Motion is not limited to public officers, but who are we looking at when we say a lifestyle audit?

 

Madam Speaker, if my dear hon. Colleagues had cared to look at the Abuse of Authority Act, for example, they would have known that most of the issues they are raising are catered for. Issues such as how someone should account for assets that are acquired beyond their means. That is already catered for in this Act. As hon. Members of this august House, it is prudent that we acquaint ourselves with the laws that we pass in this august House so that even as we seek to introduce new legislation, we know exactly the rationale and what it is that we want to achieve. So, if there are weaknesses that are identified, for example, in the Abuse of Authority Act, then, we highlight them so that this august House can then relook at them and amend them.

 

Madam Speaker, I know the hon. Minister of Justice is here. People in public offices such as hon. Ministers know what role they are supposed to play in their ministries. Controlling officers also have their specific roles under this legislature which provides oversight functions. We will approve the Budget, and all the finances that we shall approve in the Budget are accounted for. Every year, the Auditor-General goes to the ministries to see how the monies appropriated to these ministries have been spent, and the reports come to this august House. The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is sitting as we speak now to look at those who could have abused the public resources that are appropriated by this august House. So, all this is very clear.

 

Madam Speaker, we have the Ministerial Code of Conduct. If you are an hon. Minister, you are supposed to declare what you own from the time you occupy office every year up to the time you exit. Maybe what we should be talking about is how we can enhance this system so that what is declared is verified by the system to have been the actual declaration of what someone owns. This is what we should be taking about now. So, to think that there is nothing that exists in terms of a legal framework is not being in tune with what is obtaining.

 

Madam Speaker, I urge my dear hon. Colleague, the mover of the Motion, to look at all these pieces of legislation that are currently in place and then point out where weaknesses are, if there are some weaknesses. If we are talking about law enforcement agencies, what is it that needs to be done in order for them to be effective, so that for example, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) should be able to visit hon. Ministers? We have seen, in the recent past, the ACC visiting a hon. Minister who is alleged to have done something. It should deal with an hon. Minister without waiting for that hon. Minister to exit, or wait for the Permanent Secretary (PS) to no longer be PS to visit them. So, capacitating of institutions is one thing that we could discuss separately.

 

Madam Speaker, a lifestyle audit is catered for under these pieces of legislation I am referring to. I am sure we are not talking about seeing who eats chicken everyday or who is a polygamous person. If we are talking about personal lives, then, we must be categorical so that we know what we are talking about. We have seen preachers who have become so rich from nowhere.

 

Hon. Government Member: Why are you worried?

 

Mr Kampyongo: We are not worried. That is why we are accepting it. However, we are also making it clear to you that when we were appointed as Ministers, we were oriented on what the dos and don’ts should be or what we are supposed to do. Beyond that, when you stray in deep waters and go into the controlling officer’s zone and start directing him, then you will get into problems. Those issues must be dealt with spontaneously. That is why we are saying that we should enhance and enforce internal audits. When you listen to the PAC, you will find that these are the issues it discusses every day. How do we strengthen the internal controls so that external auditors start doing routine works of checking whether the Public Finance Management Act was enforced when public funds were spent? That is what we are saying.

 

Madam Speaker, we are all public leaders here. Let us just be sincere.

 

Hon. Government Member: You are scared.

 

Mr Kampyongo: How can we be scared? We are here. You are the ones who should be scared. You who are in the offices now are the ones that this thing is coming for. We did our part.

 

Madam Speaker, what I am just saying is that let us be clear on what we want to achieve as we urge this House. Is it to enhance or reform the laws before we can think of introducing new ones? I have made it very clear that the ministerial code of conduct compels hon. Ministers to declare their assets annually. What it does not do is include hon. Backbenchers to do the same. Probably, we could say that the ministerial code of conduct include hon. Members of Parliament and other offices, of course, excluding Presiding Officers.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: Madam Speaker, this Motion is straightforward, but we want it to be clear on the rationale behind the Motion after taking stock of all these pieces of legislation that I have alluded to. Then we can see whether, indeed, we new legislation or we need to enhance the existing pieces of legislation.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Madam Speaker: Thank you. Anyway, it is targeted at everyone. So, it is not one sided.

 

Business was suspended from 1040 hours until 1100 hours.

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Mr Wamunyima (Nalolo): Madam Speaker, I would like to out rightly say that I am not in support of this Motion because there is enough legislation in the country to enforce the fight against corruption. This Motion to introduce lifestyle audits lacks any specific parameters on how this will enhance the fight against corruption.

 

Madam Speaker, countries with the lowest levels of corruption such as Denmark and New Zealand do not undertake lifestyle audits. The fight against corruption must be anchored on strong oversight institutions. We do not need to have additional mechanisms to fight corruption. There is no proven research where a life style audit has succeeded in the fight against corruption. We have the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act and various legislation. There is no need to add other legislation to fight corruption.

 

Madam Speaker, the Auditor’s General Report clearly indicates where corruption is happening. The biggest problem we have had in this country is the enforcement of existing laws and perhaps progressing these laws as to how the country is in terms of modernising these laws. For example, enforcing the Auditor General’s Report in terms of holding public officers accountable is a whole long process.

 

Madam Speaker, we are in a free market economy where public officers are entitled to undertake private businesses. This Motion brings to this Parliament something that is not tenable in terms the fight against corruption. You should at the bribery laws of the countries that have succeeded in this fight, like I earlier alluded to such as New Zealand. Denmark has added bribery in its penal code. So, the question should not be on additional legislation but perhaps on enhancing existing laws.

 

Madam Speaker, when you want to undertake a lifestyle audit that does not have parameters and includes private citizen and directors in parastatals, which institution will have the capacity to lifestyle audit everyone who rises to a position of influence? Therefore, to me, this Motion holds no water. Let us enforce existing laws and let us pay people what they deserve to earn so that they should not be corrupt. We need to, perhaps, also improve the minimum wage. Is it commensurate to the economic times? We need to go to the root cause of what leads to corruption. Sometimes, it is because of low wages and people are paid less. Therefore, we need to support better and progressive ideas.

 

Madam Speaker, unless if we say that we can prove that there is research in the world that a country can say it succeeded in ending corruption because of the lifestyle audit, then, I can support this Motion. From where I am standing, the people of Nalolo do not support this Motion. This money that we seek to use in establishing other institutions should be taken to other developmental projects, if it is there. Let us build more schools. I need more schools in the constituency.

 

Madam Speaker, the fight against corruption in Zambia has been a problem because it is an expensive undertaking. It usually takes centre stage in specific people and mainly on politicians. The fight against corruption has not been streamlined even to private institutions. So, when you look at the fight against corruption in its entirety, it usually looks like a witch hunt because you have fight against corruption post administration. When a Government leaves that is when there is fight against corruption. So, what we need now, firstly, is the political will from the existing Government to stamp out corruption from its Executive members and, secondly, the political will to introduce better controls or better application of existing laws.

 

Madam Speaker, in summary, the people of Nalolo do not support this Motion. I want to encourage that the existing laws, which are there in abundance, should be enforced. If we need to recruit additional manpower, perhaps let us do that. We have no room for additional institutions. The Auditor General’s Report already exposes where law enforcers must look at. So, what is stopping the law enforcers –

 

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Nalolo!

 

A point of order is raised by the hon. Member for Petauke Central.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, he was just playing with the microphone.

 

Madam Speaker: Then that point of order falls off.

 

Continue, hon. Member of Parliament for Nalolo.

 

Mr Wamunyima: Madam Speaker, in summary, I do not support this Motion. Zambia, as a country, already has the backlog of cases and that is why we ratified the new Chief Justice hoping for more efficiency in the Judiciary. Our judicial system is already inefficient. Currently, we have all the legal frameworks to stop corruption. All we need is political will and this political will must not only be seen to be against former Governments. It must also be seen within Government. That is when we will end corruption that takes the form of a witch hunt. The Anti-Corruption Commission Act, the Forfeiture of Proceeds Act, the Financial Intelligence Centre Act and Ministerial Code of Conduct are sufficient enough. Perhaps, what we can do is criminalise corruptions and perhaps put it in the penal code. However, there is no need for additional legal frameworks in view of what is already there.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Menyani Zulu (Nyimba): Madam Speaker, thank you of the opportunity.

 

Madam Speaker, as I start contributing to this Motion, I do not support it. Looking at the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, the Financial Management Act and the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, I think we have enough legislation which can deal with a lifestyle audit. Just to add up before I go into details, what are we talking about when we say a lifestyle audit?

 

Madam Speaker, we are simply saying that we should audit the kind of food we eat at our respective homes. If one has two or three girlfriends, one should tell the nation how one is managing to support the extra marital affairs. Many things can be included in this Motion. Why do we want to come up with this piece of legislation when we have more than enough Acts to support what we are proposing? I do not believe that it is good for us to come up with laws that will target individuals. As we move ahead, we should learn from the past.

 

Madam Speaker, practical examples are given of some people who came with K2 million, but went with more than K20 million. Any sensible person can tell where this Motion is leading to. Let us not target individuals. At one point, members of the Ruling Party and all of us in this Parliament will be out of this Parliament. Therefore, the next Parliament should not come up with laws which will target us, as former leaders.

 

Madam Speaker, the House will agree with me and the entire Parliament that currently, there are very few Government officials at the levels of directors and procurement officers who cannot account for what they have gained, but you will never hear the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) following them. If today we had to bring in the Transparency International Zambia to start auditing people from the level of Permanent Secretary, you will find that no one will account for this.

 

Madam Speaker, the reason I am against this law is that it is trying to target certain individuals within the country. This is my understanding. I have given a practical example from what the proposer mentioned in the Motion. So, am I supporting corruption? No! I am against corruption. It is very simple to account for what I own because there is Income Tax Act. For instance, if I have K20 million in my account today, the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) will just check whether the money I have contributed is equivalent to the taxes I have paid or not. If I have built twenty mansions, it is very simple because the Act is already there. The only thing we need now is the political will which should come from the United Party for National Development (UPND). So, the idea of targeting individuals should not be there.

 

Madam Speaker, a practical example is that if you are going to carry out an audit on Hon. Zulu, let it be a proper and straightforward audit and not one which is going to push Hon. Zulu because I hate him and therefore, I need to target him because he did this and that in the previous Government against the party. We should start moving in the right direction.

 

Madam Speaker, we are not going to move on as a country if we continue targeting individuals. We have to move on as a country than to continue coming with laws which are going to hurt our friends. That should come to an end. A practical example is that the Ruling Party has a lot to do to impress Zambians. They are against time, but to me, this is a very retrogressive law and I do not support it. Basically, I would like to hear the Ruling Party encouraging the ACC to start checking on what is happening. For example, after six months or one year down the line from now, the current hon. Ministers will be called corrupt leaders just like the pervious hon. Ministers. Are we going to say these are saints than the previously ones? No! Some of them are clean and some of them are dirty. For instance, let us look at the richest people in Government institutions. They are people from the procurement department who are at directorate level. People own mansions, but you want to target a poor Parliamentarian.

 

Madam Speaker, they need to come with a system which going to tell us that Mr Zulu came with so much wealth and later on find out how he accumulated the extra wealth because the Act is already there. This is the reason that when we joined Parliament, we were told to declare what we had and we declared. So, if I am going to acquire anything from today to 2026, I should account for that because the law is already there. So, why should we come up with this Act? Let us search ourselves as we are proposing and seconding this Motion. Is what we are proposing right? Is this not targeting some individuals? We are Christians and we need to change our mentality.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr E. Tembo (Feira): Madam Speaker, the Motion urges the Government to introduce legislation on lifestyle audit in order to enhance the fight against corruption.

 

Madam Speaker, from the outset, I want to indicate that I am one person who hates and abhors corruption. Indeed, we strongly support any efforts to fight corruption. Having said, it has been indicated that there is existing legislation with regard to the fight against corruption and, indeed, there was also reference to countries that have introduced legislation with regard to lifestyle audit and that the same has been quite helpful.

 

Madam Speaker, it is my considered view that this legislation that is sought to be introduced should actually be implemented retrospectively. For me, theft of resources in this country started way back. So, the legislation should go back from the colonial times, Independence, even those who have died, the time of privatisation and many other people. I think we have to be fair. The objective is to recover what has been stolen and to deter any future corruption. Having said that, I also feel that it is very important to define the parameters because it is to enough to just good at other countries have done. For me, it is also important to audit –

 

Madam Speaker, this legislation is mostly focused on Zambians. This is why I am saying that let us look even back to see who has stolen what. We have Chinese and Indian investors in this country and most of this corruption is perpetrated by those people. Let us also audit these people. Let us look at who owns Zambia’s resources. We are just small time players when the real resources are being stolen by foreigners.

 

Madam Speaker, I can attest that 90 per cent of our resource is owned by foreigners. I am even more worried now that there is too much talk about the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the talk about the foreigners as a solution to Zambia’s problems. Let us audit who owns what in this country. How much are the mines paying? Kagem Mining Limited and those emeralds belong to Zambians. Why do we not talk about legislation to recover millions of dollars because there are more millions of dollar which we would recover there than from individuals. As Parliament, we need to look at those things.

 

Madam Speaker, having said that, I still insist that this legislation should not leave anyone and should not target single individual. I can only support it on that condition. Indeed, for me, there are no sacred cows in the fight against corruption and at this stage, we are looking at the period from colonial times up to now, one by one so that those who are claiming to be righteous and to be clean should also be exposed.

 

Madam Speaker, it is my considered opinion that what I will support is a full-fledged recovery audit. Let us audit this country as a whole. Who owns land? We, the Zambians are fighting over small portions of land because everything has gone to the foreigners. If the New Dawn Government is serious about economic recovery, let us look at a full-fledged audit, not piecemeal proposals of either fighting corruption or recovering whatever has been stolen. The people of Feira will only support a full-fledged economic recovery in as far as what has been stolen from this country is concerned. We know who is who because all this information is there. So, there is no need to even look at a few people.

 

In a nutshell, Madam Speaker, since we have all hidden something, I want to see those who had five cows, and after two years, have ten million. I want to see those who had no cow and were riding a bicycle, but now have all those things. Let us not leave anyone behind.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr B. Mpundu (Nkana): Madam Speaker, I will say a few words.

 

Madam Speaker, let me start by saying that we are the only country that celebrates poverty. I will quote a Bemba adage that says “Chimbwi aitilempashi no kumububa, shamububa” which literary means, a hyena went to dance around the red ants and they taught him a lesson of a life time.

 

Madam Speaker, I was very young but I can remember vividly that there are certain laws in this country that were enacted, that were targeted around individuals. Let me state here that laws that are targeted at individuals are repugnant, colonial and ancient, and it is mischievous to bring such a Motion because we know that the intention is to target individuals.

 

Madam Speaker, you will remember –

 

Mr Haimbe: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Nkana!

 

A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Haimbe: Madam Speaker, the point of order is raised pursuant to Standing Order No. 65 relating to the need for debate to be factual. The hon. Member debating the Motion on the Floor made a sweeping statement to the effect that the intended effect of the Motion is to target individuals. I read the Motion and there is nothing to suggest that. Therefore, what is being proposed is speculative and not based on any fact in the absence of evidence to the effect being laid on the Table. Is the hon. Member in order?

 

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member, as you debate, stick to factual statements and not assumptions. Do not bring about things which are not in the Motion. Of course, if you have an opinion on the matter, you can render that opinion. Proceed.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, I will continue to render opinions.

 

Madam Speaker, I am fully aware of particular laws in a particular Government and one particular law that was enacted was to make theft of a motor vehicle non-bailable. I can guarantee you that that law came back to haunt people who crafted it. Another law that was made in this House was to deter certain individuals to aspire for political office and they brought in the issue of having a Grade 12 certificate.

 

Madam Speaker, posterity will continue to judge us and those who attempted to hinder others to progress politically, were actually visited by the same law. I objected to a proposal at some point where a law was almost brought to Parliament that sought to deter those who were serving the Government or the public servants, that they needed to wait for six months after leaving office for them to aspire for political office. I vehemently objected that because that law was targeted around individuals. Individuals must never be targeted when we are enacting a law. I am not proposing that this law is targeting individuals; I am just making a statement that we must never come to this House to push for laws that will target individuals.

 

Madam Speaker, I come from a constituency where people hustle everyday for survival. As we speak, the young men in the constituency, who are called Jerabos, are out in the bush looking for ends meet.

 

Mr Kambita: Nibakabwalala!

 

Mr B. Mpundu: They find the soil – do not call them bakabolala, you need to sit down. They go and make ends meet out of the soil they find. Today, somebody wants to propose that whatever they earn out of their hustling must be subjected to scrutiny.

 

Madam Speaker, I am of the view that we should stop celebrating poverty and instead encourage people to work hard. In this House, we should have laws that question why I must be restricted to a US$5,000 transaction per day. People move thousands of dollars in other countries where they celebrate success. In here, hon. Members of Parliament are agitating or advancing for people to be confined to a particular mediocrity lifestyle.

 

Mrs Chonya: Question!

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, we have enough laws in this land, like others have debated, that have been providing checks and balances in as far as wealth creation and enrichment is concerned. What this Motion seeks to do is to gag people to continue living better.

 

Madam Speaker, I love suits. I grew up as a poor boy and I envied people who used to dress nicely. I do not want on a particular day, for people to come and question me on where I get my suits. I remember vividly that the late President Chiluba, may his soul rest in peace, …

 

Mr Mubika: With a container of shoes.

 

Laughter

 

Mr B. Mpundu: …was vilified for his classy taste in clothes. This is basically what this Motion seeks to do, to begin to question Binwell where he gets his shoes.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Question!

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, we work hard so that we can look good, live better and enjoy life. We need to encourage our people …

 

Hon. Member: To become billionaires

 

Mr B. Mpundu: … to become billionaires ...

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr B. Mpundu: …because when our people become billionaires, this country will progress.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, we are where we are today because – today, people will call you a witch because they have seen you drive a Mercedes Benz. People will assume that you sold your years in Dubai because they have seen you live better. This is what such a law seeks to do; to confine people to poverty.

 

Madam Speaker, the people of Nkana will continue to work hard and this law must not see the light of day in this House because it is repugnant, archaic and mischievous.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Katakwe (Solwezi East): Madam Speaker, thank you for according me and the people of Solwezi East this chance to add a voice to this matter on the Floor of the House. Allow me to just to say a few things for clarity’s seek.

 

Madam Speaker, first and foremost, I support the Motion on the Floor to introduce legislation on lifestyle audit. My understanding of a lifestyle audit is that it is simply a tool generally used for the sake of accountability; it simply means monitoring one’s life. In that aspect, as a tool, it is basically used to detect and prevent corruption. So, from the outset, and in view of how the debate is going, it is like people do not really understand this whole matter and, therefore, have unknown fears. However, a lifestyle audit is basically conducted when there is a visible shift in one’s lifestyle. Like my brother pointed out, when suddenly an hon. Member of Parliament, born from a poor family, gets into the Government and you are able to trace –

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members! You should not debate while seated. Otherwise, should I ask the hon. Member debating to sit down so that you can take up the Floor? Let us have some order.

 

Hon. Member for Solwezi East, you may proceed.

 

Mr Katakwe: Madam Speaker, I was saying that a lifestyle audit is basically conducted when there is a visible shift in one’s lifestyle. For instance, here is a person who grew up poor, went to school and eventually progresses and develops himself and you are able to trace how this person has acquired wealth. Let me give an example of a renowned person who we all know, our current President, who was a poor boy in the village with one animal and later had more and so on and so forth. So, you are able to trace that shift.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr J. Chibuye: Do not debate the President.

 

Mr Katakwe: I look at that as a way of monitoring –

 

Mr Mubika: It is an example.

 

Mr Katakwe: I am giving an example of monitoring a lifestyle. It is actually a way of monitoring the lifestyle of an individual who may actually appear to exceed his own income. Here we are in Parliament, we get an income. If what I get as an income and my expenditure is known and suddenly there is just this leap in my income, then, people will begin to question how that has happened. One has a little money then suddenly is a billionaire, and that attracts questions.

 

Madam Speaker, it needs to be understood that a life audit is actually used systematically in conjunction with other anti-corruption measures, which actually includes criminalisation of illicit enrichment. This is generally established on obligations for regular declaration of assets, like we did before we came into power. We had to declare our assets, incomes and so on and so forth.

 

Madam Speaker, a lifestyle audit basically looks at the unexplained wealth, as it is, whereby somebody just acquires wealth from the blues or from nowhere. Then it becomes questionable. As an anti-corruption tool, it actually relates to other lifestyle audit issues such as illicit enrichment. For instance, if we do not follow the laid down procedures in tender procurement and so on and so forth, and suddenly there is single sourcing. Then, people ought to ask how one acquired this wealth. Then there is, of course, declaration of assets, which I have already talked about. There is also unexplained wealth, I have also talked about.

 

Madam Speaker, my opinion on this Motion, therefore, is that as a public office bearer, I need to be accountable to the people who elected me. I also need to be accountable to even the one upstairs there. We need to be accountable to the creator. That is why every morning when you come here, you recite a prayer. It is a way of affirming our accountability to the one who gives us this life.

 

Madam Speaker, from the way I look at it, this is a Motion that is going to set precedence for the future generations, who should be able to understand that acquisition of wealth should be through hard work, as other hon. Members of Parliament have said. It should not be like a system in history in Sicily, where there was a clique of highly organised people. They were called mafias. These mafias infiltrated the systems in government and because they were highly organised, they gave each other tenders and acquired wealth in an illicit way. So, future generations should not think that to earn wealth, they must use the mafia formula. Not at all. They should know that it is through sweat.

 

Furthermore, Madam Speaker, lifestyle auditing even gives us confidence on the international market that we are fighting corruption and, therefore, we expect even other people to help us when we have this legislation already on the table. Like it has been said, other countries have implemented it and it is working.

 

Madam Speaker, in my opinion, therefore, we should actually work hard. Money that is earned through working hard gives somebody peace. However, when you dubiously acquire wealth, definitely you will not sleep because you will be expecting somebody to visit you for doing a wrong thing. So, as hon. Members of Parliament, I believe that being accountable and transparent is important. Hence, my proposition is that this Motion be supported.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Madam Speaker: There is so much interest and many people are indicating to debate this Motion, but time is also not on our side. We have a lot of business. We will express our debate through voting. I, therefore, call on the hon. Minister of Justice to give a policy statement.

 

The Minister of Justice (Mr Haimbe): Madam Speaker, thank you for affording me this opportunity to debate the Motion on the Floor of the House on the introduction of legislation relating to lifestyle audits, so as to enhance the fight against corruption.

 

Madam Speaker, I wish to begin by addressing a number of misconceptions that may have crept into the debate on this very important Motion, the first being in respect of what amounts to a lifestyle audit. It has been suggested on the Floor of the House that lifestyle audits are tools to enhance poverty. It has also been suggested that the intended legislation would be aimed at a witch-hunt against certain individuals. Indeed, it has been suggested that a lifestyle audit is intended to check what people are eating in their homes or if they are eating chicken on a particular day.

 

Madam Speaker, that cannot be further from the truth. Indeed, as the last hon. Member who debated the Motion has stated, lifestyle audits are intended to enhance accountability. His Excellency the President when he addressed this House made it very clear that the policy of this Government is that hard work will be rewarded, whereas those who will be in conflict with the law will face the law.

 

Madam Speaker, a lifestyle audit, therefore, is intended to encourage us all to undertake clean hard work in order for us to gain whatever assets we have. In fact, some of the aspects of a lifestyle audit include, for example, the need to have consistent tax returns. That is a requirement of the law already and should not be seen as a means of trying to be a witch-hunt against certain individuals. Likewise, a lifestyle audit requires declaration of assets by public officers. That cannot be taken as a means of enhancing poverty. In fact, any piece of legislation that is passed by this House, inconsequence of the principle that is being espoused, could be neutral and blind like any other piece of legislation and not intended at any particular individual. In fact, we all know that legislation once enacted does not work retrospectively, unless specifically provided. So, a lifestyle audit, indeed, will be intended to work going forward.

 

Madam Speaker, that being said, I wish to also elaborate certain principles of legislative drafting, if I may.

 

Madam Speaker, the purpose of legislative drafting, as I have already said, is to ensure that a certain standard is set which applies across the board, not specifically for individuals. Indeed, the New Dawn Government has been clear that it would enact laws in that specific way. Legislative drafting is also meant to ensure that the law remains current. Therefore, it ensures that the law is a living instrument. In this respect and with regard to the matter that we are discussing, the question is whether or not there is a need at any particular given time, not only for legislation relating to the lifestyle audit, but legislation generally, to enact new pieces of legislation.

 

Madam Speaker, in that regard, I would like to underscore that, indeed, as many of the speakers who have spoken before me, the hon. Members who have debated, there are already existing pieces of legislation. The question, therefore, is whether we would need to enact completely new legislation. Of course, given that we have clear provisions in the Constitution, the Anti-Corruption Act No. 3 of 2012, the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act No. 19 of 2010, Prohibition and Prevention of Money Laundering of Act No.14 of 2001and other pieces of legislation including regulations like the Ministerial Code of Conduct, any legislation that has to be introduced would be merely to enhance the existing provisions and not to reinvent the will. In any event, it would be in keeping with the principles of legislature drafting and such legislation will be promulgated as and when necessary. Therefore, there is no need for there to be any apprehension as to the content and the intention of the Motion on the Floor of the House.

 

Madam Speaker, further, we are a State party to the United Nations (UN) Convention against Corruption, which provides very specifics imperatives that we are to follow as a country. Indeed, the Motion on the Floor of the House simply feeds into what is expected of us under the United Nations Convention against Corruption which we are a State party.

 

Madam Speaker, interestingly, I only returned last week from Egypt where the United Nations Office on drugs and crime was having its ninth convention of State parties and these are some of the matters that were discussed. In fact, it is a topical issue world over. Therefore, this Motion is nothing strange. As we speak now, the entire globe was discussing the very matter, amongst other things, of lifestyle audits in Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt, which I attended. One of the key issues, for example, is not only the question of public officers, but, indeed, the private sector as required under Article 12 (1) of the Convention.

 

Madam Speaker, in this country, we have several private sector drivers that deal with the Government on a day to day basis, yet have not been given the same imperative in terms of the lifestyle audit and making declarations. This is something that needs to be addressed. So, the Motion on the Floor of the House should not be looked at in the narrow perspective of only dealing with public officers. It has a far reaching consequence.

 

Madam Speaker, therefore, my submission is that as the Government, the position that we take is that we support the Motion in principle and we shall endeavour, as and when necessary, to enhance the existing pieces of legislation ...

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Haimbe: ... so as to give impetus to the fight against corruption as we go day by day. As the need arise and as the people of Zambia, through their representatives, make such Motions, we will be responsive.

 

Madam Speaker, indeed, I need to underscore here that the Government will not relent in the fight against corruption. Indeed, the existing pieces of legislation are sufficient and any enhancement, for example, to allow for us to properly capture the private sector is most welcome. This is why this Motion that is before the House is of supreme importance.

 

Madam Speaker, I commend the mover and the seconder of the Motion for coming up with the Motion as it were, of course, with regard to the fact that there is existing legislation. I will take it that the Motion is aimed at enhancing what already exists.

 

Madam Speaker, for that reason, as I wind up and conclude my debate on the Motion, I wish to say that I support the Motion. The New Dawn Government will continue to look for innovative ways of fighting corruption, past, present and future. I submit.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Fube: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker: A point of order on whom, hon. Member for Chilubi?

 

Mr Fube: On the House, Madam Speaker.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Speaker: There is no such thing as point of order on the House. Can we make progress?

 

Mr Fube: Madam Speaker, it is a very important matter.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Members, especially those who debated, for or against the Motion. I thank them for what they have done. I think I am very happy. It is like a preacher on the pulpit saying ‘do not steal’ then someone should rise ati, “Is he talking about me?” I think that this law is well intended.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Fube: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order! Can we have some order?

 

Question put and agreed to.

_______

 

BILLS

 

SECOND READING

 

THE INCOME TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

The Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane): Madam Speaker –

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Chilubi and the hon. Member for Lukashya, you can go and consult outside quietly, please.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Income Tax Act so as to:

 

1. increase the Pay As You Earn (PAYE) tax free threshold for individuals to K54,000 per annum;
2. provide for the deductibility of the Mineral Royalty Tax for Corporate Income Tax assessment purposes;
3. reduce the standard Corporate Income Tax rate to 30 per cent;
4. extend the application of a 15 per cent Income Tax rate on income earned by persons providing accommodation and food services to 31^st December, 2022;
5. exempt the payment of Withholding Tax from interest earning accounts held by individuals with institutions registered under the Banking and Financial Services Act, 2017;
6. reform the Rental Income Tax Regime;
7. suspend the application of Income Tax to persons carrying on the business of manufacturing ceramic products for the charges 2022 and 2023;
8. extend the period for which disallowed interest deduction can be carried forward by persons carrying on a mining operation or electricity generation;
9. revise the bands for presumptive taxes on taxis and buses;
10. introduce Withholding Tax at the rate of 20 per cent on reinsurance placed with reinsurance not licensed in the Republic;
11. provide clarity on the computation of winnings for Income Tax purposes;
12. provide for the registration of persons with disability with the Zambia Agency for Persons with Disabilities for Income Tax purposes; and
13. provide for matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.

 

Madam Speaker, this Bill is straight forward and I recommend it to the House. I beg to move.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Chaatila (Moomba): Madam Speaker, in accordance with its terms of reference as provided under Standing Order No. 195(5), your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill No. 41 of 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, the 2022 National Budget set out various macroeconomic objectives to put the economy on the path to inclusive growth and recovery. It is envisaged that these objectives will positively contribute to job creation and growth. Against this backdrop, it is necessary to effect the Budget measures and amend the relevant pieces of legislation. The Income Tax (Amendment) Bill of 2021, therefore, seeks to amend the principle Act so as to give legal effect to some of the tax measures pronounced in the 2022 Budget Address.

 

Madam Speaker, most of the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee generally supported the Bill. However, the submissions by these stakeholders were not short of some concerns. Particularly, some stakeholders argued that there was no guarantee that making mineral royalty deductable for Income Tax purposes as provided for in Clause 6 of the Bill would spur investment and boost mining output by eliminating double taxation. They disputed the relationship between tax incentives and investment.

 

Madam Speaker, however, while noting that the measure will significantly reduce tax revenue by K3.2 billion as highlighted in the Budget Address, your Committee is of the strong view that the measure will make the mining sector attractive to investors and will greatly contribute to the creation of jobs, especially if it is complemented with robust monitoring measures.

 

Madam Speaker, in making its recommendation, your Committee commends the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) for enhancing monitoring and tax compliance measures in the administration and collection of taxes in the mining sector. Your Committee strongly recommends that the Geological Survey Department and all other relevant institutions involved in the mineral value chain determining mineral content and mineral output should scale-up enforcement and monitoring measures in order to maximise revenue collection from the mining sector.

 

Madam Speaker, while your Committee commends the Government on the two-year Corporate Tax holiday granted to manufactures of ceramic products from 2022 to 2023, under Clause 14(H), your Committee was of the view that this should be supplemented with specific targets to be met by investors to prevent companies from shutting down immediately after exhaustion of incentives. Your Committee eagerly awaits the implementation of the targets as it was assured by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning when he appeared before it that the Government will endeavour to attach such targets to the measure.

 

Madam Speaker, as I conclude, I wish to place on record that your Committee supports the Bill subject to its concerns expressed in this report.

 

Madam Speaker, allow me to thank all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee for their invaluable input to the work of your Committee. Gratitude is also extended to you, Madam Speaker, and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and support rendered to your Committee throughout its deliberations.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, thank you so much for allowing me this opportunity to make a few comments on the proposed Bill of the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill of 2021. We acknowledge that at this juncture, the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning has to move legislation in order to ensure that the tax measures he has put in place can be operationalised in the coming fiscal year.

 

Madam Speaker, however, we have a few concerns and I will start with the issue raised by the Chairperson of your Committee on Mineral Royalty, which the hon. Minister proposes that it provides for the deductibility of Mineral Royalty Tax for Corporate Income Tax. Out of this measure, the Government will lose revenue of more than K3 billion.

 

Madam Speaker, the Chairperson of your Committee stated that in the absence of set targets, it becomes very difficult to implement a measure like this. Let me inform the hon. Minister that to arrive at this measure, the previous Government accessed where we were coming from with the investors we had in the mining sector. We realised that if we put measures that would guarantee reasonable revenue coming from that sector, we would be like, “Umulembwe wa chipuba,” as we say in my local language “uupwila muli tumfwe.” Madam Speaker, anyone can come and eat okra cooked by a foolish person until it finishes in the pot. So, we decided that we needed to make sure that we generate –

 

Madam Speaker: Does it mean that mulembwe is a delicacy somewhere?

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: Madam Speaker, it is a delicacy and that is why it is compared to the only natural capital that we have in terms of minerals. That is a natural capital that we have, which is diminishing, and when it diminishes, we will remain with craters or holes that we will remain managing when the proceeds of that natural capital would have been taken. So, we are very concerned that at a time like now, when we are struggling to stabilise the economy, we can forego that kind of revenue from this sector.

 

Madam Speaker, the other measure of concern is that of revising the Rental Income Tax regime. We are starting a very difficult year. What the hon. Minister is proposing could have been gradual, but to move from 4 per cent to 37.5 per cent is such a drastic increase. What this will do is that the housing deficit cost that we have will now be passed on to the tenants, be it domestic tenants or tenants who rent shops such as small-scale enterprises. I do not know how my dear colleague, the hon. Minister of Small and Medium Enterprise Development, will manage to cushion those small entrepreneurs who rent small shops to earn a living because landlords who own property which they rent will pass on the cost to them.

 

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister should consider reducing this so that we can progressively increase this percentage. We cannot move from 4 per cent to 37.5 per cent. That is too drastic and it will have a negative impact on our people. We will begin a difficult year and we need to make sure that we cushion our people through measures such as this one. So, we will support the hon. Minister should he decide to reduce the percentage of what he has proposed.

 

Madam Speaker, regarding the measure to suspend the application of Income Tax to persons carrying business of manufacturing ceramic products for the charge years 2022 and 2023, how many investors do we have in this sector? Whom are we targeting with this measure? We have seen that the hon. Minister has also proposed to increase Customs Duty on imported ceramic tiles, but I only know one company under the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) which produces ceramic tiles. Does the company have capacity to cater for the demand? The Government wants to give tax holidays to these people, so, are we saying now that people should have houses without ceramic tiles? So, for me, the hon. Minister needs to justify to us who his targets are so that we can appreciate what he is trying to do with this measure.

 

Madam Speaker, my last concern is with regard to objective (i) of the Bill, which is to revise the bands for presumptive taxes on taxis and buses.

 

Madam Speaker, I have looked at the schedule and this is obviously targeting public transport, the buses our poor people use. I have seen the schedule of how much adjustment has been done. Already, beginning this year – this sector has had fuel prices increased and the bus and taxi fares have already been adjusted, meaning travellers will now have to pay a little bit more than they used to when travelling from Lusaka to the Copperbelt, from Lusaka to Shiwang’andu and beyond. When that measure is put in place, the operators will have nowhere to pass on the cost but to the commuters, the poor people. Could the hon. Minister not reconsider this measure he intends to put in place so that he can at least cushion the people poor?

 

Madam Speaker, we understand that next year will be a very difficult one, but it must come with at least some cushion to the poor people, the commuters. Those who jump on buses from Mtendere to the Central Business District (CBD) are literally poor people. They need to be cushioned. Already, transporters have adjusted the fares and the moment this measure is put in place, it will mean another adjustment to the fares and the hon. Minister of Transport and Logistics will have challenges to try and negotiate with the operators because they will have no option.

 

Madam Speaker, I wanted to make this clear and I hope the hon. Minister will be considerate and will review some of the measures that I have highlighted because it is very critical. You cannot punish the poor and leave the mines to get away with more than K3 billion. It does not work; let us prioritise our poor people.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Kang’ombe (Kamfinsa): Madam Speaker, I will quickly go to the first page of the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2021 and I am happy that the first page summarises the objectives of the amendments.

 

Madam Speaker, allow me to comment on some of the proposed objectives of the Bill and I will begin with proposal number one, which has been made by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, and that is to increase the Pay-As-You Earn (PAYE) tax-free threshold for individuals to K55,000 per annum.

 

Madam Speaker, my simple mathematics indicates that this translates into a threshold of K4, 500. I hoped that with the many increments that will be made in 2022 as a result of the increment in the price of fuel, the amount for tax exemption would have actually been taken to maybe K5,000 or even K5,500. So, my first observation, which I hope the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning is taking note of, is that the K4,500 that he has proposed as an exemption threshold is not adequate given what will happen in 2022. I am sure we all agree here that already, changes are taking place in terms of the cost of living for our people. So, the exemption threshold should have been more than the proposed K4,500 made by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning.

 

Madam Speaker, secondly, I am happy that the hon. Member for Shiwang’andu has actually set the tone for the concerns that I was about to raise. We will lose K3.2 billion per annum, meaning, in 2022, we will lose K3.2 billion and in 2023, we will lose K3.2 billion, probably even more, and the years ahead.

 

Madam Speaker, my simple mathematics shows that next year, we will lose US$200 million and I am happy that when the Chairperson for your Committee was reading his report, he actually acknowledged what the stakeholders who were invited stated. I want to quote his words that, there is no proof or evidence that shows that when you forego this revenue, suddenly there will be investment in the mining sector. I think that is what the Chairperson for your Committee stated.

 

Madam Speaker, given that reality and technical expertise, because the people who appeared before your Committee are experts in mining, investments and in so many aspects of the subject that we are discussing, clearly, there is no guarantee that if we lose US$200 million per annum, we will suddenly have First Quantum Minerals (FQM) and Konkola Copper Mines (KCM) investing in the mining sector. So, under objective (b), I hoped that we would have allowed to retain our USD$200 million. We sit and wait for our US$200 million as we continue expecting the mining sector to receive investment through other avenues.

 

Madam Speaker, I personally do not support objective (b) of the Bill and I would have preferred that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning retains the US$200 million, at least we know that the US$200 will come.

 

Madam Speaker, so, we fully understand objective (b) of the Bill and I personally do not agree with it as highlighted.

 

Madam Speaker, I will quickly go to objective (c), which is to reduce the standard corporate income tax rate from 35 per cent to 30 per cent. This is an incentive for corporates. These are already established companies and industries. These industries have already been making money. Probably, they have even recovered their investments or the monies that they put into the sector. We are giving them an incentive of 5 per cent less of what they are currently paying, but we are giving the Zambians only a K500 cushion. So, comparatively speaking, I hoped that as we give incentives to industries, we give more incentives to individuals, the Zambians who are going to feel the pinch when commodity prices begin increasing next year. So, my observation on objective (c) of the Bill is that we give a bigger incentive to the individuals, the Zambians, the small and medium entrepreneurs, those whom Hon. Mubanga will be looking after in the new year.

 

Madam Speaker, my other observation is on (f); revision of the rental income tax regime. I think the current 4 per cent for income not exceeding K800,000 and the normal taxation for any income above K800,000 per annum simply means that there will be normal taxation if you make more than K800,000, which is what Hon. Kampyongo was referring to. It will basically be 37.5 per cent of your income if you make more than K800,000 per annum from property. What this will do is that people will start hiding this income. What will happen is that if I own property, and I know that my income will exceed K800,000, I will start looking for other colleagues to manage that income for me simply to hide so there will be no compliance and I can bet that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning will lose revenue instead of fulfilling the objective of getting more revenue.

Madam Speaker, on objective (i) revision of presumptive taxes on taxis and buses, again my simple mathematics shows that there is an increment of about 11 per cent. So, we will ask taxis and buses to pay more money in view of an increment of 11 per cent. Again, the objective is to make more money, but how will we make more money if our businesses are going to suffer in terms of growth? If I wanted to buy an extra bus, I will decide not to because I know that fuel has increased and I now have to pay 11 per cent more on the presumptive taxes.

Madam Speaker, we propose that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning does not implement this proposed increment. He should keep the rates where they exist and allow our taxi and bus drivers to invest more in that sector by giving them some relief. Lastly, on the current reinsurance rate which the Government is proposing to increase to 20 per cent, I think the hon. Minister needed to clarify why this measure would be taken so that we appreciate the intention.

Madam Speaker, in summary, the measures that are supposed to be achieved under the Income Tax Amendment Bill do not favour the growth of the economy. The objective of growth is inclusive growth and recovery, but we will not achieve inclusive growth and we are not going to achieve recovery.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. Colleagues who have debated. Let me go through some of the points, one by one, starting with the Mineral Royalty Tax.

Madam Speaker, some hon. Colleagues are asking why we made the Mineral Royalty Tax deductable. First of all, we are not saying that we are withdrawing the Mineral Royalty Tax. It will be there, except that when you are computing Income Tax, whatever you paid on the Mineral Royalty Tax would be deducted.

Madam Speaker, I know that had my hon. Colleagues there won, this is exactly what they were going to do.

Hon. PF Members: Ah, awe!

Dr Musokotwane: I have accessed documents. They are now posturing, wanting to sound as if they are good, but this is exactly what they would have done. In doing so, they would have attempted to correct the serious mistakes that they made in the last ten years, which we are now going to correct for them.

Mr Chilangwa: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Ah! Sit down!

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, before these hon. Colleagues came into office in 2011, there were so many new mining operations that came into the country. Bwana Mkubwa was revised and Kantanshi Mine in Solwezi, Lumwana Mine and Kalumbila Mine were opened. With so many new mining companies that opened up, copper production rose from 250,000 metric tonnes to about 800,000 metric tonnes by the time they came into office.

Madam Speaker, then they started tinkering. I am sure you have been reading that mining taxation changed every year or every two years. That frequent change, including this one on the Mineral Royalty Tax, had one very devastating effect. This devastating effect was that whereas during Mwanawasa’s rule and Rupiah Banda’s rule, copper production was going up, under the Patriotic Front (PF) – first of all, no new mine opened in Zambia for the last ten years. Not a single mine opened.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

Dr Musokotwane: Copper production stagnated from where they found it. Since our colleagues in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) had a more enabling environment, copper production in the DRC rose from 400,000 metric tonnes to about 1.5 million tonnes today. Ten years ago, the DRC was producing just half of the amount of copper that we were producing then. Today, the DRC is producing double what we are producing. So, the effect of what these people did was to kill the mining sector.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, instead of inviting investment in the country, what we know the PF for in the last ten years is the closure of mines.

Hon. Government Members: Shame!

Dr Musokotwane: So, this poverty that you see today, in spite of the fact that copper price is at a record high, we are not feeling it because these hon. Colleagues instead of encouraging copper production to go up, they encouraged copper production to go down.

Mrs Chonya: Shame!

Hon. Government Member: Look at them!

Dr Musokotwane: These hon. Colleagues were given talents but instead of investing them, they buried the talents in the sand.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Musokotwane: That is lack of wisdom and this is why this country is suffering in the manner it is today. On one hand they were borrowing while on the other hand, where the sector that is supposed to pay these debts –

Madam Speaker: May the hon. Minister windup.

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank you and I want to tell those people that we are correcting the mistakes that they made so that the country becomes more prospective.

I thank you Madam Speaker.

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 23^rd December, 2021.

 

THE VALUE ADDED TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Value Added Tax Act so as to:

 

1. provide clarity on the use of an electronic fiscal device to record each sale or transaction;
2. revise the penalty for a taxable supplier for failure to issue a tax invoice;
3. provide for an upward adjustment of the penalty for a taxable supplier for failure to use an electronic fiscal device;
4. provide clarity on documents to be submitted by a supplier in support of imported goods; and
5. provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

 

Madam Speaker, this Bill is straightforward and I commend it to the House.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Chaatila: Madam Speaker, in accordance with its terms of reference as provided for in Standing Order 195(5), your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, No. 42 of 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, in carrying out this important task, your Committee interacted with various stakeholders including the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning. Most of the stakeholders who appeared before the Committee supported the Bill and were optimistic that the measures contained in the Bill will contribute to boosting the economy and actualising the macroeconomic targets for 2022. They, however, expressed concern on the limited time given to stakeholders to study and comment on the money Bills.

 

Madam Speaker, the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill of 2021 seeks to provide for clarity on the use of an electronic fiscal device to record each sale or transaction and revise the penalty for the failure by a taxable supplier to issue a tax invoice, among others. Having interacted with various stakeholders regarding the Bill, your Committee supports the Bill and makes observations and recommendations as outlined.

 

Madam Speaker, whereas the measure in Clause 3, which makes it mandatory for taxable suppliers to use an electronic fiscal device to record each transaction as a sale as opposed to a daily summary record is well intended, your Committee contends that it may not be practically possible. This is on account of the shortage of the devices and software compatibility challenges for devices in use by taxable suppliers.

 

Madam Speaker, cognisant of the fact that the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) is in a process of accrediting independent suppliers to improve the supply of the devices to value added tax taxable suppliers, your Committee recommends that ZRA should expedite the process in order for the measure in Clause 3 to be fully enforceable and ultimately secure revenue.

 

Madam Speaker, further, your Committee made a general observation that the biggest challenge of Value Added Tax is the increased complexity in its administration which largely contributes to tax evasion. Your Committee recalls that the Value Added Tax was initially intended to support value-adding manufacturing activities when it was introduced. In order to limit revenue leakages, your Committee urges the Government to consider undertaking a comprehensive Value Added Tax reform and ensure that the tax, as much as possible, supports value-adding manufacturing activities, as it was envisaged when the tax was introduced.

 

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, allow me to place on record my appreciation to all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and made submissions on the Bill. I also wish to thank you and Office of the Clerk for the guidance and support rendered to your Committee during the consideration of the Bill.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, my submissions will be very brief and allow me to welcome the proposal through this amendment Bill presented by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to provide clarity on the use of electronic fiscal device, to revise penalties and all the objectives that have been highlighted.

 

Madam Speaker, my only question to the hon. Minister and I am sure he will comment as he responds, relates to how much time we are going to accommodate in terms of sensitising the public on this very important step or the amendment of the Bill because once the law changes, it means that these become mandatorily. What will happen in 2022 and according to this draft law, this Act shall come into operation on 1^stJanuary, 2022, meaning anyone who will not be compliant with this regulation will be required to face the penalties that have been highlighted.

 

Madam Speaker, the first observation is that I will need the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to guide the House on how much window the Government is going to create to sensitise all the business men and women who will be required to have this gadget.

 

Madam Speaker, secondly, I keep referring to the Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), because there is always a delay in them adapting to changes in the business environment. I know the hon. Minister of Small and Medium Enterprise Development has a very huge passion to ensure that the SMEs grow. How are we ensuring that with these changes in legislation, these gadgets that we are told in the report are in short supply? According to the Chairperson of your Committee, there is a challenge in terms of the software and the actual gadgets to ensure that there is compliance. How will we accommodate our SMEs that need to be supported?

 

Madam Speaker, it is on this Floor of the House that we were allocating money to SMEs so that they grow. Does this law affect them? How does it affect them? How do we ensure that there is no impact on the growth of the SMEs? Otherwise, I fully support the measures that the Minister of Finance and National Planning wants to undertake to introduce these particular steps under the Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the House for the support. The issue raised by the hon. Member for Kamfinsa has been taken note of. I am sure the institution that is responsible for administering tax has taken note.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committee to the committee of the whole House.

 

Committee stage today.

 

THE CUSTOMS AND EXCISE (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Customs and Excise Act, to provide for the following:

 

1. align the First Schedule to the 2022 Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System of the World Customs Organisation;
2. revise the rates of customs and excise duty payable on certain goods;
3. revise the list of goods to be subject to surtax;
4. importation;
5. remove the export duty on maize;
6. provide matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.

 

Madam, this Bill is straightforward and I commend it to the House.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Chaatila: Madam Speaker, in accordance with its terms of reference as provided for in the Standing Orders, your Committee was taxed to scrutinise the Customs and Excise (Amendment) Bill No. 43 of 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, let me state from the outset that the Customs and Excise (Amendment) Bill No. 43 of 2021 is aimed at amending the Customs and Excise Act, Chapter 322 of the Laws of Zambia in order to align the First Schedule to the 2022 Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System of the World Customs Organisation. Further, the Bill seeks to revise the rates of customs and excise duty payable on certain goods, revise the list of goods to be subjected to surtax at importation, and lastly, remove the export duty on maize.

 

Madam Speaker, your Committee is in support of the proposed amendments in the Bill as they are intended to give effect to some of the pronouncements made in the 2022 Budget. In supporting the Bill, your Committee made the following observations and recommendations.

 

Madam Speaker, with regards to Clause 5, Chapter 34, your Committee notes the introduction of 5 per cent import duties on critical raw materials such as linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid which is an important raw material in the manufacturing of detergents. Your Committee is of the view that the introduction of an import duty will subsequently increase the cost of production, thereby making it difficult for locally manufactured detergents to compete with imported detergents. In this regard, your Committee recommends that the 5 per cent duty should not be imposed on linear alkyl benzene sulphonic acid in order to ensure that locally manufactured detergents are able to compete with imported ones.

 

Madam Speaker, with regard to Clause 6, Chapter 22, your Committee notes that unpackaged opaque beer is the most accessible form of regulated alcoholic beverage on the market for the poor community in Zambia. Implementing a higher tax rate on this category will alienate many low-income consumers and deny them access to products they can afford. Your Committee is concerned that if unpackaged opaque beer becomes very expensive and unaffordable, consumers will substitute this beer for illicit home-made brews which could adversely affect their health. Your Committee, therefore, recommends that the current tax rate of 15n per litre on unpackaged opaque beer be maintained to ensure that unpackaged opaque beer is not unduly taxed out of the market.

 

Madam Speaker, under the same clause, your Committee also notes that the current excise duty rate of 15n per litre on opaque beer was implemented ten years ago and has never been revised. It also noted that this measure is aimed at adjusting the specific excise duty on inflation. However, your Committee is concerned that the increase in excise duty from 15n per litre to 50n per litre will drastically increase production costs and may result in adverse effects such as laying off employees. Your Committee, therefore, recommends that the proposed excise duty paid on opaque beer should be reduced in order to protect local manufacturers in the economy.

 

Madam Speaker, finally, your Committee takes note of the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning’s assurance when he appeared before it that the Government would relook at the proposed measures above after taking note of the concerns raised by stakeholders.

 

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, allow me to place on record, my appreciation to all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and made submissions on the Bill. I also thank you and the Office of the Clerk for the guidance and support rendered to your Committee during the consideration of the Bill.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Chitotela (Pambashe): Madam Speaker, thank you so much. I stand to support the report of your Committee.

 

Madam Speaker, I am concerned about the Bill that proposes the introduction of a 5 per cent tax on the raw material used to produce detergent paste in Zambia, bearing in mind the living standards of the majority of the people of Zambia. I am not concerned about alcoholic beverages but about the issue to do with the raw material used to produce detergent paste. Last week, we saw the removal of the subsidy on petroleum products that led to the increase in the pump price for fuel. These are some of the ingredients that manufacturers use when producing goods and services. It also works for the transportation of goods and services to different areas where people of low income have access to the detergent paste. Bear in mind that we also have a pending issue of having cost-reflective electricity tariffs. This may injure many common Zambians who depend on detergent paste. Therefore, we may have a situation where Zambians will have difficulties to access this important commodity.

 

Madam Speaker, when I was doing history in economics, I learnt that there is a strong argument that countries that depend on increasing taxation with a view to improve economic wellbeing of their citizens usually do very little. However, countries that have deliberately chosen to relax or lower their taxes have attracted direct foreign investment in those countries. As a result, economic activities are boosted.

 

Madam Speaker, there will be a lot of competition in terms of the manufacturing sector in Zambia. Bear in mind that the New Dawn Administration has been preaching on job creation and promoting the manufacturing subsector in the economy so that it can work as a catalyst for job creation for the young ones. Introducing a new tax on a raw material used in the manufacturing subsector here in Zambia will make it difficult for those who want to come and invest in the manufacturing subsector in Zambia. They would rather choose to buy a finished product to come and sell in Zambia because it will be cheaper than producing it here in Zambia. Bear in mind that there are other factors such as overhead costs that go into the production of detergent paste.

 

Madam Speaker, we can calculate the 5 per cent tax and look at the energy sector, the electricity subsector, and the transport cost. Usually, businessmen do not want to pay tax so all that cost will be calculated as a selling price that is described as a total cost of bringing a good to a saleable value. Therefore, a manufacturer will pass on that cost to a consumer. At the end of the day, the same Zambians who would want to save and are looking for employment will suffer because they are the ones who will pay tax. That product will be very expensive such that the majority of the poor Zambians will not be able to access it.

 

Therefore, I appeal to the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to consider – a number of Bills are introducing a cost to doing business in Zambia, therefore, affecting the lives of the Zambian people. I know that the Government has no factory where it produces money and money comes from the taxes. However, I stated that if we are to encourage many manufacturing industries in Zambia and we lower our taxes, we will attract many people to invest in Zambia. Many people are going to be employed, and as a result, we will benefit from Pay As You Earn (PAYE), Corporate Tax and other income related taxes compared to introducing new taxation on raw materials that are supposed to help us boost out domestic economy.

 

Madam Speaker, these are the things I wanted to bring to the attention of the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, whom I have a lot of admiration and respect for. He is one of the most accomplished economists Zambia has produced. He understands the basic things we are supposed to do for the good of the poor Zambians in Liuwa and Kalabo District, where he comes from. Our people in Liuwa would want to buy detergent paste that they will be able to use daily.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank Hon. Chitotela for saying that we reduce taxes so that we expand the industry and create more jobs. How I wish the hon. Member was here when we were debating the tax on the mining sector. I think he would have agreed 100 per cent.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank your Committee and hon. Members for supporting the Bill. I also wish to take note of the observations made by your Committee as well as the issues raised by the hon. Members. May I take this opportunity to respond to some of them.

 

Madam Speaker, under Clause 28, it was submitted that the Bill proposes to impose a 5 per cent import duty on critical raw materials used in the production of detergents, which Hon. Chitotela talked about. I wish to submit that the Bill has not proposed to introduce any import duties. The amendment under Clause 28 is intended to align the first schedule to the 2022 Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System of the World Customs Organisation, to the current Harmonised Commodity Description and Coding System. The input in question appears under the HS tariff sub-heading 3402.11.00, which attracts a duty at 5 per cent. Under the new coding system of the World Customs Organisation, the input appears under the tariff sub-heading 3402.31.00.

 

Madam Speaker, notwithstanding the afore mentioned, I also wish to submit to the House that currently, companies can enjoy suspension of duty on critical inputs, such as the one we are talking about, through Statutory Instrument (SI) No. 110 of 2020, which is intended to support local manufacturers. In other words, the problem is going to be solved.

 

Madam Speaker, with regard to the taxation of opaque beer, the Bill proposes to increase the specific excise duty on opaque beer to 50 n per litre from 15 n. The specific excise rate has not been amended since 2015 and it has since been significantly eroded by inflation. Stakeholders submitted that the increase would lead to some of the key players in the subsector to close. The counter proposal from the sector is to increase the specific excise rate to 25 per cent. I wish to submit that I have taken note of the submission and proposal to amend accordingly. So, this will be amended.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee on Wednesday, 23^rd December, 2021.

 

THE PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Property Transfer Tax so as to:

 

1. provide for a ten per cent property transfer tax rate on the transfer of a mineral processing licence;
2. provide clarity on the period for the exemption of property transfer tax on an indirect transfer of shares;
3. permit the filling of return live proxy where the transferor may be dead, absent from the Republic or cannot be located; and
4. to provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

 

Madam Speaker, this Bill is straight forward and I commend it to the House.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr B. Mpundu (Nkana): Madam Speaker, in accordance with the terms of reference as provided for in the Standing Orders, your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Property Transfer Tax (Amendment) Bill No. 44 of 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, the Property Transfer Tax (Amendment) Bill of 2021 seeks to amend the Property Transfer Tax Act Chapter 340 of the Laws of Zambia in order to:

 

1. provide a ten per cent property transfer tax on the transfer of the mineral processing licence;
2. clarify the period for the exemption of property transfer tax on an indirect transfer of shares; and
3. permit the filling in of return on behalf of the transferor by proxy where the transferor may be dead, absent from the Republic or cannot be located.

 

Madam Speaker, the House may wish to note that all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee were generally in support of the Bill. However, one major concern was raised by the stakeholders on the possibility of double taxation in a situation where there was a transfer of shares and also a transfer of the mineral processing licence. Upon continued consultations with the stakeholders, this position was clarified. Your Committee was, therefore, informed that the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) had mechanisms in place to ensure that where a transaction involved the same property, the Property Transfer Tax would not be charged twice. It would apply only to either the transfer of shares or transfer of the mineral processing licence and never on both.

 

Madam Speaker, your Committee is in full support of the introduction of the 10 per cent Property Transfer Tax on a transfer of a mineral processing licence or an interest in a mineral processing licence. It is envisaged that once the Bill is enacted, it will ultimately result in more revenue collection for the State, through the broadened tax base.

 

Madam Speaker, I, therefore, wish on behalf of your Committee members to express our gratitude to you and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and support that you rendered to it throughout its deliberations. Your Committee is further indebted to all the stakeholders who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank your Committee and the hon. Members for supporting the Bill. I also wish to take note of the observations made by your Committee as well as the issues that it raised.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee Stage today.

 

THE INSURANCE PREMIUM LEVY (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Insurance Premium Levy Act 2015, so as to revise the Insurance Premium Levy.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill is straightforward and I commend it to the House and I beg to move.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, your Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters was tasked to scrutinise the Insurance Premium Levy (Amendment) Bill No. 45 of 2021, pursuant to its mandate as set out in the Standing Orders No. 197(j) of the National Assembly Standing Orders of 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, I have no doubt that hon. Members have acquainted themselves with the contents of your Committee’s report and I will, therefore, be brief in my comments.

 

Madam Speaker, one of the revenue raising measures proposed by the Government in the 2022 Budget Address to the National Assembly was the introduction of the Value Added Tax (VAT) on insurance premiums.

 

Madam Speaker: Order!

 

Business was suspended from 1255 hours until 1430 hours.

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, one of the revenue raising measures proposed by the Government in the 2022 Budget Address to the nation was the introduction of the VAT on insurance premiums. However, following further consultations, the Ministry of Finance and National Planning resolved to retain the Insurance Premium Levy and, instead, revise the applicable rate. This called for the amendment of the Insurance Premium Levy Act No. 21 of 2015 so as to increase the levy charged, levied, collected and paid, from 3 per cent to 5 per cent on insurance premiums in respect of insurance policies for all classes of insurance business carried on by insurers, insurance agents or brokers.

 

Madam Speaker, affordability is a key determinant of the uptake of insurance services. An increase in the Insurance Levy has a direct effect on the price of insurance on the policy holder and can affect further the uptake of insurance services. Your Committee, however, understands that the proposed change in the rate of the Insurance Premium Levy is not expected to have a significant impact on the volume of insurance products purchased across the different insurance products. Notwithstanding the impact that the measure will have and taking into account that the proposed increase in Premium Levy is in lieu of an introduction of the VAT at the rate of 16 per cent, it is a welcome alternative in this regard.

 

Madam Speaker, while supporting the Bill, your Committee is alive to the fact that the increase in the rate of the Insurance Premium Levy will undoubtedly translate into another tax on the already heavily taxed citizens and, therefore, implores the Government to ensure that the resultant benefits trickle down to all Zambians and not just to a privileged few.

 

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I wish on behalf of the Committee Members to express our gratitude to you, and the office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and support rendered to our Committee throughout the deliberations. Your Committee is further indebted to all the stakeholders who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, allow me to comment on the report by the Chairperson of your Committee as well as the Bill that is before the Floor of the House regarding the proposed increment in the levy from 3 per cent to 5 per cent.

 

Madam Speaker, in the Budget Speech presented by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, the initial intention of the Government was to provide a value of 16 per cent which I believe now, we are being told there is an alternative to that proposal which is in the Budget speech. We are now told that the levy will be increased from 3 to 5 per cent.

 

Madam Speaker, I am hoping that as the hon. Minister responds, he will tell us what relief will be given to the insurance industry in as far as helping them grow the industry is concerned.

 

Madam Speaker, you are aware that very few Zambians today actually do insurance business. If you consult the regulator in the insurance sector, you will be told that the number of Zambians who do insurance business whether it is property, vehicle or any form of insurance, is quite low at this stage. However, in order to get the industry to grow, I was hoping that in this first Budget, made by our colleagues who have taken over the Executive Arm of Government, we would have seen steps being taken to provide relief and incentives. What we are seeing today is basically an increment in taxes. So, we are not seeing a relief to the insurance industry which we must see grow. So, as the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning responds, my proposal would be that we maintain the 3 per cent levy as it is, allow for the industry to grow and then as we move, we have five years here as Parliamentarians, we will be able to get a report from the sector through the appropriate committee on how the industry is responding.

 

Madam Speaker, my submission is that, firstly, there is no need to increase the levy. Secondly, we need to grow this industry. We need to encourage Zambians to insure property. We need to encourage Zambians to actually appreciate the reason there is insurance. Increasing the levy to 5 per cent does not in any way promote the growth of the insurance sector.

 

Madam Speaker, I submit that this Bill is not supported.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the debaters who have contributed to the discussion. Let me say that for all the services that the Government gives to its people, the money only comes through taxation, and one of those taxes is the VAT.

 

Madam Speaker, today, if you take your clothes to the laundry, you pay VAT; you go for a haircut, you pay VAT; when you go to a restaurant, you pay VAT. So, anything or most things consumed in this country attract VAT at 16 per cent of the value of that service. So far, insurance is actually most favoured because there was only a levy of 3 per cent on the value of the insurance. There has never been any VAT like in other services. This is why, initially, we thought, just like in line with other services that we consume where VAT is imposed, the same should happen to insurance, but for issues of how to administer that practically, we decided to change. In changing, it only increased from 3 to 5 per cent. So, this industry is one of those that is least taxed. Honestly, with an increase of 3 to 5 per cent when on other services like eating food, taking a drink, having a haircut and so on and forth, we pay 16 per cent, I think the hon. Member agrees with me that this industry still gets favours in terms of treatment.

 

Madam Speaker, the question the hon. Member asked is: What is the incentive that is going to this industry? The incentive is there. The insurance industry may want to share some of its risk with those outside the country. For example, an insurance company that is taking premiums from an industry may feel that should this risk materialise, it would be wiped out. Therefore, it would want to share this risk with other insurance companies. In other words, undertake reinsurance. In this case, a withholding tax has been put here. If an insurance company decides to share the insurance with an entity outside the country, there will be withholding tax of 20 per cent. This means that the local reinsurance companies or insurance industry is getting this favour to create a favourable competitive environment against outside insurance.

 

So, Madam Speaker, with this measure, we believe the insurance industry is now going to contribute something, even just a little bit or even less than what other industries contribute at 16 per cent of VAT by just adding two extra percentage points. Of course, as I just indicated, the industry is also being favoured by protection through taxes against foreign competition. In that light, therefore, I still think that we are doing the right thing and I request the House to support the move.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee Stage, today.

 

THE ZAMBIA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before the House is principally seeking to amend the Zambia Development Agency Act of 2006 so as to –

 

1. introduce an investment threshold of fifty thousand United States Dollars or its equivalent for a citizen investor to qualify for incentives in accordance with the Act.

 

Madam, this Bill is straightforward and I commend it to the House. I beg to move.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, your Committee of National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters was tasked to scrutinise the Zambia Development Agency (Amendment) Bill No.46 of 2021 pursuant to its mandate as set out in Standing Order 197 (j) of the National Assembly Standing Orders, 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, I will only highlight the salient features of the Committee’s report on the Bill, as I am very confident that the hon. Members have acquainted themselves with the contents of the report.

 

Madam Speaker, the proposed amendment in the Bill seeks to amend the Zambia Development Agency (Amendment) Act No. 11 of 2006 so as to actualise the aspirations of the Government as pronounced in the 2022 Budget Address that was delivered by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning.

 

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister outlined incentives to support higher output and production that would create employment opportunities and, in turn, improve the livelihood of Zambians. Further, in order to attract investment and help to concretise value addition, the hon. Minister indicated the need to revamp the Multi-Facility Economic Zones (MFEZs) and industrial parks by providing tax incentives that would attract private sector investment in the zones and industrial parks.

 

Madam Speaker, the Zambia Development Agency Act provides that an investor who is investing not less than US$500,000 or the equivalent in convertible currency in a priority sector or product is entitled to incentives as specified by or under the Income Tax Act, Cap.323 of the Laws of Zambia or the Customs and Excise Act, Cap.322 of the Laws of Zambia. The Bill we are discussing today amends the principal Act by providing for a lower threshold of US$50,000 for local investors while maintaining the US$500,000 threshold for foreign investors.

 

Madam Speaker, your Committee notes the well-intended incentive provided by the Bill. The focus on promoting local investment is commendable, especially that it contributes to the attainment of the strategic objective to increase actualised investments in priority sectors by effectively mobilising domestic and foreign investments.

 

However, Madam Speaker, a major concern for both your Committee and a number of stakeholders who made submissions is what represents a local investor. As per the Zambia Development Agency Act, a foreigner who incorporates their company in Zambia at the Patents and Companies Registration Authority (PACRA) is considered to be a local investor. This disadvantages Zambian citizens who have to compete with foreign nationals under the US$50,000 incentive. These foreign nationals in many instances already have other incentives such as access to cheaper financing which Zambians do not have.

 

Madam Speaker, following the engagement with various stakeholders, including the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, your Committee reluctantly resolved to support the enactment of the Bill into law. The Committee’s reluctance arose out of the fact that the decision to make the incentives more targeted is not justified without redefining what a local investor is. Your Committee, therefore, strongly urges the Government to ensure that the relevant amendment of the Zambia Development Agency Act to redefine the term ‘local investor’ is made during the legislative meeting of the Thirteenth National Assembly in February 2022 as a matter of extreme urgency.

 

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I wish, on behalf of the Committee hon. Members, to again express our gratitude to you and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and support rendered to our Committee throughout our deliberations. Your Committee is further indebted to all the stakeholders who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Chilangwa (Kawambwa): Madam Speaker, good things must always be supported and I believe this move the hon. Minister has taken to ensure that the threshold for Zambian companies comes to K50,000 is a good start. Even if the exchange rate is at K17 to a dollar, or goes to K19, this will still be below a million Kwacha and this is a good thing. However, the concern I want to raise, just like the Committee did, is the need to classify who that Zambian business we are targeting is. We need to – obviously, those are details.

 

However, I commend the hon. Minister because this is a good start. When he presents the 2023 Budget, I believe this will even go to US$25,000 or US$20,000 because that is what, we, their good friends in Patriotic Front (PF), desired to do. Our colleagues know very well that we wanted to ensure that we laid a very firm foundation for the Zambian businessman to be able to do business in their own country with affordable terms and be able to create employment for our people. Our people must get jobs. If the terms and conditions that we put on the table and a level playing field are worked on, then, our Zambian entrepreneurs will be able to provide more jobs. At the end of the day, Zambia will not be developed by Zambians. Others come and go, but Zambians will always remain here.

 

Madam Speaker, with those very few remarks, I commend the hon. Minister for this very progressive way of doing things.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the Committee and the hon. Members who have debate and I thank the House for the support.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committee Stage today.

 

THE ROAD TRAFFIC (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this House is principally seeking to amend the Road Traffic Act of 2002, so as to revise the taxes payable for motor vehicles and trailers. The Bill is straight forward and I commend it to the House.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mrs Munashabantu (Mapatizya): Madam Speaker, I rise to present the Report of the Committee on Delegated Legislation on the Road Traffic Amendment Bill No. 47 of 2021, for the First Session of the Thirteenth National Assembly, referred to the Committee by the House on Friday, 10^th December, 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, the object of the Bill is to amend the Road Traffic Act No. 11 of 2002, so as to revise the taxes payable for motor vehicles and trailers, upwards by 10 per cent from what is currently payable. The House may wish to note that the last adjustment to these taxes was done in 2010 and, therefore, the planned upward adjustment seeks to maintain the real value of revenue which has been eroded by inflation since the last adjustment.

 

Madam Speaker, all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee supported the proposed amendment to the Road Traffic Act and are cognisant of the fact that the Bill seeks to give effect to the measures announced in the 2022 Budget Address by the Minister of Finance and National Planning. Your Committee is in support of the amendments as they are expected to enhance domestic revenue mobilisation effort.

 

Madam Speaker, may I conclude by expressing gratitude to you on behalf of the Committee for your guidance during our deliberations. Your Committee is also thankful to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly as well as the permanent witness from the Ministry of Justice for the support services rendered during the Committee’s deliberations.

 

With those few words, Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Menyani Zulu (Nyimba): Madam Speaker, in the first place, I thank the Committee for the job it did.

 

Madam Speaker, I have no problem supporting this Bill, but my only disappointment is that – if we look at appendix two on the list of witnesses over the same, from the Government side, they had Ministry of Justice, transport and logistics from the Ministry of Finance and National Planning, the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA), Bank of Zambia (BoZ) and all these are Government institutions are trying to raise resources for the country, which is very good. I support this because, basically, the country needs a lot of resources for us to function, buy medicine in hospitals and construct roads.

 

Madam Speaker, however, my disappointment is that the people who are players in these sectors were excluded to be among the witnesses. We invited an elite representation, which is Truckers Association of Zambia (TAZ), one single association from six or so associations in this country to represent the masses, which was wrong. There is a cartel in our logistic business where a few can meet Government officials and the rest cannot. 80 per cent of the representation of the TAZ are people domiciled in South Africa, with a few registered truckers in Zambia. The major players in this business, who were supposed to advise the Government on how it can get money, were excluded. They were not among the list of those who were supposed to come in as witnesses, which is very disappointing.

 

Madam Speaker, there are about four or five ministries connected to this sector. So, for the betterment of the country and for it to raise enough revenue, let us involve everyone. If we start segregating others because they are not meeting that standard – basically, Zambia is not a developed country. It is not even maybe, amongst the middle income countries. Zambia is a low income country. We have our transporters who can contribute money at that stage but we ended up calling the South African dominated companies to Parliament. The organisation which was invited by Parliament to come and be part of the witnesses is segregative and it promotes racism. This should come to an end. Let us involve people who are going to advise us.

 

Madam Speaker, in as much as we are collecting this money, we should give the incentives to the local transporters. Let us give them incentives which are going to help them. We cannot have a country where the entire mining companies are contracted companies from South Africa and Tanzania. This Government cannot even give jobs to the local people where it wants to get money from. The problem starts from the Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA), goes to the Ministry of Energy and then the Ministry of Home Affairs and Internal Security. This Government is failing to control this. This Government is looking for money but it is empowering others.

 

Madam Speaker, I will give the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning a practical example. If today, he gave Zambian companies contracts and supported them by giving them 250 metric tonnes to export, I can rest assure him that he would be getting a lot of taxes from the drivers. The importation of spares and cars in this country is going to rise and we are going to collect more money.

 

Madam Chairperson, the United National Independence Party (UNIP) Government tried but the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) and the Patriotic Front (PF) Governments failed in this sector. I can see the United Party for National Development (UPND) Government failing this sector because the first remedy was supposed to be at this stage, starting from now. Now, I do not know if it is failure to consult or they feel they are so learned such that they cannot consult other people.

 

Madam Speaker, I am getting the statistics from Appendix II of the report. Only the Truckers Association of Zambia (TAZ) was invited. Why did they not invite Peter Transportation and Car Rental? Why did they leave these people out of the witnesses because these are people who are helping out? These are people who are feeling the pitch. Starting from 1^st January, the cost of a trailer will be somewhere at US$5,000 to US$6,000 per year. If we look at that figure, what incentives have we given to the same transporters for them to have business so that they can pay?

 

Madam Speaker, to drive that diesel tanker, if they put all the Energy Regulation Board (ERB) requirements and whatever is needed, one tank will be costing about over K50,000. So, what is it that we have given them so that we can empower them? I beg the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to sit down with the hon. Minister of Transport and Logistics and the hon. Minister of Energy to make sure that we empower our local transporters. I think this is not too much to ask. I hope the hon. Minister is getting the point I am trying to drive at. For us to raise money, we need to empower the locals.

 

Madam Chairperson, failure to empower the locals, I can rest assure the hon. Minister that we are not going to do anything. All those vehicles we see in the country carrying copper are not Zambian companies. It is either they are South African or Tanzanian companies. Our own companies cannot carry anything and are doing nothing. It is not because they do not want to but it is because this Government has failed to consult them and instead, it consults a group of people which thinks it owns this country. They are holding Zambia with their hands such that we cannot do anything as Zambians. The people are feeling the pitch. That should come to an end.

 

Madam Chairperson, next time we will be calling witnesses, let us call the people who are going to help this country, where the hon. Minister and I will be able to collect revenue but you will find that these are the people we are not inviting. These are the people who are going to help us. The people they called to be witnesses are not helping us. They only talk to the people in the Government and those who want money to come in without looking at the source. If the river dries up, where are we going to get the water to drink?

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, thank you for allowing me to also make a few comments on the proposed Bill by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning.

 

Madam Speaker, we acknowledge that it has taken a bit of time since the fees were reviewed. Indeed, it is important that we generate revenue from all sources including these sources where we generate non-tax revenue. However, my concern is the percentage with which this Government has adjusted. I am saying this knowing very well that earlier in the morning, we were talking about the presumptive tax that will be applicable now to the public transporters for example, those who own buses and taxis. So, like I said, apart from the increase in fuel, there will be this adjustment in presumptive tax and we are talking about the licensing fees being adjusted by 30 per cent. Ultimately, this cost will be passed on to our commuters especially, in the transport sector because the operators will have no choice.

 

Madam Speaker, so, my view is that in as much as this Government wants to generate or raise money from these non-tax revenue sources, it has to be considerate. It is one thing to revise the fees upwards and then we fail to collect them. We will have the police running after the mini-bus operators for failure to pay fees in the quarters as required. So, we need to consider reviewing the percentage slightly downwards so that we cushion the operators in the transport sector and also, the citizens, those who own motor vehicles because 30 per cent is quite steep in terms of adjustment. We could have put it at 15 per cent, if it is possible.

 

Madam Speaker, we commend the hon. Minister for the measure he pronounced to reduce the cost of renewing driving licenses. We propose to increase the Public Service Vehicle (PSV) driver’s renewal period from annual to every five years. This is commendable but we also have to be aware that the short periods were meant to assess the fitness of these drivers because five years is a long period and you never know how these drivers will be faring. So, continuous assessment was one of the measures that the Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) was using to ensure that people, especially those who drive our citizens using public transport are always fit enough to operate public vehicles. Yes, it is not so much about the fees. Probably we could have considered just reducing the fees and ensure there is periodic assessment of these drivers. We have seen the road carnage and how many lives we have lost on the roads due to the recklessness of some of the drivers in whose hands our members of the public are put.

 

Madam Speaker, my considered view is that we need to look at the percentage of what we have adjusted in terms of the licenses for the motorists and also, see how we can discuss with the Ministry of Transport and Logistics in order to ensure that whilst we have increased this period for renewal of PSV driver’s licenses, measures should be put in place which they will use to continuously assess these public drivers. It is very important to ensure the safety of our commuters who are carried on the public transport. We, therefore, support the measure hoping that the hon. Minister will be considerate with this proposal that we are sharing, that we should consider reviewing the percentage that the Government has slapped so that there is compliance.

 

Madam Speaker, we see police officers running around and mounting checkpoints at the end of every quarter to try to compel motorists to pay license fees for their motors vehicles. It is not because people just do not want to pay. Sometimes it is just the capacity of our people to pay. So, the hon. Minister should make it easier for the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security to not have his people on the road just to compel people to pay licenses which might be prohibitive. So, it should be made attractive so that the Government can generate a little bit more than chasing the people to pay.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank those who have debated, but let me just make a few comments.

 

Madam Speaker, the whole of last week and before that, if you listened to debate in the House, some hon. Colleagues were complaining bitterly about one particular province and schools not being funded properly and why we did not build clinics in certain places. In other words, we are looking for money to satisfy those cries that hon. Members of Parliament were making about their places. One of the areas we thought we could raise some funding is through raising the fees for motor vehicles because the fees were last revised in 2015. Seven years have passed between today and 2015.So, the real value of the levies that are being collected today compared to what we were collecting in 2015 has gone down. This is why it was necessary to make these adjustments so that the values of the levies go back or near to where they were before, to satisfy the requirement of funding various projects. So, in my view, I do not think that this is too much to ask for. Admittedly, any tax adjustments means that we must pay something towards the very public expenditures that we want to meet.

 

Madam Speaker, I also want to add that in this particular instance, something has been given back to the transporters in terms of the frequency of paying for Public Service Vehicles (PSV) driving licenses. Previously, they used to pay every year. Going forward, they will only be paying after five years because a license will only be required to be renewed after five years. So, this is something that has been given back to the transport sector and that concession cannot just be seen in terms of monetary value. It must also be seen in terms of the time opportunity cost. The amount of time that drivers would have to go and queue and make payments is cut off. They say time is money, so when you relieve the drivers of the need to go and queue every year, you have saved them time and therefore, their money is saved.

 

Madam Speaker, I fully appreciate what my Colleagues have said and indeed appreciate the issue raised by the hon. Member for Nyimba. Yes, we are concerned about the competitiveness of the Zambian truckers. This is something we are going to address together with the hon. Minister of Transport and Logistics. Why is it that the majority of the truckers are foreign? We will also look at every possibility that is available to make our truckers more competitive so that they should be the ones transporting copper, fuel and as much of the traded goods between Zambia and other African countries.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee Stage today.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: On a point of order, Madam.

 

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Hon. Member for Nkana, on whom do you have a point of order or is it a mistake?

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, I was supposed to raise this point of order in the morning, but I did not. So, I want to take advantage of the time.

 

Madam Speaker: It is the timing.

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, that is the guidance you had provided.

 

Madam Speaker: Now is not the appropriate time to raise it. You can try tomorrow.

 

Laughter

 

Mr B. Mpundu: Madam Speaker, even after your guidance?

 

Madam Speaker: It is okay; we are all learning.

 

THE BETTING CONTROL (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, to beg move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill before the House is principally seeking to amend the Betting Control Act so as to:

 

1. revise the licence fees for a bookmaker;
2. revise the validity period of a licence issued to a bookmaker; and
3. provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

 

Madam Speaker, the Bill is straight forward and I commend it to the House.

 

I beg to move, Madam.

 

Mrs Munashabantu: Madam Speaker, I wish to present the Report of the Committee on Delegated Legislation on the Betting Control (Amendment) Bill, No. 48 of 2021 for the First Session of the Thirteenth National Assembly referred to the Committee by the House on Friday, 10^th December, 2021.

 

Madam Speaker, the object of the Bill is to amend the Betting Control Act, Chapter 166 of the Laws of Zambia so as to revise the licence fees for a bookmaker and the validity period of a licence issued to a bookmaker.

 

Madam Speaker, while all the stakeholders who interacted with your Committee supported the Bill as it was intended to raise revenue for the country, some expressed concerns as highlighted in the Committee’s report. Notably, stakeholders were of the view that the increase in betting and gabling houses had increased financial distress in households and individuals because some individual were allocating family resources to betting in the hope of increasing personal income. In other words, stakeholders were concerned with the social impact of gambling on society, especially on the youths.

 

Madam Speaker, in view of this, your Committee recommends that the Government should strengthen monitoring and regulation of this sector so that there is a balance between the economic benefit to the country and the social welfare of families.

 

Madam, further, stakeholders submitted that given the nature of the industry, there is a high probability that frequent changes to the quantum of licence fees will be required. In this regard, stakeholders proposed that the quantum fees should be provided for in a Statutory Instrument and not the principal Act so as not to subject the Act to rigorous amendment processes each time there was an adjustment to the fees. Your Committee agrees with the stakeholders regarding this matter and urges the Government that going forward, the necessary steps should be taken to actualise this proposal.

Madam Speaker, may I conclude by expressing gratitude to you on behalf of the Committee for your guidance during our deliberations. Your Committee is also thankful to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly as well as the permanent witness from the Ministry of Justice for support services rendered during its deliberations.

 

With those few words, I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Munir Zulu (Lumezi): Madam Speaker, I have a few contributions and I want the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to get me clearly. We have increased by more than 1000 per cent on an institution that, in a way, has been providing remedies to the young people who are jobless in society.

Madam Speaker, most betting firms do not own their own buildings. They either rent or put their machines in the building of someone with a grocery shop in a densely populated area. Now, with this increase of more than 1,000 per cent, the young people who are jobless will start committing crimes. We have already observed that the number of crimes has increased.

Madam Speaker, when it comes to stakeholders, I think we should try in the near future to consult as many people as we can. That way we will be making better decisions for the citizens. We cannot say we consulted when we only consulted one betting firm.

Madam Speaker, there have been many taxes on this industry. The player is taxed, the one issuing the money is taxed and now we are bringing in a 1,000 per cent increment. Going forward, let us take into consideration the people in the most affected areas like Kanyama and Chibolya. Let us not only look at taxes that are going to benefit us as the selected few. Let us not think that because we stay in Kabulonga and there is no betting facility we can choke the citizen. I think that will be choking more citizens.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the Committee and the hon. Members for supporting the Bill. I have also taken note of the observations made by the Committee as well as the issues raised by those who have debated.

Madam, the Bill proposes to revise upwards the licence fees for bookmakers which have not been revised since 2011, ten years ago. However, it was submitted that there is a need to ensure that small enterprises are protected. Therefore, I propose to amend the Bill to ensure that small enterprises pay half the substantive fees.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 23^rd December, 2021.

THE MONEY-LENDERS (Amendment) BILL, 2021

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Madam Speaker, the Bill before the House is principally seeking to amend the Money Lenders Act so as to revise the money lenders license fees.

Madam Speaker, the Bill is straightforward and I commend it to the House. I beg to move.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mrs Munashabantu: Madam Speaker, I wish to present the Report of the Committee on Delegated Legislation on the Money Lenders (Amendment) Bill No. 49 of 2021 for the First Session of the Thirteenth National Assembly referred to the Committee by the House on Friday, 10^th December, 2021.

Madam Speaker, the object of the Bill is to amend the Money Lenders Act Chapter 398 of the Laws of Zambia so as to revise the money lenders licence fee. The House will be interested to note that the regulation of financial services in Zambia is in three categories. To this end, the Bank of Zambia (BoZ) provides regulatory oversight over commercial banks and non-bank financial institutions with capital thresholds above K100,000 while the Ministry of Finance and National Planning provides oversight over money lenders under the Money Lenders Act which is the subject of discussion today.

Madam Speaker, the current fees for a license are 450 fee units for a licence which is obtained at the beginning of the year. If a license is obtained less than six months before the end of the year, the fees are 300 fee units. The proposed amendment, therefore, seeks to set the fee for a licence obtained at the beginning of the year at 33,333 fee units and for a licence obtained less than six months before the end of the year at 22,222 fee units.

Madam Speaker, according to the Fees and Fines (Fees and Penalty Unit Value) (Amendment) Regulations, 2015, the value of a fee unit is currently at 30n. This means the proposed amendment will increase the cost of a license obtained in the first half of the year from K135 to K9,999 and one obtained in the last half of the year from K90 to K6,666.

Madam Speaker, stakeholders who provided both written and oral submissions to your Committee had no objection to the proposed increase in the licence fees on account of the growth in scope and the geographic footprint of money lenders. They were of the view that the upward adjustment of the fees was welcome and long overdue, and would ensure that only persons with the capacity to operate as money lenders would continue or enter the sector. This had the desired effects of protecting the public from illegal or explorative money lenders.

 

Madam Speaker, while welcoming the Bill, some stakeholders submitted that the high licence fees may have the an unintended consequence of increasing the number of unregistered and illegal money lenders, who charge exorbitant rates which would negatively impact low cost and poor borrowers. In this regard, it was proposed that a full regulatory impact assessment be conducted to establish a reasonable amount for the licence fees. The assessment may also help to determine the threshold on which formalisation can start in view of the fact that some indigenous lenders might be too small to regulate.

 

Madam Speaker, your Committee supports these observations made by the stakeholders and has made appropriate recommendations thereon in its report. Your Committee, therefore, supports the Bill and urges the Government to take on board its observations and recommendations.

 

Madam Speaker, may I conclude by expressing gratitude to you on behalf of the Committee for your guidance during our deliberations. Your Committee is also thankful to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly as well as the permanent witnesses from the Ministry of Justice for the support rendered during the Committee’s deliberations.

 

With those few words, Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, some of us are new to this Parliament and we are learning, and what is surprising is that it appears everything coming for amendment is an increment. It appears this session is just for increments. We thought that there will be relief to our people. I know the industry for lending money is growing. Many people want to participate in the industry and to lend money, and then pay tax to the Government. However, what is surprising – I was counting the units and, currently, we are charging 450 fee units and according to the Chairperson’s report, the number of fee units will be 33,000 fee units. The percentage is almost 7,000 per cent and this is quite shocking.

 

Madam Speaker, I was hoping that as we try and raise money, there must be a formula. I do not know what formula the Government will use to give incentives to the growth of business. The last seven Bills we have attended to, excluding the Bill for incentives to invest in a Multi Facility Economic Zone (MFEZ), are clearly Bills to increase taxes for our people. I have not seen a report or any item that has given an incentive, as we amend these Bills, because clearly they are coming for amendment. However, as we amend these Bills, I was hoping that the Chairpersons of the Committees would have actually told us the relief that will be provided to our people.

 

Madam Speaker, I have observed that the proposed fee, which is currently about K3,000, will now be about K10,000 roughly and this increment is enormous. It is something that we thought should not have been announced at this very early stage. My submission to the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning – I know the Committee has already done its work but I think that the proposed amendment according to the figure that we have been given is too high. I want to put it on record that I do not agree with the amount that has been proposed. Yes, the figures need to be adjusted, but I think we needed to give our people a breather. If I am a money lender and I want to employ more people and cashers and have more people recover my money, with these increments, I might have to reduce my growth plan and I think the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning is not doing justice to the growth of this industry.

 

Madam Speaker, I personally do not agree that we should have this increment announced by the Government, especially that we want the industry for money lenders to grow. Money lenders are normally individuals who incorporate their companies. They have a bit of capital and they think if they lend out money, they will make a bit of profit. I want to be on record that I do not agree with the proposed increment.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member who has just windup debate. However, in view of the long time that has passed, I think that the adjustment that has been made is within reason, considering the value of money going down with time.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee Stage now.

 

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

 

[THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

 

THE VALUE ADDED TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1, 2, 3 and 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

THE PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

THE INSURANCE PREMIUM LEVY (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

THE ZAMBIA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

THE ROAD TRAFFIC (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Second Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

THE MONEY-LENDERS (Amendment) BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

HOUSE RESUMED

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

The following Bills were reported to the House as having passed through Committee without amendments:

 

The Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Property Transfer Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Insurance Premium Levy (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Zambia Development Agency (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Money-Lenders (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

Third Readings today.

 

THIRD READING

 

The following Bills were read the third time and passed:

 

The Value Added Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Property Transfer Tax (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Insurance Premium Levy (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Zambia Development Agency (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

The Money Lenders (Amendment) Bill, 2021

 

_______

 

HOUSE RESUMED

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Resolution reported.

 

Report adopted

 

Question put and agreed to and Madam Speaker appointed the Minister of Finance and National Planning into a committee of one to bring up the necessary Bill to give effect here to at later date

_______

 

BILL

 

FIRST READING

 

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES NO.1 OF 2021

 

The following Bill was read for the first time

 

The Supplementary Estimates Bill, 2021

 

Second Reading, today.

 

SECOND READING

 

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES NO.1 OF 2021

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

 

Madam Speaker, following the approval of the Supplementary Estimate No.1 of 2021 that will provide additional funds with which to carry out essential services by the Government during the financial year ending on 31^st December 2021, I now have to return to this Chamber with the necessary legislation to give effect to the resolution of the House.

 

Madam, the Bill before the House is intended to legalise the supplementary estimates of monies aggregating K19, 632,862,134.

 

Madam Speaker, the Supplementary Estimates No.1 of 2021 has been thoroughly debated in this House and I do not, therefore, expect it to attract another debate and, accordingly.

 

I beg to move.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Speaker, I thank the House for the unanimous support.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to and the Bill read a second time.

 

Committed to a Committee of the Whole House.

 

Committee Stage, today.

 

_______

 

BILL

 

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

 

[THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

 

THE SUPPLEMENTARY APPROPRIATION BILL, 2021

 

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to sand part of the Bill.

 

First and Schedules ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

_______

 

HOUSE RESUMED

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

The following Bill was reported to the House as having passed through Committee without amendments:

 

The Supplementary Appropriation Bill, 2021

 

Third Reading, today.

 

THIRD READING

 

The following Bill was read the third time and passed:

 

The Supplementary Appropriation Bill, 2021

 

_______

 

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

 

[THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

 

(Consideration resumed)

 

VOTE 99 – (Constitutional and Statutory Expenditure – K86,072,058,759).

 

The Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane): Madam Chairperson, I thank you for the opportunity to present the policy statement on the 2022 Estimates of Expenditure for the Ministry of Finance and National Planning – Vote 99 – Constitutional and Statutory Expenditure.

 

Madam Chairperson, the Ministry of Finance and National Planning is mandated to mobilise resources and then, of course, allocate them for spending. Vote 21, which we already passed, shows the mobilised external resources which are either loans or grants. These external resources and other domestic revenues and loans in form of Government securities are receipted in Vote 99 for onward expenditure under the different categories of the Budget, including Vote 21.

 

Vote 99 is mandated to pay all debt obligations of the Republic. This includes both external and domestic debt. Debt service is a constitutional requirement and Vote 99 holds the required funds for paying off the debts from Government revenues. Further, Vote 99 covers centralised provisions for yet to be allocated expenditure on such items as contingency, recruitments and other payroll considerations.

 

Madam Chairperson, in 2021, K47.7 billion was allocated under Vote 99. Of this amount, K27.7 billion was allocated to external debt obligations broken down as: K16 billion for the payment of principal and interest to multilateral creditors and K11.7 billion for the payment of principal and interest to bilateral and commercial creditors.

 

Madam Chairperson, K18.3 billion was allocated for domestic debt service of which K12.1 billion was for interest payments on Government bonds, K5.7 billion for interest on Treasury Bills and K538 million for payment of debts obligations to Commercial Banks. Currently, interest payments on Government bonds and Treasury Bills have been higher at K16.9 billion and K7 billion respectively accommodated by variation within the Budget. Debt obligations to commercial banks have been paid have been paid in the sum of K538 million.

 

Madam Chairperson, K125 million was set aside for contingency in 2021. To this effect, funds to the Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) to mitigate flood and Coronavirus (COVID-19) emergencies were released. Further, funds were released to the Ministry of Defence for food relief distribution.

 

Madam Chairperson, K1.2 billion was set aside for other payroll considerations while K273 million was set aside for the centralised recruitments across the public sector which saw the recruitment of health personnel, teachers and military personnel and also towards the enhancement of conditions of service the Public Service.

 

Madam Chairperson, in 2022, K86.1 billion has been budgeted for under Vote 99. As usual, the main categories under this Vote are: external debt service, domestic debt service, contingency, centralised recruitment and other payroll considerations. Here are the details: K51.3 billion has been allocated to external debt service, sub-programme towards loan repayments, interest rates and other debt related charges to external creditors.

 

Further, K27.4 billion has been allocated to domestic debt service to cover Treasury Bills, Bonds, Government securities and other domestic commercial loans. The 2022 allocation to domestic debt service has since increased by 50 per cent from 2021 allocation of K18.3 billion due to the additional bonds that were issued to stimulate economic activity arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and those related to fuel arrears payments as well as the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP).

 

Madam Chairperson, the centralised recruitment has been allocated with K3.3 billion to facilitate the net recruitment of at least 34,000 frontline personnel across the Civil Service. Further, a provision of K3.9 billion has been set aside to cover other payroll considerations under the public sector which will be apportioned across ministries, provinces and other Government spending agencies. Lastly, K185 million has been allocated to the contingency Vote.

 

Madam Chairperson, the amount of resources going into Vote 99 has increased more than what is being allocated to any other Vote in the past ten years. In 2012, Vote 99 constituted only 19 per cent of the total Budget. By 2016, the share had risen to 27 per cent. In 2022, the share now constitutes 87 per cent.

 

Hon. UPND Member: PF!

 

Dr Musokotwane: At this level, debt servicing makes up 80 per cent of the total domestic revenue that we collect as a country. In other words, out of every Kwacha that you collect, 80n goes to debt servicing. If debt service payments were to follow the loan agreements as scheduled, the country will run out of foreign exchange causing the foreign exchange rate problems that we have witnessed in the past five years. Debt service has become impossible and, therefore, Zambia is officially categorised as debt distressed. In simple terms, debt distress means that we can only manage to service the debts if we are to severely cartel expenditure for many other critical services such as education and others. If the Kwacha has to start losing value again, this situation will become worse.

 

Madam Chairperson, out of the K27.7 billion that was allocated for external debt service under Vote 99 last year; 2021 or the current year, only K4.7 billion or 17 per cent has been expended for payments of foreign principle and interest to multilateral, bilateral and some commercial creditors. In other words, we have not been paying our debts except to a few. This is so because many creditors permitted Zambia to suspend servicing debt pending agreement with creditors to restructure the debt. Without this arrangement, most of the Budget in 2022 would be spent on debt service and exchange rate of the Kwacha against major currencies would have collapsed very soon.

 

Madam Chairperson, the only route to getting to agree with the creditors is if Zambia obtains an economic programme with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This is so because the creditors must be convinced that the economy is now being managed properly and a competent body, namely the IMF, can certify that this is indeed the case. Following the successful staff level agreement reached between the IMF and Zambia, we are hopeful that the agreement with creditors will be reached sometime mid 2022. In the aftermath of obtaining the staff level agreement, the next key step is to engage creditors. If we manage to secure a good restructuring of the debt, it likely that Vote 99 for 2022 could realise some savings which become available to finance other important needs in our country.

 

Madam Chairperson, with the above, I now recommend that Vote 99 be considered for approval by this House.

 

Madam Chairperson, I thank you.

 

Mr Anakoka (Luena): Madam Chairperson, thank you very much for the opportunity to debate this very important Vote 99, Statutory and Constitutional Expenditure.

 

Madam Chairperson, this is the epitome of what the New Dawn Government has found. It demonstrates how much work this Government –

 

Mr Sampa: On a point of order, Madam Chairperson.

 

Mr Mbangweta: Why?

 

Madam Chairperson: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Sampa: Madam Chairperson, I rise according to Standing Order No. 206; dress code for Members.

 

Madam Chairperson, is the Member for Kasempa, Hon. Tambatamba, the Minister of Labour and Social Security, in order to come to the House dressed in party regalia? I seek your serious ruling Madam.

 

Laughter

 

Madam Chairperson: Hon. Member, I cannot see any party regalia in the House.

 

Mr Katakwe: It is valentines.

 

Madam Chairperson: I can only see the hon. Minster putting on a very nice, is it red or pinkish suit.

 

Mr Mbangweta: There is no symbol

 

Madam Chairperson: So, as long as something does not have words written on it or anything with a party symbol, then, it is not a party regalia. Hon. Member for Luena, you can continue with your debate.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Anakoka: Madam Chairperson, in supporting this Vote, the people of Luena are mindful of where we are coming from. The hon. Minister has indicated that this Vote, for the first in the history of this country, has increased more than any other Vote. That is because we, as the New Dawn Government are trying to occupy a house which was left on fire.

 

Madam Chairperson, we are trying to put off the fire while getting the house ready to be occupied comfortably. The debt trap that the country has found itself in, is the reason we see that some of the proposed amendments that this House has just passed this afternoon are seemingly very steep because the Government has to raise the necessary revenue. It is a necessary surgery that has to be performed on the economy of this country in order to get us out of the debt hole that the previous regime left the nation in.

 

Madam Chairperson, when one carefully looks at how the previous Government went about contracting debt, one is shocked because we even have situations where the Government went to borrow and after borrowing money, as in the example of the Eurobond, then it started wondering what it was going to do with this money it had borrowed? To this day, we have nothing to show for the money that we borrowed. Therefore, this Government now picks up the responsibility and it may even begin to look like it does not care for the people because of some of these increases that have to be put in place this time around all in view of the damage that was done to the economy.

 

Madam Chairperson, this country has literary been broke or insolvent for the past five or so years. Therefore, to get it to work and function, as a normal economy, it is necessary that some of these measures that are being proposed are supported fully by all those who would like to see development in this nation.

 

Madam Chairperson, Vote 99 has a very difficult balancing act to play. On one hand, there is a need to service the debt for the economy which, even in the eyes of the creditors, we had lost credibility. One has not forgotten how when the creditors asked us to make a full disclosure of everything we owed after we borrowed commercial debt, we said no because if we tell you how much we owe, everybody else would want to know, if we pay you, everybody will also come running that we should pay them. This was worse than somebody running his personal house, yet these were national issue being handled in such a careless and laissez-faire manner. Therefore, the people of Luena are in full support of the Estimates for Vote 99 because they recognise that this is the engine that is going to restart the economy of this country. The painful measures that are being implemented now may seem painful but in reality, this is the necessary surgery that is going to lead to permanent healing of this economy so that we can see growth once more.

 

Madam Chairperson, the people of Luena Constituency are yearning for development, but they know that for this development to happen, there are a few sacrifices that have to be made. When one looks at the situation, as shown in Vote 99, if out of every K100 we are realising as a nation, K80 goes to service debt, that cannot be said to be a healthy situation. If our hon. Colleagues had been given an opportunity to continue running the affairs of this nation, God forbid, we were going to be living on everything borrowed. Sooner rather than later, this country was going to be on its knees, and it literally is already. However, we thank God that the New Dawn Government has come with a robust economic policy. Therefore, the estimates in Vote 99 are what will begin to close the gap, so that we can begin to see positive economic growth in the nation.

 

Madam Chairperson, with those few words, I fully support the estimates of Vote 99 and we look forward to this pain so that we can be healed permanently as a people.

 

I thank you, Madam Chairperson.

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Chairperson, thank you so much for allowing me to make a few comments on the Motion moved by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, which is meant to finalise the business we have been on for the past few weeks.

 

Madam Chairperson, Vote 99 is now coming for final approval and at this point, I urge the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning that, indeed, a lot of work was done and this morning, we reflected on what should have happened and what should not have happened. In going forward, however, I would like the hon. Minister to ensure that as we conclude this business, he deals with the matter that we raised in the morning. There is no harm in him using the transition provisions of the National Planning and Budgeting Act of 2020, in terms of which national development plan he is going to operationalise through these budget estimates. There is no harm in going with the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) for now as he finalises the draft we left of the Eighth National Development Plan (ENDP), which he can then use in the future.

 

Madam Chairperson, the reference to the Patriotic Front (PF) Budget has come to an end. As we commence next year, we expect the hon. Minister to help his Government fulfill the promises that were given to the people of Zambia through this Budget we are approving. Most importantly, let it be borne into our minds all of us that there is no finishing line in so far as development is concerned. Our hon. Colleagues have picked up the mantle and it is important to focus because the Republic of Zambia has existed for more than fifty years now. So, they are embarking on the new tour of duty, on which tour of duty they have a responsibility to fulfill the so many promises that were made to the people of Zambia.

 

Madam, the PF did its part, and like I have said, the 2021 Budget comes to end. We have heard several times here, when matters have been brought in terms of development that there was nothing that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning and his Government could do because they were still using the 2021 Budget. We were assured that the first New Dawn Budget, as they would say the first cut is the deepest, was going to be a panacea to the challenges that we have been grappling with. Therefore, we do not expect any excuses.

 

Madam Chairperson, we are a bit sad though, that some of the measures that we have decided to go with in the Budget will have a negative impact on our people. The hon. Minister has just revised upwards the fees to be paid by motorists as we are going into a very difficult year when the pump price of fuel will go up. The hon. Minister should have found a way of cushioning the people of Zambia.

 

Madam, I am also sad for my farmers in Shiwang’andu and other small-scale farmers who laboured so much to grow maize to feed this country. This is December and they have not been paid. However, the hon. Minister has seen it fit to export the same maize they produced without charging any export duty on it. In the meantime, people are wondering when they will be paid. They will have a very miserable festive period for the first time in a long time. These people depend on one activity of farming in a year. It is out of this activity that they send their children to school. Those of us who have benefitted from the efforts of poor farmers know how it feels.

 

Madam Chairperson, we have supported the hon. Minister, but obviously, we will have to answer a lot of questions when we go back to our constituencies, especially those of us who come from rural constituencies. The fuel price increment has affected our poor farmers, especially those who run hammer mills because to run a hammer mill one needs diesel, which has actually gone up by more than 5 per cent. We have supported the hon. Minister, but he should please ensure that he attends to the issues that we have raised. We thank him for making some of the amendments that we had to force our way in order for him to acknowledge and work on. It is our sincere hope that he will realise the promises that his Government made to our people of Zambia without making any excuses.

 

Madam Chairperson, with those few remarks, I beg to support the estimates of Vote 99.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Ms Kasune (Keembe): Madam Chairperson, I will not be long. I just want to say that I support Vote 99 that has been brought on the Floor. In adding on to what my hon. Colleagues have already alluded to and in concluding, I think this is what His Excellency the President, Mr Hakainde Hichilema, meant when he said that in the New Dawn Government, we will see things being done differently.

 

Madam Chairperson, it is in this House – as Hon. Kampyongo has alluded to, we are grateful that the Patriotic Front (PF) budget is now long gone and come January, 2022, it will be a different story. It was in this House that we heard that Standard & Poor’s (S&P), which is actually a global rating company, gave Zambia a ‘D’ grade, and I stand to be corrected. We know very well that once you are being rated with such kind of a rating, it is very difficult, first of all, to borrow money. Then when you borrow, you are going to be given a very high interest rate. So, looking at the trajectory that we have found ourselves on, yes, we have to move forward indeed, as our motto says. However, we have to look backward so that we do not end up in the same situation.

 

Madam Chairperson, it was not long ago in the millennium time when many actors advocated for Zambia and other countries to have the debt cancelled. Zambia’s debt was cancelled. However, because of the lack of good governance and the lack of heeding to the good financial practices, we found ourselves in a situation where Zambia is debt crippled because of what happened in the Patriotic Front (PF) Government. Moving forward, it is indeed our hope that through things such as Constituency Development Fund (CDF), we will no longer see children walk 15/ 20km to go and draw water so that they can go back to school. Those have implications on why we do not see many women in Parliament at the end of the day. The girl child would have dropped off. Why? This is because we failed to bring things like water to the closest place for our children, especially in rural areas like Keembe Constituency.

 

Madam Chairperson, looking at the pie chart on Vote 99, it is very saddening, but I am glad that through the New Dawn Government, there is a new day. This is unacceptable and Zambia should never find itself on this trajectory where 91.4 per cent of its money is going to public debt servicing management. You cannot run even your own house at an individual level, if all you are doing is pay debt. Then what are you living for.

 

Madam Chairperson, the issue of gas, or fuel, as we call it in Zambia, was long overdue because we were putting a bandage on a sore that continued rotting and growing. I saw this behaviour especially in the mine areas in those days where a miner would not have the capacity to run his house, but would go and borrow things. They used to call it Umukwau meaning borrowing. So, you lived a life that you did not afford but the children thought you had the money. That is what we have been doing in this country, where the subsidies which were there, created a facade for us as Zambians, yet at the end of the day we were losing out. So, it is bold decision that was taken by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning. It speaks to the leadership of His Excellency, Mr Hakainde Hichilema that he is not concerned of what happens in 2026, but he is concerned about leaving a legacy that will enable our children and grandchildren find a better Zambia. So, it was inevitable that we come to this situation.

 

Madam Chairperson, we are hopeful that through what has been put in place in particular for the first time – K25.7 million is good money especially if we utilise it well in our constituencies. That is the beginning of decentralising our Government, which has been a problem. Everything has been so centralised, we can now build our own schools and feeder roads and we can no longer have to cast for Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) on everything. We can repair our own roofs.

 

Madam Chairperson, this New Dawn Government means business and it means well to all Zambians regardless of their region. The President promised that as a leader, he will ensure that all resources are distributed in all corners of Zambia and this is the Zambia we want. I submit and I support the Vote.

 

I thank you, Madam Chairperson.

 

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Madam Chairperson, as we debate Vote 99 and come to an end, there are many pending issues, which in the minds of the people of Chilubi have not been resolved. The hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, in his speech, addressed the issues to do with Constituency Development Fund (CDF) and many others that some people have referred to. However, all of us are aware that currently, there is a law that manages the CDF. The moment you refer to the issue of CDF, it means that it has to be within the confines of that law.

 

Madam Chairperson, if I am to bring your attention to pages 156 to 160 of the Budget Speech where the CDF is widely tackled, you will find that the interpretation of some of the Ministers that we are seeing who are playing to the gallery on television, is far away from the CDF Act. The interpretation of some of the members of the public and the students board Zambia National Student Union (ZANASU) is also far away from the expectations of this Act, yet it is so linked to the 2022 budget. Even the interpretation of our President when he was addressing the Council Chairpersons and Mayors when they met in Lusaka, is far away from the Act I am referring to. This makes us reach a cross road.

Madam Chairperson, I think we are creating a problem in the nation especially that this Budget will be approved without proper clarification of the guidelines for the CDF. The guidelines cannot supersede an Act of Parliament as it maybe. Even when the guidelines come through the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development today, I do not expect that without an amendment of that Act, then what is being said becomes law. That is the worry the people of Chilubi have.

 

Madam Chairperson, I also want to bring to your attention the issue raised on finance and planning. When we go to planning and finance, we find that there are sections 53, 23 and 17 that have not been properly attended to by this Parliament. When we look at this, it shows that we still have a lacuna. We heard the hon. Minister refer to a national plan, meanwhile this plan has been bought into it and all of us are clapping and we should go with it yet it has not been clarified. When I was not successful – I heard the hon. Minister explain that we get some things from the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP) and the draft the Patriotic Front (PF) Government left.

 

Madam Chairperson, the issues I am raising are directly linked to the budgeting process. How they are linked is that, for all of us to buy in, all of us will have to agree on the Appropriation Bill. For us to agree, we need to address the grey areas that have surfaced and people have explained on the issues that pertains one. I heard one hon. Member talk about what PF left as it has been the language. In English they say “if the only tool you have in your hand is a hummer, everything looks like a nail”. That is limited in terms of manoeuvring in terms of skills where you just start saying PF did this and that. That is all you can do –

 

Madam Chairperson: Hon. Member, you are now moving away from the topic at hand.

 

Mr Fube: Madam Speaker, it is just figurative language that I have used.

 

The Chairperson: Can you focus on the Budget.

 

Mr Fube: Madam Chairperson, I am still talking about the Budget; I was just trying to address what the hon. Member said.

 

Madam Chairperson, for instance, in the Budget Speech which the hon. Minister presented – this Government found the export cover at 5.4 monthly, but it proposes to reduce that to three months cover, which entails that it will reduce the export cover. The hon. Minister can guide if I am wrong. However, they say the devil is in the details, and if you look at Vote 99 that we are debating now, the Government intends to recruit 44,000 personnel, and the hon. Minister stated that in his Budget Speech, and it is getting money from the special drawing rights. In this case, this has been provided through the window of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which is US$1.33 billion. Now, the question of sustenance comes in. How does our Government intend to sustain that introduction of the above 340 personnel who are already on payroll? We are talking about 53 per cent of our budget already going to personal emoluments.

 

Madam Speaker, that been the case, the people of Chilubi have problems understanding the issues surrounding this 2022 Budget, especially as we conclude Vote 99. All the grey areas have been left hanging including their views and the Act that talks about the budget process has been ignored, then, we should go forward as business as usual. Then they want to talk about PF this and that. They should take the mantle, pull up their socks and govern. That is what they were elected for.

 

I thank you, Madam Chairperson.

 

The Minister of Housing, Infrastructure and Urban Development (Eng. Milupi): Madam Chairperson, thank you for the opportunity to say just a few words on Vote 99.

 

Hon. PF Members: Time up.

 

Eng. Milupi: Madam Chairperson, as the House, we need to be honest with ourselves when dealing with national issues. Unfortunately for us, this Vote gives us an opportunity to focus on the real issues affecting this country.

 

Madam Chairperson, the real issue here is the economy of this country. This Vote demonstrates –

 

The Chairperson: Order, hon. Minister!

 

I apologise because I thought there was no tea break and that we will just continue and finish. However, I am reminded that we have to break for tea.

 

Business was suspended 1642 hours until 1700 hours.

 

[THE CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

 

Eng. Milupi: Madam Chairperson, before business was suspended, I was saying that this Vote provides us not only as a House, but as a country an opportunity to focus on what the real issues affecting this country are. As I said, it is the economy and our economy was headed in the wrong direction. I think when anything happens to the economy and affects the citizens, they normally make up their minds. It is on that basis that on 12^th August, 2021, they made a decision to change Government. It is on that basis that the New Dawn Administration came into power.

 

Madam Chairperson, the figures that the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning has clearly stated in this House in terms of what is within Vote 99 really makes sad reading for this country. For a start, he talked about debt service and let us look at the history of debt service, especially if we compare it to locally generated revenues.

 

Madam Chairperson, ten years ago, debt service made up 10 per cent of the locally generated revenues. This year, debt service makes up 70 per cent of the locally generated revenues. That shows the magnitude of the distraction of this economy. When we look at the figures that the hon. Minister has given, the combination of foreign debt and local debt amounts to about K78 billion.

 

Madam Chairperson, the locally generated revenue, if we look at our Yellow Book, is slightly under K100 billion. It shows that almost 80 per cent of our locally generated revenue accounts for almost 80 per cent of our locally generated revenues. Time after time, the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning has made it very clear that if we get two line items, debt service and emoluments for our public workers, the amount exceeds our locally generated revenue. Therefore, in order to put this country right, it is necessary to focus on the economy and this is what this New Dawn Administration is doing, but let us understand. When we have figures such as those that have been clearly explained by the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning to put this economy right, we cannot therefore, avoid the national debt. We have heard on the Floor of this House that the debt in this country, foreign as well as local debt, amounts to just under US$27 billion.

 

Madam Chairperson, to begin to address this, that is why it has been necessary to engage with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Without addressing it, the amount of revenues that are required to service this debt, just under US$1 billion per annum, is what is causing deterioration in the value of the Kwacha and that deterioration in the value of the Kwacha is what is causing prices to go up and livelihoods to be much more difficult.

 

Madam Chairperson, in addressing in this, this New Dawn Administration has engaged with the IMF and already, there is on the table, US$1.4 billion over a three year period but more than that, it opens a window for this administration to begin the process to address that key component which is addressed in the debt of this country. In the first quarter of next year, this New Dawn Administration will begin that process. When that is complete, it will therefore, be possible to reduce the amount of money we pay for debt service. That is why I get surprised – we have to make hard decisions such as increasing fuel which is painful but necessary in order for us to get on this. If we do this properly as the hon. Minister is doing, and the President is doing, it will allow us create headroom and fiscal space to address the many key issues that we required to address. Already, many things have been done. We are employing nurses, teachers, paying retirees and so many other things. We have also increased the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) but we need to do more things.

 

Madam Chairperson, the Budget for the Ministry of Infrastructure, Housing and Urban Development has gone down. Last year, it was K10.5 billion and this year, 2021, it is K6.5 billion. In 2022, it has gone down to K4.9 billion. This is painful because each and every hon. Member of Parliament in this House will be required to do certain infrastructural work in their constituencies and these are necessary. The Lundazi Bridge and the Kashikishi Road need to be worked on and so many other things need to be done. The Great North Road and the Copperbelt Road also need to be worked on. There are certain roads on which we shall focus on the Public Private Partnership (PPP) basis but even with that, there will be a lot that will require our own revenues. This is where these revenues will come from to address the infrastructure throughout our country.

 

Madam Chairperson, therefore, it surprises me to hear some people question even the necessary decisions to restructure our economy by removing the subsidies on fuel. It is painful I know but it is necessary. With those few words, I support this Vote.

 

I thank you, Madam Chairperson.

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Chairperson, I thank the hon. Members who have debated. I just want to emphasise the points that my colleagues have raised.

 

Madam Chairperson, at the beginning of the last seven years, we kept on telling our hon. colleagues across there to slow down on borrowing. Each time, they would say, “No, we are okay and that borrowing is okay” until we reached a stage where we are now, whereby, the foreign exchange rate which they found at less than K5 to a Dollar at one time even reached K22 to the Dollar. What caused that? It is the excessive borrowing that they did. Paying debt and paying salaries of civil servants swallow up the entire revenue that we collect and we have to borrow some more.

 

Madam Chairperson, today, we cannot fix the roads and so many other things because of excessive borrowing. Today, those who caused this problem want to pretend that they feel for the people of Zambia, forgetting that excessive borrowing is what led to the price of mealie meal rising from K38 where they found it to where it is today, and the exchange rate to move from less than K5 to a dollar to where it is now. Everything has become expensive in Zambia because of excessive borrowing, but the ones who did that want to pretend that they feel for the Zambians when they inflicted this pain.

 

Ms Kasune: Shame!

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Chairperson, the same people are in the forefront asking why we have increased the price of fuel. The price of fuel has gone up because they pretended to be paying for it but they were not. They left a bill of almost US$500 million. They collected fuel from various suppliers, but they were not paying for it. Today, they want to pretend that they feel for the people of Zambia, when in actual fact they are the ones who have inflicted the pain that the people of Zambia are feeling.

 

Madam Chairperson, the question is: With all this pain that was inflicted, what measure did they take to correct the situation? The answer is they did absolutely nothing; the thing was just drifting. So, I am afraid, we have had to take measures to stop this trainage, and at the core of that, is get into an agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). If we adhere to what we agreed and restructure what we owe, in agreement with the IMF and the creditors, by next year, money will be unlocked and this huge bill, which makes us unable to fix the roads and other things will be cleared. This is the solution. The solution is not to stay put for ten years and do nothing and then pretend that you care for the people of Zambia; you do not.

 

Madam Chairperson, I thank you for this opportunity to wind up debate, and I thank all the hon. Members who have supported this Vote.

 

I thank you, Madam Chairperson.

 

VOTE 99 – (Constitutional and Statutory Expenditure – Ministry of Finance and National Planning – K86,072,058,759)

 

Dr Musokotwane: Madam Chairperson, I bet to move the following amendments:on page 949, under Table 5: Programme Budget Allocation by Subprogramme, Paragraph 1, by the deletion of the word “loan” immediately before the word “repayments” and the substitution therefor of the word “interest”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Vote amended accordingly.

 

VOTE 99, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

 

The Chairperson: Order!

 

_______

 

HOUSE RESUMED

 

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

The Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure (Including Capital and Constitutional and Statutory Expenditure) for the year 1^st January, 2022 to 31^st December, 2022 were reported to the House as having passed through the Committee with amendments.

 

Report Stage on Thursday, 23^rd December, 2022.

_______

 

MOTION

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

The Deputy Chief Whip and Acting Leader of Government Business in the House (Ms Kasune): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

_______

 

The House adjourned at 1720 hours until 0900 hours on Thursday, 23^rdDecember, 2021.