DAILY PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES FOR THE FIRST SESSION OF THE ELEVENTH ASSEMBLY

Wednesday, 21st February, 2012

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

REHABILITATION WORKS AT STATE HOUSE

The Vice-President (Dr Scott): Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement on the recent, post-election procured rehabilitation works at State House, in response to no fewer than four comments or questions from Hon. Members. However, there was no point of order, except the one raised last week and yesterday.

Mr Speaker, on Friday, 25th November, 2011, during His Honour the Vice-President’s Question Time, the hon. Member for Chitambo, Mr M. Malama, wanted to know when His Honour the Vice-President would tell the House which company was contracted to refurbish State House and Nkwazi House, if proper tender procedures were followed and at what cost.

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

There shall be order in the House. His Honour the Vice-President is on the Floor. Therefore, let us consult quietly.

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, in my response, I was of the view that, since the Patriotic Front (PF) Government had only been in Government for sixty-two days, I wondered if there had been any contracting of individuals or companies done and that, if so, I was not aware of it. 

Mr Speaker, on 13th March, 2012, Hon. Mwiimbu raised a point of order in which he said:

“Mr Speaker, you may be aware that the Government has been making assurances that it will come back to this House and inform the House on a number of issues arising from points of order. One of the points of order, which I would like to specifically refer to, was on the rehabilitation of State House and Government House after last year’s General Elections.”

Sir, in this point of order, it is now State House and Government House as opposed to State House and Nkwazi House. 

“Questions were also asked on this matter and an assurance was made by His Honour the Vice-President to return to the House with the response that is correct. To date, the Government has decided to remain mute on this issue. Are they in order to ignore the rulings and issues that have been raised on the Floor of this House with impunity?”

  Mr Speaker, in your ruling, you said:

“The point of order raised by the hon. Member of Parliament for Monze Central is both pertinent and valid. I would, therefore, urge His Honour the Vice-President to come back, during the course of this meeting, with a response to the specific issue that the hon. Member for Monze Central has made reference to. However, I would also like to assure the House that the Secretariat does, very frequently, follow up on a number of these issues as the course of business this week will reveal”

Mr Speaker, I wish to make a statement in response to the issue that was raised as best I as can manage, given the various ambiguities in the issues. 

Sir, there are ten …

Interruptions

The Vice-President: … buildings in the State House grounds. Do you have questions on all of them, Mr Mazabuka?

Laughter

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, I am trying my best to give the information that hon. Members on that side of the House required. 

Mr Speaker, a number of companies were awarded contracts to undertake the rehabilitation works at State House and associated structures as follows:

(i)    Apollo Enterprises Limited─ Rehabilitation of the Nkwazi Presidential House;

(ii)    Afe Limited─ Improvement of Water Supply to Nkwazi House;

(iii)    Rico Enterprises─ Servicing of air conditioners at Nkwazi House and the Administration Building which is the main State House and replacement of  two 48,000 BTU air conditioners in the dining room at Nkwazi House;

(iv)    Morthy Electricals─ Rehabilitation of the swimming pool at the Administration Building; and

(v)    Omali─ Swimming pool at Nkwazi House.

Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the right tender procedures were followed for the rehabilitation works as follows:

(i)    Rehabilitation of Nkwazi Presidential Residence─ Direct bidding in compliance with the Zambia Public Procurement Authority (ZPPA) Act No. 12 of 2008, Part IV, Section 32; and

(ii)    for the improvement of water supply, servicing and replacement of air conditioners and rehabilitation of swimming pools, limited bidding in compliance with the Zambia Public Procurement Authority Act No. 12 of 2008, Part IV, Section 30.

Mr Speaker, the House might wish to know that the total cost of the rehabilitation works done were as follows:

(i)    the rehabilitation of Nkwazi Presidential House by Apollo Enterprises was K642,379,812;

(ii)    improvement of water supply at Nkwazi House by Afe Limited was K56,427,689.44;

(iii)    servicing of air conditioners at Nkwazi House and Administration Building by REACO Enterprises was K127,172,000;

(iv)    replacement of two No. 48000 BTU air conditioners in the Dining Room at Nkwazi House by Morthy Electricals was K70,500,000; and

(v)    rehabilitation to the swimming pool at the Administration Building at Nkwazi House by Omali Swimming Pools was K126,231,200.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members are now free to ask questions on points of clarification.

Dr Chituwo (Mumbwa): Mr Speaker, I thank His Honour the Vice-President …

Mr Mwiimbu: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr Deputy Speaker:  A point of order is raised.

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, I rise on a friendly point of order pertaining to Article 44 (2)(e), ...

Hon. Government Members: Of what?

Mr Mwiimbu:  … of the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia states that:

“the President shall have power to establish and dissolve Government ministries and departments subject to the approval of the National Assembly.”

Mr Speaker, is the Government in order to remain quiet and not submit for approval, to this House, the creation of the Ministry of Gender and Child Affairs, as per the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia? We are also aware that the hon. Minister is, actually, in office performing her functions as Minister and superintending over this particular ministry that has not been approved by this august House. Is it in order? 

Laughter 

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

The question has been asked and a point of order raised. First and foremost, I just want us to get used to saying the right thing. When we are in the Chair, we want to ensure that we abide by our own rules. The hon. Member raising the point of order said, “Mr Speaker, Sir”. I want to emphasise that we have to learn to live by our rules. It is supposed to be “Mr Speaker” or “Sir”. As regards the point of order, I wish to inform the House that a Motion addressing that matter is being circulated this afternoon for debate tomorrow. Therefore, this point of order has come at a pertinent time. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

The hon. Member for Mumbwa may continue. 

Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank His Honour the Vice-President, through you, for the very straightforward statement he has made. However, why did it take him so long to present it to the House?

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, there have been staff changes and other things going on in the ministry concerned. There has also been actual paperwork following up the work with some of these contracts. We do not work with a Civil Service full of super men. In fact, I have already discarded two statements on the grounds that they were incomplete. Now, I have a statement I am prepared to stand by and I have given it. You should thank me, instead of complaining. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Laughter
    
Mr Mooya (Moomba): Mr Speaker, I would like to know how many companies or contractors participated in the bidding in each category of work and how much the highest and lowest bids were.

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, I do not have this data at hand. Apollo Enterprises was a direct bid against an estimate made by the ministry. In fact, it came in under the estimate because it has experience in working at State House. We had to occupy State House in order for the President to be able to work. We, therefore, did it by the most transparent and direct means possible. We would still be tendering it now if we had gone for the whole dog and pony show of open tender. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Mr Namulambe (Mpongwe): Mr Speaker, it is common knowledge that Apollo Enterprises belongs to one of the hon. Members of the Cabinet. Was there a declaration of interest before the bid was submitted? 

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, the same company was, for instance, employed in 2009 to do works at Nkwazi House. I wonder whether there was a deceleration of anti-interest or contrary interest made then. I am not aware, but I am sure that the people at the Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication know perfectly well who the shareholders are in all these companies. You can rest assured that there was no direct involvement. By Apollo’s standards, this is peanuts. In fact, it is a nuisance for it to have to carry out these works. It is the biggest contracting company in Zambia. I, therefore, do not think that even a very paranoid person would be suspicious here. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Mr Muteteka (Chisamba): Mr Speaker, may I learn from His Honour the Vice-President what prompted the renovations, considering that we had a President living in the Nkwazi House. 

Interruptions

Mr Muteteka: Further, this Government is known to be serious on cost-saving. Is that in tandem with what they embarked on? 

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, I did not …

Interruptions 

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

There shall be order. We are beginning to get out of what we are supposed to be. Let us give a chance to His Honour the Vice-President to be heard. 

His Honour, the Vice-President may proceed. 

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, most of the work done at Nkwazi House was routine maintenance. There were also kitchen units that were dilapidated and needed repairs. The original company that did those units was Apollo. So, it had the spare parts and facilities. There was a change of occupancy of the house, which may have surprised you, but did not surprise us. 

Laughter     

The Vice-President: It was easy to do the maintenance that was necessary during this change. It is common sense to do rehabilitation when one buys a new house so that he or she does not quit later in order to provide for rehabilitation. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Siliya (Petauke): Mr Speaker, in his statement, His Honour the Vice-President talked about following the right procurement procedures. In this case, I wish His Honour the Vice-President to confirm that, indeed, because they had no time, they used those procurement procedures, including selective tender and single sourcing. 

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, we were not using the Cayman Islands system to …

Laughter 

The Vice-President: … award this contract or finance it. Basically, it was done by accelerated procurement procedures …

Laughter 

The Vice-President: … in line with the Act as specified in my statement. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Dr Kazonga (Vubwi): Mr Speaker, may I know from His Honour the Vice-President the status of all the works that the five companies were awarded. Have they been completed? 

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, the rehabilitation part of it is still on-going. I think that they are waiting for parts. Afe Limited, Reaco Enterprises and Morthy Electricals have completed their works, and the Omali works are on-going. Several other contracts are at pre-contract stage. There is also a contract from 2009 on Government House, which is not yet completed. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Ms Lubezhi (Namwala): Mr Speaker, going by His Honour the Vice-President’s answer to the follow-up question by the hon. Member of Parliament for Mpongwe, he said that Apollo was used in 2009. It is common knowledge that, in 2009, this Cabinet was not in office. So, we want to find out if the hon. Cabinet Minister declared interest.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, I am not sure of the precise timing. First of all, I even suspect that the Cabinet was not in place at the time the decision was made to do this accelerated work. Secondly, I am absolutely certain that the hon. Minister would not personally have been involved in such procurement.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mbewe (Chadiza): Mr Speaker, could His Honour the Vice-President explicitly confirm that Apollo is one of those companies that were single sourced.

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, luckily, I have a spare copy of my statement and I will avail it to the hon. Member …

Laughter

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: … at the end of proceedings.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Mr Speaker, actually, some of us who know what happens in construction are aware that there is no such thing as ‘single sourcing’.

Hon. Opposition Members: No!

Interruptions

Mr Kampyongo: Sir, you may wish to know that this …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

Interruptions

Mr Kampyongo: Can you be quiet?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

Can you ask your question.

Hon. Opposition Members: Yes!

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, my question is: What is so peculiar with picking Apollo because, from what I know, the company has been working on State House …

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

You are not in the Chair, I am.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: So, please, let me guide the proceedings of the House.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Can you continue.

Mr Kampyongo: I do not know why hecklers are …

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Please, ask your question.

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, my question is: What is so peculiar about this Apollo Company, which I know has been working on State House, not only in 2009, but for so many years, and it has been cleared by the State security agencies for a long time? What is so peculiar this time around?

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

Are you asking His Honour the Vice-President to answer that question?

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, through you, may I find out from His Honour the Vice-President what is peculiar about Apollo, which I know, and Hon. Mooya will agree with me that it has been working in State House for a long time because he has worked for Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communications for a long time. May I know what is so peculiar this time around.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, what is peculiar is that our friends across, on your left are attempting to make a mountain out of a very small kama molehill.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwanza (Solwezi Central): Mr Speaker, I would like to hear His Honour the Vice-President come out with a straight ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer. Did the subject hon. Cabinet Minister, who also owns Apollo, declare interest or not? 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

I think that we will be quizzing His Honour the Vice-President to an extent that he will continue giving us the same answers.

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: All the same, I call upon His Honour the Vice-President.

Interruptions

The Vice-President: Sir, if he was aware that the contract was in the process of being granted, before he was made the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, then he would have declared interest, perhaps. However, it is a very small transaction for a company with a turnover in excess of K20 billion a year and assets in excess of K30 billion, to do a K500 million job, the price of one decent vehicle.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kunda SC., (Muchinga): Mr Speaker, let us not trivialise very serious issues.

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Interruptions

Mr Kunda SC.: The sum of K600 million is a lot of money because this Government …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

Mr Kunda SC.: This Government …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Hon. Government Members: Sit down!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member of Parliament for Muchinga, can you, please, ask your question?

Mr Kunda SC.: You are taking people to court over bicycles. Now, which one of these …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Interruptions 

Laughter

Mr Kunda SC.: … is more trivial? Is it K600 million or six bicycles?

Laughter

Ms Siliya: Hear, hear!

Mr Kunda SC.: How are you fighting corruption?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: I can see the interest the question is generating, but the rules in this House are that, when the Chair is upstanding, you should stop talking immediately. Having said so, can the hon. Member of Parliament for Muchinga ask his question?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Mr Kunda SC.: Mr Speaker, single sourcing is a very serious offence and you are taking some of …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order, order!

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member of Parliament for Muchinga, unfortunately, the presiding officer has the advantage of having been a teacher at one time. So, when you are requested to ask a question, there are many ways of doing so. If you want to bring in what you are starting with then, please, start with a question. I am now trying to guide you. Can you ask your question?

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kunda SC.: Which of these is trivial, taking six bicycles to court or K600 million through single sourcing, which is corruption and contrary to the Public Procurement Act?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: At least that was in the form of a question!

Laughter

The Vice-President: I suppose it depends, Mr Speaker, on whether the six bicycles were the tip of the bicycle iceberg under which many more may have been …

Hon. Opposition Members interjected.

The Vice-President: … or whether they were stand-alone six bicycles, in which case it would depend on whom they were procured from. If they were stolen from people who had left them outside while drinking in a pub, then, it would be a serious offence.

Laughter

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Single sourcing, Mr Speaker, is not an offence. There are circumstances under which …

Ms Siliya: Tell us, now that you know.

The Vice-President: There are circumstances under which …

Ms Siliya: Tell us!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Hon. Member of Parliament for Petauke, can you, please, keep order.

Laughter

The Vice-President: There are circumstances under which it is permitted, such as when urgent works need to be done. For example, the privatisation of Zambia Telecommunication (ZAMTEL) Company Limited was not an urgent requirement.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Yes. By way of interest, Mr Speaker, there are several other maintenance projects that need to be done at State House. For example, the water proofing of the main building, the old governor’s residence, is urgent. It leaks inside that building when it rains. It leaks inside the Head of Government, the seat of Government of the Republic, but we have not done it because the sum is one and half billion, and we want to do it properly, not with open tender or single sourcing, but with limited tender. So, it has not yet been done. Whatever they were doing were things that were needed urgently and they were done.

Mr Mukanga: Yes!

The Vice-President: So, it is common sense, I would claim, backed by the Zambia Privatisation Agency (ZPA) law that we followed. That is as simple as that, Mr Speaker.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

NEWS FROM PARLIAMENT MONTAGE

The Minister of Information, Broadcasting and Labour (Mr Shamenda): Mr Speaker, a point of order was raised by Hon. Victoria Kalima who, unfortunately, is not in the House as usual.

Laughter

Mr Shamenda: In her point of order, Hon. Kalima wondered whether the Government was in order to continue to show pictures …

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Let the hon. Minister be heard.

You may continue.

Mr Shamenda: Sir, the hon. Member of Parliament for Kasenengwa asked whether the Government was in order to continue to show pictures of the old Parliament under the programme Inside Parliament as though this new Parliament does not exist.

Sir, I wish to inform the House that it is usually the practice that, whenever there is a change of Parliament, or some substantive changes have taken place in the House, we change the montage for Inside Parliament. Following the change in the composition of the National Assembly in September, 2011, the montage for news in Parliament was at the beginning of the Sitting for the First Session of the programme, in 2012, changed to reflect the current composition of the National Assembly. The one currently in use shows images of the current hon. Members of the National Assembly, including Mr Speaker, Dr Patrick Matibini, SC. If Dr Matibini, SC., was a former Speaker of this august House, then, I would say that it was an old montage being used. I would also wish to confirm to this House that this is the montage currently in use (held up a Digital Versatile Disc (DVD)) and I lay it on the Table.

Mr Shamenda laid the DVD on Table.

Mr Shamenda: Mr Speaker, I would also like to take advantage of this opportunity to inform this House that the Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC), in conjunction with the Press Office at State House, is making arrangements to record new video footage for the National Anthem as the one in use does not reflect the appearance of the current Zambia Army Brass Band. The footage in use contains images of members of the band some of whom may have passed on or retired. 

Sir, I would like to appeal to this august House that, when raising points of order or seeking clarification, it is important for hon. Members to check the facts before we do so, rather than looking for mistakes even where there are none.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members are now free to ask questions on points of clarification on the ministerial statement given by the hon. Minister of Information, Broadcasting and Labour but I see no one standing to do so.

_______________ {mospagebreak}

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

TRANSFORMATION OF NKRUMAH TEACHERS’ TRAINING COLLEGE

238. Mr Kapyanga (Kabwe Central) asked the Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education:

(a)    what progress had been made on the process of transforming the Nkrumah Teachers’ Training College into a university;

(b)    in what ways the current academic staff would be affected by the transformation of the college into a university; and

(c)    whether gratuity would be paid to the lecturers who had so far been handling the degree programmes.

The Deputy Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education (Mr Mabumba): Mr Speaker, the ministry has produced a road map of transforming Nkrumah Teachers’ Training College into a university and the construction of its library, lecture rooms and students’ hostels has reached an advanced stage. The staff will be affected as follows:

(i)    eligible employees will be re-engaged by the new university;

(ii)    those who will not be eligible will be redeployed in the main stream of the ministry; and

(iii)    those due for retirement will be retired in accordance with their terms and conditions of service as well as the existing labour laws.

Sir, no gratuity will be paid to the lecturers who have so far been handling degree programmes as they are on permanent and pensionable establishment, not on contract.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Dr Kazonga (Vubwi): Mr Speaker, in the answer from the hon. Deputy Minister to part (a) of the question, he referred to a road map. When, exactly, are we going to have progress made in terms of that road map?

The Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education (Dr Phiri): Mr Speaker, the road map is very clear. We are looking at September, 2012 for the official establishment of Nkrumah University of Education and indications are that we are on course.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chisala (Chilubi): Sir, two years ago, a number of lecturers from Nkrumah University College were transferred to other institutions because they were under-qualified. Now, since the institution is under-staffed, may I learn from the hon. Minister if his office has serious intentions of setting some money aside for staff development.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, I do not know whether to call the plans serious or not, but there are on-going staff development programmes and these will be accelerated. This is not the only institution that we are concerned about. I confirm that the ministry is seriously pursuing the continuous development of staff for this university. When we have a Vice-Chancellor in place, some time this year, these programmes will be even more visible and we will be reporting back to this House.

I thank you,Sir.

Mr Kapyanga: Mr Speaker, may I know from the hon. Minister when the Chinese contractor constructing lecture rooms and hostels will complete the work because the institution will be enrolling about 420 students in September, 2012.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, the correct position is that there is already an intake, which has given the ministry even more impetus to work a little faster. Let me confirm that the Chinese contractors have done a good job. In fact, the buildings are at a very advanced stage and they will meet the September, 2012 deadline. If not, I will be reporting to this House as to the impediments that the ministry will face in this direction.

I thank you, Sir. 

Mr Mushanga (Bwacha): Mr Speaker, most of the Government educational institutions, including our three universities, have had serious accommodation challenges.  May the hon. Minister inform this House and the nation at large what measures have been put in place by our Government to minimise the problems of accommodation once Nkrumah Teachers’ Training College becomes operational as a university.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, again let me say that the Chinese contractors are working around the clock to ensure that they meet the deadlines. One aspect of their construction programme concerns accommodation. I think that we have leant the lesson that we must make hostels part of the plan in the construction works of any college. 

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mbewe (Chadiza): Mr Speaker, may I know from the hon. Minister if there are any other incentives that the Government has put in place to retain and attract the lecturers in our universities.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, I think that the hon. Member is referring to Nkhrumah Teachers’ Training College, which is about to become a university, not universities in general. If that is the case, I can reconfirm that there is a programme in place for the separation and redeployment of the lecturers concerned so that, as much as possible, we minimise the suffering that people go through when faced with such circumstances.

I thank you, Sir.

Professor Lungwangwa (Nalikwanda): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has made reference to the roadmap that will establish a university of education. University curricula are interrelated across different disciplines. What kind of university is this that will specifically be within the domain of one curriculum?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, I doubt that I mentioned that this university will have one curriculum. It will have a wide range of curricula, but all from the field of education. If the hon. Member would like a little more information, I am willing to avail it to him. 

Thank you, Sir.

COMMUNICATION TOWERS IN SIKONGO PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY

239. Mr Ndalamei (Sikongo) asked the Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication when communication towers would be erected at Sikongo, Nyongo and Leuti areas in Sikongo Parliamentary Constituency.

Mr Kazabu:  On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: On whom?

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Can you, please, resume your seat. 

The Deputy Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication (Mr Mwenya): Mr Speaker, the Government is collaborating with mobile phone operators to extend communication services to cover all parts of the country. Sikongo, Nyongo and Lueti in Sikongo Constituency have been listed for the erection of communication towers. However, at the time a team went to the area to survey the sites in order to assess the requirements and plan for the roll out of the towers in 2011, it experienced difficulties accessing the sites as the only possible means was by boat. As a result of the foregoing, the surveys were not carried out. Therefore, the operators could not cost the roll out, hence, they did not include the sites in the financial year ending March, 2012. Therefore, the scheduling of the sites will only be done when the areas are surveyed after access conditions improve.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Ndalamei: Mr Speaker, is the hon. Deputy Minister aware that there was a contractor who was awarded a contract to erect the communication towers in Liuwa Constituency and had started works at Libonda and Sishekano, but later stopped? If he knows, what has happened to the contractor?

Mr Mwenya: Mr Speaker, that is a new question. I had expected that my colleague was going to centre his question on the principal question. If he wants a more informed response to that question, I urge him to put it forward.

Thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe (Mpongwe): Mr Speaker, the hon. Deputy Minister, in his answer, indicated that the communication towers are going to be constructed countrywide. Is there a timeframe within which all the parts of Zambia are expected to be connected because people have got cell phones, but have no access to the network?

Mr Deputy Speaker: This question gives me the opportunity to explain to hon. Members on my right about something that might be of benefit also to hon. Members on my left. This question was very clear. However, in answering it, the hon. Deputy Minister said that the ministry is thinking of covering the whole country. Once this is said, you are opening yourself to further questions outside the main question despite the question having referred to a particular area. So, please, by way of guidance, next time, try to answer the question. Do not open up the discussion to questions outside the principal question because, if you do so, then you leave the Chair with no option other than to allow them also to ask further questions. Having said that, is the hon. Minister able to answer that question?

The Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication (Mr Mukanga): Mr Speaker, yes it is our intention to ensure that everybody in the country has proper communication facilities, but there are constraints. The ministry is doing everything possible to ensure communication towers in Sikongo, Nyongo and Lueti are put up this year.

Thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, since the hon. Minister’s decision is to put up communication towers throughout the country, may I know if Mukwera and the other places in Kalomo ...
 
Mr M. H. Malama: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr M. H. Malama: Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to raise a point or order. I apologise to my brother who is currently on the Floor of the House for disturbing his contribution. 

Sir, I rise on a serious point of order. On Sunday, 18th March, 2012, at about 1915 hours, the former President, Mr Rupiah Banda, appeared on Muvi Television where he stated that he was advised not to use Vernon Mwaanga as a campaign manager because his name was not worth mentioning in public, especially in Zambia. He went on to say that Katele Kalumba must shut up because he pointed fingers at the top MMD leadership as having caused the loss of the MMD in the 2011 General Election. 

Mr Speaker, as if that was not enough, in today’s paper, …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

I will not sustain that point of order for the reason that a point of order must be made along the following lines:

(i)    relevance: The point of order must be relevant to what is under discussion. Now, that point of order has absolutely no relevance to what we are discussing;

(ii)    procedure: That point of order does not hinge on procedural issues;

(iii)    decorum: The point of order has no issues regarding decorum; and

(iv)    urgency:  A point of order must be raised on an issue of an urgent nature. I do not see any urgency in that question.

Laughter

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Seriously speaking, the hon. Mr Speaker has guided on when we should raise these points of order. Let us not make superfluous points of order. Based on the foregoing, that point of order cannot be sustained.

The hon. Member on the Floor may continue.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, since the hon. Minister is aware of the stations that may be given these communication masts, I would like to know whether Dimbwe, Neganega and Chifusa are on that list because we really need these communication facilities.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I do not have the list with me right now, but will make it available to the hon. Member of Parliament once it is finalised.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutelo (Lukulu West): Mr Speaker, in his answer, the hon. Deputy Minister mentioned that wet places, such as Sikongo, are inaccessible. Does it mean that areas that are prone to floods will not be attended to?

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, that question has already been answered. I said that, for Sikongo, we will try to have it surveyed so that, if possible, the placement of towers can begin this year.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Sing’ombe (Dundumwezi): Mr Speaker, is the hon. Minister aware that Dundumwezi is the only constituency in Southern Province that is not serviced?

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I am aware that Dundumwezi is currently not being serviced. That is why it is one of the constituencies that have been targeted in the exercise that I have been talking about.

 I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chipungu (Rufunsa): Mr Speaker, the people of Sikongo and, indeed, these other areas …

Mr Kazabu: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Kazabu: Mr Speaker, I rise on a serious point of order and need your serious ruling. I have observed with great concern that some hon. Members of this august House are in the habit of asking questions for oral answers, but stay away from the House when their questions are due. Considering that hon. Ministers and their deputies spend a lot of time researching in order to give appropriate answers, are these hon. Members in order to be absent from the House when it is time for their questions to be responded to?

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

That is the type of point of order that I can sustain.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Deputy Speaker: It really does not augur well that you come to ask questions, expect answers and then you do not turn up. That is not a good habit. Although I must also indicate that, even when these questions lapse, they are still reflected in the records of proceedings. However, we should still try, as much as possible, to be around when our questions are due. That was a useful point of order.

The hon. Member on the Floor may continue.

Mr Chipungu: Mr Speaker, I was saying that the people of Sikongo, Lweti and Yongo are, indeed, very anxious to be connected to …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

I think that we are having difficulties asking questions. Even if, sometimes, we allow you to make your preliminary remarks before asking your question, please do not make them long. Can you zero-in on the question. 

Mr Chipungu: Mr Speaker, in his answer, the hon. Minister said that the areas I mentioned would be considered this year. I would like to know which month the works will commence in.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, the target is September this year.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kalaba (Bahati): Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister tell the House and the nation whether the Government has any plans to roll out towers throughout the country and to Bahati Constituency, in particular.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I made it clear that the Government has those plans. Once we finish compiling the actual plan, we will give it to the hon. Members.

I thank you, Sir.

TEVETA CURRICULA

240. Dr Kazonga (Vubwi) asked the Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education:

(a)  how many curricula the Technical Education, Vocational and Entrepreneurship training Authority (TEVETA) developed or reviewed in 2010 and 2011, year by year, at the following levels:

(i)    technologist;

(ii)    technician;

(iii)    craft; and 

(iv)    trade test; and

(b)    what measures the Government had taken to ensure that the TEVETA curricula above met the demands of the labour market.

Professor Willombe: Mr Speaker, in 2010, under the levels of Technologist/Diploma, five curricula were developed in the following diploma courses:

(i)    Building Construction Works, Monitoring and Management;

(ii)    Local Government Administration;

(iii)    Local Government Finance;

(iv)    Community Development Studies; and

(v)    Radiotherapy.

Sir, three curricula were revised in the following diploma courses:
    
(i)    Automotive Technology;

(ii)    Air Traffic Management; and

(iii)    Fire Rescue Services.

Mr Speaker, no curriculum was developed or revised in Technician and Advanced Certificate while in Craft Certificate, one curriculum was developed in Community Development Studies. Further, two curricula were revised in the following craft certificate courses:

(i)    Automotive Mechanics; and 

(ii)    Automotive Electrical.

Sir, two curricula were developed in the following Trade Test Certificate courses:

(i)    Earth Moving Operations; and

(ii)    Level III Knitting.

Mr Speaker, in the following craft certificate courses, two curricula were revised:

(i)    Automotive Mechanics; and

(ii)    Automotive Electrical.

Sir, in 2011, under the Level of Technologists/Diploma, five curricula were developed in the following diploma courses:

(i)    Records Management;

(ii)    Electrical Technology;

(iii)    Biomedical Engineering Technology;

(iv)    Public Service Finance Management; and

(v)    Entrepreneurship.

Mr Speaker, two curricula were revised in the following diploma courses:

(i)    Science Laboratory Technology; and

(ii)    Rural and Urban Management.

Three curricula were developed in the following technician and advanced certificate courses:

(i)    Mining;

(ii)    Entrepreneurship; and

(iii)    Land Surveying.

Mr Speaker, two curricula were revised in the following advanced certificates courses:

(i)    Electrical Engineering; and

(ii)    Science Laboratory Technology.

Sir, five curricula were developed in the following craft certificate courses:

(i)    Mineral Processing Technology;

(ii)    Child Care Development;

(iii)    Entrepreneurship;

(iv)    Transport Management; 

(v)    Storekeeping; and

(vi)    Science Laboratory Technology.

Sir, three curricula were revised in the following craft certificate courses:

(i)    Electrical Engineering;

(ii)    Heavy Equipment Repair; and

(iii)    Livestock Production.

Mr Speaker, six curricula were developed in the following trade test certificate courses:

(i)    Entrepreneurship;

(ii)    level I Drill and Blast Operation;

(iii)    level I Heavy Mobile Equipment Operation;

(iv)    level II Heavy Mobile Equipment Operation;

(v)    level III Dewatering Operation; and

(vi)    level III Cable Handling Works.

Sir, the House should note that there was no curriculum revised for these courses. Further, a number of curricula were developed for skills awards courses that included short courses (skills awards) as follows:

(i)    Road Construction and Maintenance;

(ii)    ICT for Construction Industry – Computer Aided Designs (CAD);

(iii)    Building Works Supervision;

(iv)    Contract Supervision;

(v)    Construction Material Testing;

(vi)    Construction and Land Surveying;

(vii)    Civil Engineering Construction Processes;

(viii)    Trauma Management;

(ix)    Community Based Natural Resources Management; and

(x)    Road Condition Survey.

Mr Speaker, the Government, through TEVETA, ensures that the curricula developed meet the demands of industry through the involvement of all stakeholders during the development process. The relevant industry and professional bodies are involved at all stages of curriculum development. The curriculum development process, itself, is outcome-based and focuses on meeting job and labour market requirements.

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Kazonga: Mr Speaker, may I know why TEVETA has developed as few as two, three and five curricula the whole year. What is it that is limiting the number of curricula to be developed or revised?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, I can see that the hon. Member for Vubwi is trying to notify us that he did very little work in this area …

Laughter

Dr Phiri: … but, on the contrary, he left quite an elaborate team of technocrats under TEVETA.

Sir, there are many factors that limit the development of curricula in this sector, mainly the funding aspect. The number of institutions is also rather limited and efforts will be made to expand them. The lecturing staff is also limited. Therefore, there is a need to expand it as we go on. However, on the whole, we are satisfied that the twenty-nine curricula that have been developed and the seven that have been revised at these levels, which the hon. Deputy Minister mentioned, is a good foundation for us to build on and we will try to do so.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Matafwali (Bangweulu): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out if at all the ministry intends to give incentives to companies that are willing to take on some of the students at the higher institutions of learning and the University of Zambia for internship after they finish their programme, with the hope of being employed.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, although the current situation is not the ideal, all these programmes involve internship, which is one area in which we can further expand as we work closely with industry and potential employers.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, what is the general composition of the teams revising the curricula?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, as the hon. Deputy Minister mentioned, the involvement of all stakeholders during the development process is ensured by TEVETA. The relevant industry and professional bodies are involved at all stages of curriculum development through the use of systematic curriculum and instruction design methodology. The stages followed include job profile development, curriculum chart development, detailed syllabus development, validation, approval and evaluation. We will ensure that the best is done. That should lay to rest any anxiety from the hon. Member. 

I thank you, Sir.{mospagebreak}

NDOLA/KAPIRI MPOSHI ROAD

241. Mr Katambo (Masaiti) asked the Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication when the Government would construct speed humps at the following crossing points on the Ndola/Kapiri Mposhi Road;

(i)    Masangano;

(ii)    Mishikishi; and

(iii)    Nyenyezi.

The Deputy Minister of Transport, Supply and Communication (Dr Mwali): Mr Speaker, the speed humps will be constructed by August, 2012. The need to do this work was brought to the attention of the ministry last year by the Provincial Roads Engineer. 

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister explain to me why the building of the speed humps will be done in August, instead of now.

Dr Mwali: Mr Speaker, the Road Development Agency (RDA) is following its programme of work and those works will be due by August, this year.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, I have noted that, in neighbouring countries, speed humps are not the norm along the major highways. What is obtaining are speed limits. What is the problem in this country for us to be constructing speed humps along the major highways? Is it because the drivers do not respect …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Leave the answer to the hon. Minister. Do not give him the answers.

Laughter

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I really appreciate the hon. Member’s concern because the norm is to have speed limits indicated, which drivers should observe. In this country, drivers do not observe limits and that is why we have taken that direction.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kazabu (Nkana): Mr Speaker, what measures is the ministry taking to ensure that there are signs to indicate that, at a particular point, there is a speed hump? I am saying so because there are no signs at some points.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I appreciate the hon. Member’s concern because, if you go on most of the roads, there are many places where there are supposed to be road signs. We require a lot of money for us to make all these corrections. We are, therefore, going to proceed at this very pace to do what we can.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, we have heard that the speed humps will be ready by August. For easy follow up, is it the regional engineer for Copperbelt Province or the RDA, Lusaka Office, who are going to put them up?

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, it does not matter who does the job. What matters is that it is done under my ministry. If the hon. Member wants to make a follow up, let him do it through my ministry.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Hon. Members, once an answer has been given to the main question, hon. Members who ask questions must indicate quickly. Do not take time. Otherwise, the Chair will move on. 

Mr Katambo: Mr Speaker, why is the hon. Minister not allowing the police officers from the traffic section to mount speed traps during the market days as safety is not a game of chance?

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, we will look into that suggestion and see how workable it can be.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Sing’ombe: Mr Speaker, is there a standard size of speed humps? I am asking this question because some of the humps actually have become death traps for motorists, especially the one at Magoye.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, we are not talking about Magoye. The question is very specific. However, let me say that there is always a standard size for speed humps. Engineering is about working according to standards and specifications.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chipungu (Rufunsa): Mr Speaker, is there any consideration to erect some speed humps in places like my constituency and the Great East Road, which is frequently used even by the Hon. Mr Speaker?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

I want to encourage people to save the hon. Ministers from giving bonus answers. Otherwise, they will make us go in the opposite direction. I will, therefore, save the hon. Minister from answering that question because it is outside the main question.

Mr Chisala: Mr Speaker, may I know when the ministry will construct speed humps at the Chifubu Stream, where we have been losing many lives.

Mr Deputy Speaker: That question is equally unsustained.

Laughter

JAPANESE CAR DEALERS

242. Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu) asked the Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry:

(a)    whether the ministry was aware that many Zambians had been swindled out of their money through dishonest car dealers in Japan using websites that were not genuine; and

(b)    if so, what measures the Government had taken to assist the victims of the fraudulent car dealers.

The Deputy Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry (Mr Mukata): Mr Speaker, the ministry is aware that there are people who have been swindled out of their money and the information regarding such issues is very much in the public domain, especially within the circles of those who deal in second hand cars.

Mr Speaker, it is worth noting that the ministry, through its statutory body, the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), has registered a number of car dealers who deal in a genuine and legally accepted manner with their Japanese counterparts. In this regard, it is the expectation of the ministry that potential buyers should purchase from these legally-established suppliers without having to take the risk of purchasing vehicles through websites whose owners are not known and not registered in Zambia. Furthermore, the Government has continued to sensitise potential buyers on the need to purchase from established suppliers who are duly registered in Zambia and whose physical addresses are known. The Government, however, cannot force potential buyers to buy from these established suppliers, apart from encouraging them to do so. The decision to buy from preferred suppliers lies entirely in the wisdom and freedom of the buyers. The Government has little to do with these personal decisions. The mission in Japan has also been made aware of the problems faced by some local second-hand vehicle buyers, but it should be noted that there is a limit to which the Government can influence individual decisions. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister said that the mission in Japan is aware of this predicament. Most of these complaints have been lodged with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tourism …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Shiwang’andu, what is your question?

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, how are they collaborating with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tourism, and Interpol, knowing that this is more or less a cyber crime? I would like to know what they are doing to sensitise the public in an effort to address it.  
    
Mr Mukata: Mr Speaker, we are aware that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tourism has been inundated by complaints, some of which have been presented to the Ministry of Home Affairs as well. In fact, it is as a result of these representations to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Tourism that our mission in Japan has been advised on this crime. 

Mr Speaker, the Japanese Embassy here has been equally advised and we have been encouraging most of the people who purchase vehicles that, before they procure these vehicles, they should enquire about the identities of these entities through the Japanese Embassy, which may then contact its local authorities to verify the authenticity and identity of the companies, knowing fully well that the crime is perpetrated in a different jurisdiction. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Chishiba (Kamfinsa): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister if our Government will put up deliberate policies and incentives to car dealers like Toyota and Marounochi to assemble vehicles in Zambia to satisfy our local demand and export to the region so that we protect our citizens from these unscrupulous car dealers. 

Mr Mukata: Mr Speaker, obviously, people have resorted to procurement of second-hand cars because of the lower pricing compared with procuring brand new vehicles. However, in terms of policy framework, the Government has the necessary legislative and policy frameworks to attract would-be investors into manufacturing. In fact, the Chinese, through the Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication, and under a company called Great Wall Motors (GWM), have expressed an interest in investing in the manufacturing industry and setting up a plant. In fact, they are already exporting vehicles to Zambia.  

Mr Speaker, I also wish to inform the House and the nation that the Government has facilitated the establishment of a company that is manufacturing heavy-duty motorised equipment for supply to the mines. The company is called Hitachi and is along the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport Road. Regarding the legislative framework, we have the incentives and it is up to the investors to come through. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Chisala: Mr Speaker, it has been discovered that at border posts, we suffer loss by way of paying ‘dimalage’ (demurrage). 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hmmn? What is that?

Mr Chisala: This being the case, is this Government planning to reduce this amount of ‘dimalage’ paid at border posts?

Laughter 

The Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry (Mr Sichinga): Mr Speaker, firstly, and foremost, that is a completely different question. The question that was raised pertained to cyber crime, which we have already responded to. Secondly, this question is not really for the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry. It relates to taxation, which falls under the Ministry of Finance and National Planning. Maybe, the hon. Member of Parliament can raise this question specifically to this ministry. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!
    
Mr Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister, I thank you. I did not want to say anything because the hon. Member for Chilubi would have said that the Chair gagged him. I am glad you have given that answer. 

The hon. Member for Solwezi Central may ask his follow-up question.

Mr Mulusa (Solwezi Central): Mr Speaker, my question has been overtaken by events. 

_____

MOTION

MINERAL ROYALTY TAX SHARING MECHANISM

Mr Mulusa (Solwezi Central): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that, in view of the delayed implementation of Section 136 of the Mines and Minerals Development Act enacted on 1st April, 2008, concerning the sharing of mineral royalty revenue, this House urges the Government to establish a mineral royalty tax sharing mechanism. 

Mr Deputy Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

Mr Mweetwa (Choma Central): Mr Speaker, I beg to second. 

Mr Mulusa: Mr Speaker, I thank you for, yet again, allowing me to make my small contribution to the development of our nation. 

Mr Speaker, I rise, to move a Motion whose theme is “Beneficiation to the local economy, the environment and the inhabitants of those localities where mining is done and, beyond that, eventual beneficiation to all the people in our country.” 

Mr Speaker, I must state from the onset that there are two schools of thought guiding the debate on the management of the income that comes from our natural resources. The first is of the view that a certain portion of the earnings from the mineral wealth must be retained to be spent in the localities where mining take place in order to assist ameliorate the negative impact of mining activities on the local environment and society while the second is of the view that it is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that the entire country shares in the national cake, given the huge disparities between the rural and urban areas. Having noted that this Motion was once moved by Hon. Mwenya Musenge, seconded by Hon. Habeenzu and passionately supported by Hon. Lumba, Hon. Mukanga, Hon. Simuusa and Hon. Kambwili, but militantly opposed by Hon. Dr Machungwa, Hon. Mwaanga, Hon. M. B. Mwale, the then hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals Development, and Hon. Dr Musokotwane, the then hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, I decided not to re-invent the wheel by subjecting this House to a debate for and against the implementation of the sharing mechanism as provided for in the Mines and Minerals Development Act No. 7 of 2008. Instead, I chose to adopt a Discourse Analysis approach as a way of moving the debate up the value chain. Having laid this foundation, I now wish to proceed.

Mr Speaker, both the proponents of the implementation of Section 136 of the Mines and Minerals Development Act No.7 of 2008 and the antagonists have strengths and weaknesses in their positions. 

Mr Speaker, this House collectively supported the Motion to bring the Mines and Minerals Development Act of 2008 into law. Section 136 of the Act required a mandatory establishment of a sharing mechanism for mineral royalty it read as follows:

“The Minister responsible for finance shall, in conjunction with the Minister of Mines and Minerals Development, establish a mineral royalty sharing mechanism for distributing royalty revenues.”

Mr Speaker, proponents of the Act pointed out the use of the word ‘shall’, meaning that it was mandatory to do so. They also bemoaned the fact that no time limit had been included, hence, the Government’s inability to implement the law two years later and, now, four years later, this Motion. 

Mr Speaker, the seriousness with which the then Mwanawasa Administration attached to this law could be seen from the fact that the President went as afar as sending four chiefs from the Copperbelt to Ghana and South Africa to consult on how mineral royalty revenue was administered in those countries to enhance local development. The royal highnesses the late President sent were Chief Nkana, Chief Lumpuma, Chieftainess Malembeka and the late Senior Chief Chiwala. 

Sir, when the Royal Highnesses came back, they made several recommendations to the Government, through Hon. Magande and Hon. Dr Kalombo Mwansa, the then hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals Development. Among the recommendations was the sharing of mineral royalty revenue between the Central Government, local authorities and local mining communities. The sharing ratio recommended was 60 per cent of revenue to go to the Central Government and the remaining 40 per cent to be shared equally between the local authorities and local mining communities. 

Mr Speaker, it was also highlighted during debate that the Committee on Energy, Environment and Tourism, in its report of August 2007, chaired by Hon. Sakwiba Sikota, SC, reported to this House that the laws passed to control pollution and land degradation in the mining sector had not been a deterrent to mining and mineral processing operations countrywide. The Committee noted that communities hosting these operations suffer unthinkable miseries from negative impacts of these operations.

Sir, it was also highlighted that, in addition to the mining-related hazards, service delivery and infrastructure in mining areas are pathetic. In Wusakile and Mindolo, for example, it is shameful and unthinkable that, after forty-seven years of independence, people still use plastic bags and buckets to answer the call of nature, not to mention the pathetic state of road infrastructure in the townships in many constituencies on the Copperbelt.

Mr Speaker, I must mention, here, that, at least, the towns on the Copperbelt have roads that can even be described as pathetic. For us in Solwezi, we do not even have township roads. 

Mr Kaingu: You use buckets!

Laughter

Mr Mulusa: No, we do not use buckets, fortunately.

Sir, proponents of Section 136 of the Act argued that, if the revenue from mineral royalty tax is shared as per requirement of Section 136, the portion that is appropriated to the mining communities will go towards addressing the mining-related social economic issues in mining areas. They also pointed out that, when the Government privatised the mines in 2000, it signed development agreements with investors that imposed limited liability on the part of investors in terms of provision of social services as well as addressing environmental liabilities. As a consequence of that, legally, there is limited contribution of mining companies to the improvement of health, education, sport, road network and other social services in the mining areas. Further, in the event of the environmental and social liabilities, such as cracking of houses, the mining investors are not liable at all. Mention was also made of the fact that all historical liabilities are a responsibility of the Government. It was for this reason that the Government borrowed US$50 million from the World Bank and the Nordic Development Fund to address the the liabilities of the former Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines (ZCCM) mining areas. 

Mr Speaker, further arguments in favour of Section 136 of the Act pointed to the enactment of Zambia Wildlife Act, No. 12 of 1998, in which one of the requirements is the sharing of revenue of wildlife and tourism with communities that host natural resources. In accordance with this Act, seventy-two community resource boards have since been registered under the Zambia Wildlife Act and approximately K5 billion per year was being disbursed to these boards as the 45 per cent of their share of hunting and tourism revenue. The example of the Zambia Wildlife Act was used to demonstrate that the law on sharing of revenue from natural resources was not new to the country, thus, showing that there was nothing sinister about the Motion that was moved by Hon. Mwenya Musenge to urge the Government to implement Section 136 of the Mines and Minerals Act of 2008, which requires that the mineral royalty tax be shared.

Mr Speaker, proponents of the Act further referred to the adopted National Policy on the Environment in 2007 by the Government. One of the guiding principles of this policy is to catalyse the implementation of sustainable environmental, social and economic development tenets, through bringing together, in a holistic strategy, all aspects of preventive, precautionary actions and equitable benefit sharing. The proponents concluded their case by stating that it was very clear that Section 136 conforms to the Government’s policy on benefit sharing in the natural resources sector and, therefore, was supposed to be implemented accordingly. I agree with this position.

Sir, on the other hand, those who opposed the Motion put up arguments that were characterised by semantics and lack of factual evidence. At best, they were political in value. They pointed out that it is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that the entire country shares whatever cake it gets and the reason was that there are huge disparities between the rural and urban areas. They further argued that the Motion was neither well intended nor well thought out, otherwise it would have been discussed with the Government so that the Government could agree on its formulation, which would be more embracing of issues that were contained in the Mines and Minerals (Amendment) Act. Since this was not done, the Government side proceeded to oppose the Motion, unfortunately.

Mr Speaker, the suffering of the people continued and continues to date.

As a way of summarising, Sir, let me now give my own thesis of the discourse analysed above. 

Sir, the discovery of minerals brings with it expectations for jobs, prosperity and opportunities amongst many other benefits. To others, though very few in number, it also brings anxieties about environmental, social and wealth beneficiation concerns.

Mr Speaker, more often than not, environmental and economic impact assessments are undertaken, but do very little to ameliorate the negative impact of mining activities. They are mere exercises of compliance. Some investors do give compensations, but these usually inadequate and one-off, yet the challenges they seek to resolve are permanent and last longer than the mines’ life span. As we debate this Motion, these two positions should be the unifying theme. 

Mr Speaker, while I am of the view that beneficiation should not be used as a basis for selective intervention and larger funds allocation, that is justified where special damages are suffered by the targeted recipient localities, in this case, the mining areas, so that they may be brought to the same level as the other areas that are not subjected to the consequences of the factors that bring about such negative impacts. Therefore, equalisation of the society and the environment with the other areas that may not be suffering the negative impacts becomes the departure point for sharing of benefits from economic activities, such as mining, that carry with them negative consequences for local societies and environments.

This, Mr Speaker, is the gist of my argument. It is adequately and eloquently supported by the proponents of the implementation of Section 136 of the Act and inadequately opposed by the opponents.

Sir, enough prima facie evidence has already been laid by Hon. Mwenya Musenge, Hon. Chishimba Kambwili, Hon. Yamfwa Mukanga and Hon. Simuusa, who are the leading proponents of the implementation of Section 136. It is also adequately demonstrated that either mining areas face low returns or are confronted with challenges that emanate from the consequences of mining activities and that, in the past, interventions have had to be made through external donor funding.

Interruptions

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order! 

We seem to have stopped listening. Can we listen, please.

The hon. Member may continue, please.

Mr Mulusa: Lastly, Mr Speaker, from the foregoing, I, therefore, proceed to request that Section 136 of the Mines and Minerals (Amendment) Act be implemented.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Does the seconder wish to speak now or later?

Mr Mweetwa: Now, Mr Speaker.

Sir, I thank you most sincerely, for giving me this opportunity to second the Motion on the Mineral Royalty Tax Sharing Mechanism.

Mr Speaker, allow me, on the Floor of this House, to say how grateful and thankful I am to the hon. Members of this august House who convened on 17th March, 2012, at the Mulungushi International Conference Centre at the Annual General Meeting of the African Parliamentarians Network Against Corruption (APNAC). At this event, a few of my colleagues and I were fortunate enough to be favoured with the rarest of opportunities to be in the Executive Committee of the organisation. I want to take this opportunity to encourage those who have not yet enlisted for APNAC so to do so that, together, we can stand against corruption and denounce it regardless of who is involved. 

Mr Speaker, allow me to thank the mover, the hon. Member of Parliament for Solwezi Central Constituency, for ably moving this non-controversial Motion, which merely assists this House to urge the Executive to act on what is provided for under the relevant Act, which is the Mines and Minerals Development Act, 2008, enacted on 1st April, 2008. As we all may be aware, and as the mover has already said, Section 136 of the Act empowers the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning, in consultation with the hon. Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development, to establish a mineral royalty tax sharing mechanism for distributing mineral royalty revenues.

Mr Speaker, it should be noted that wealth generated by the mining sector comes at a substantial development cost to the marginalised local people, along with environmental damages and economic exclusion. This has been exhaustively documented in some countries, such as India, where major mining districts are among its poorest and most polluted. Considering the negative externalities of the mining sector, new policies and practices are being explored and implemented across the world to ensure that mineral wealth can be converted into sustainable development benefits for local communities.

Mr Speaker, Zambia should not be an exception to this. We have done well ,as a country, to include provision in our laws for the establishment of a mechanism for sharing mineral royalty tax. This is, however, simply a stepping stone. The Patriotic Front (PF) Government must be made to take us a step further in achieving an all inclusive growth model that will benefit all the citizens of this country.

Mr Speaker, allow me to put today’s debate into the right perspective by reminding the House that, as far back as February, 2010, the Government told the nation, through this House, that it was in the process of coming up with modalities to ensure that the money from mineral royalties benefited the local communities. During a Questions for Oral Answer session, the Government then informed hon. Members of Parliament that there was about K424 billion, which was supposed to be shared with local authorities and communities, especially in mining areas. The Government also told us that the Ministry of Finance and National Planning was in the process of formulating a system to ensure that revenue collected from mineral royalties directly benefited the local communities.

Sir, since that debate in 2010, the Government has not come back to this House to spell out the mechanisms on how royalties would be shared. I think that the nation is interested in knowing clear-cut and transparent mechanisms would be used for local authorities and communities to benefit from the mineral royalties. It is not enough to know the amounts available for sharing. Zambians must, instead, know how the sharing will be done so that the Government is made accountable. 

Mr Speaker, just last year, we heard that there was over K1.3 trillion collected from the mines, but no one has ever told the nation how that money was used or how much went to benefit the local communities. For how long are our people going to be taken for granted over their own wealth? These are straight-forward issues that are supposed to be in the public domain.

Mr Speaker, through this Motion, we are urging the Government to do the right thing by establishing a mineral royalty tax sharing mechanism, which should be published for everyone to know. I wish to remind the Government that many mineral-rich countries have enacted legislation in which provision of benefit-sharing with the local communities is explicitly stipulated. Many of these legislations are built around a comprehensive framework in which compensation, benefit sharing and community development plans are integrated and the roles …

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the Chair]

 Mr Mweetwa: Mr Speaker, before business was suspend, I was just reminding the Government that many mineral rich countries around the world have enacted legislation in which the provision for benefit sharing with the local communities is explicitly stipulated. Many of these legislations are built around a comprehensive framework in which compensation, benefit sharing and community development plans are integrated and the roles of local communities, the government and mining companies are clearly delineated. 

Sir, mineral-rich countries like South Africa, Papua New Guinea, Namibia, Ghana and Peru have all enacted legislation to share profits from mining with the local communities and we need to learn from these countries to ensure that revenues from minerals, which are a wasting asset, are used to develop our local communities for a better tomorrow. Let us avoid a situation in which our future generations will be laughing at us for having failed to properly utilise our God-given natural resources.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, allow me to state that mining companies do not, per se, own the minerals that make them rich. They only own the right to extract them from the ground and sell for the benefit of their shareholders. The profits earned by selling these minerals are so large that they can be shared with the local people so that the local people, on whose endowment these mines thrive, can also benefit from their God-given inheritance.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.{mospagebreak}

Mr Mwiimbu (Monze Central): Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you most sincerely for according me this opportunity to debate the Motion on the Floor of this august House. I rise to support the Motion that has been ably moved by Hon. Mulusa, the hon. Member of Parliament for Solwezi Central, and duly seconded by the hon. Member of Parliament for Choma Central.

Mr Speaker, the Motion is a reminder to this august House that we must respect the laws we pass in this House. This particular provision of the law is part of the laws of the land and needs to be respected. In my debate, I would like to tag on the Motion and the submissions made by the mover, where he indicated to this august House that the sharing of mineral royalties is intended to ameliorate the suffering of the people who have been affected by mining activities. All of us must realise that the mining houses have displaced a number of people in the various localities where they have been operating. I have in mind the Copperbelt and North-Western provinces, where many of our people have been denied their ancestral rights to their land to give way to mining activities. It is, therefore, only proper and prudent that this House provides for the people who have provided for the mining activities to take place.

Sir, as I support this Motion, I want to remind the Government that mining activities in this country cannot take place in isolation from other industrial activities. There are industrial activities that have enabled mines in this country to develop and those activities have led to the displacements and death of a number of our people. 

Mr Speaker, as we debate this Motion, we should not forget the people of Kariba and Siavonga, who gave their lives, who have created the electricity generation capacity that enables the mines in this country to thrive.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, I am aware that my brother, Hon. Simuusa, was very passionate about the issue of mineral royalty sharing when he was in the Opposition and I can see that, even now, he is still very passionate.

Mr Muntanga: Yes.

Mr Mwiimbu: He will ensure that this clause in the law is implemented. However, as he does this, in liaison with the Ministry of Finance and National Planning, he should not forget that those people in the Gwembe Valley, whose graves are in the Kariba Dam, who gave way to the creation of the dam to enable this country have electricity, deserve to have a share of the wealth of this country. The people of Itezhi-tezhi, who were displaced to pave way for the Itezhi-tezhi Dam and create the Itezhi-tezhi Hydro-Electricity Power Station deserve a share of the wealth of this country.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: That is why, Mr Speaker, the people of Itezhi-tezhi have been very emotional about the realignment of the districts. That is why the people of Siavonga have been very emotional on the realignment.

Mr Muntanga: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: By the realignment that is being proposed or made by the Government, you are denying the indigenous people of those areas their inherent rights to benefit from those particular industries. That is why they are being emotional and are resisting.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, we know that this country is in the process of decentralising, including fiscal decentralisation, which entails that the people will determine the development of their areas but, if you take away the goose that lays the golden egg, you are impoverishing the people.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: That is why the people of Siavonga and Itezhi-tezhi are very emotive over this issue just like those whose land has been taken away to pave way for the mines are emotive about this issue. As we debate this issue, the Government must realise that it is not only those who have the mines in their areas who should benefit, but even those who have no mines, such as those in Kasama and Chinsali, have the right to benefit. 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: We must come up with an equitable sharing mechanism that will ensure that those whose land has been taken away benefit, as should those who are providing the necessary primary and secondary sources of energy to drive the mines.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, we have already enacted the law and I do not see why we should belabour this matter. We should merely implement it. If the Government has misgivings about it, the best thing it can do is to come back to this House and repeal it.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: However, as the situation is, currently, they have to implement it. We are lawmakers here and we swore to defend the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia and all the laws that we pass in this House. I am standing here to defend the good law that His Honour the Vice-President passionately defended and supported when this particular clause was being introduced.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Hon. Mukanga was very passionate. Hon. Lubinda, then, spoke not only for the people of Kabwata but, also, for the people of Zambia on this particular issue and I have no doubt that, even today, he will speak so passionately in its favour.

Mr Lubinda: On a point of order, Sir.

The Deputy Chairperson: A point of order is raised.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, is my good friend, Hon. Mwiimbu, in order to drag me in his debate when I am sitting here, quietly, trying to understand what he is saying, which does not seem to make any sense at all?

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Mr Lubinda: On one hand, he is talking about royalties being shared by the people where the mines are, on the other, he is advancing the opposite argument that this money must be shared equitably by everyone; even people from areas that do not have mines. Is he in order, in his mumble jumble debate, to also bring me in when I am struggling to understand what he is saying?

The Deputy Chairperson: The serious ruling of the Chair is that the hon. Member debating invited you into his debate. He was, to that extent, out of order. However, he is at liberty to debate the way he chooses to do.

The hon. Member for Monze Central may continue.

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, as we give what is due to the people who reside in the areas where the mines are, I am reminding the House that the people of Mahopo, Chilenje and Kamwala also need to enjoy the benefits from the mineral royalties.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. Member: Even in Kabulonga.

Mr Mwiimbu: That is the point I was making. Sir, I was saying that currently, there is no mechanism that is in place and the law is demanding that we put up one so that the people of Solwezi and Ndola Rural where the mines are can see the benefits of their suffering as a result of the creation of these mines. That is cardinal. As we discuss these issues, primary consideration must be given to those people who have been displaced. That is the point I have been making which my good friend, whom I will not mention, would have supported and argued as I have if he was on the left side of the House.

Mr Sing’ombe: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, one of the cornerstones of decentralisation which the Government want to implement is the sharing of the proceeds of industrial activities. Those on our side and those who were on our side under the previous regime, whom I can see nodding quietly, will agree with that a proper mineral royalty tax sharing mechanism must be implemented. As we implement it, we should not be seen to be impoverishing some areas and improving the livelihood of other areas to the detriment of the rest of the country. There must be equity in the sharing mechanism. 

Mr Speaker, as I support this Motion, I also wish to urge the hon. Minister responsible for energy to come up with a law that will ensure that the people in Siavonga, Itezhi-tezhi and Livingstone have an equitable share of the proceeds of electricity generation.

Mr Speaker, I know that this country is in the process of going into petroleum exploration and eventually if we discover any oil, into oil production. We should not forget what is obtaining in other countries such as Nigeria where the indigenous people of the areas where economic activities are taking place have not been benefiting from them. If we do not do what we are being asked to do under this law, we will be blamed by future generations if those people in those areas start rising and demanding what is due to them. You have heard the voices of the people of the North-Western Province speaking passionately on the need for them to benefit from the mineral wealth in the North-Western Province. It is a right they are demanding to be given.

Mr Speaker, I support this Motion wholeheartedly with an appeal to the relevant organs of the Government to ensure that even other industries which are in existence should be seen to be sharing the proceeds of their establishments with the local communities.

Mr Speaker, I thank you

Mr Namulambe (Mpongwe): Mr Speaker, may I begin by thanking the mover of the Motion, the hon. Member of Parliament for Solwezi Central and the seconder, my brother from Choma Central and the one who has just debated, my elder brother, the hon. Member of Parliament for Monze Central.

Mr Speaker, if I recall, in August, 2006, the late President, Mr Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, may his soul rest in peace, at a meeting held at Kalumbwa Mission in Lufwanyama District, lamented the poor state of the roads which were leading to the emerald mines when people had gotten rich from minerals in that area. He directed that the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals then, considers giving the local people a share from the mineral royalties. I think it was from that directive that even this law was enacted. Indeed, its implementation has taken time. 

Mr Speaker, when you talk about the Copperbelt Province, currently, there are four constituencies where there are mines …

Hon. Member: Four?

Mr Namulambe: … and may I congratulate my elder brother, the hon. Member of Parliament for Kafulafuta for winning his election petition.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Namulambe: The people in the four constituencies complain. The Copperbelt Province has ten districts and of these, three are rural districts. Mr Speaker, these three rural districts have nothing to write home about. The little that is happening now in the three districts is as a result of our fight.

Mr Speaker, Chief Nkana’s Palace was displaced from the area in Wusakile where you see a hip of slag as you enter Kitwe. Despite the displacement nothing has happened in that area. The current Ndola Golf Club is near where the palace for Senior Chief Mushili was. The palace was destroyed to pave way for a copper refinery. 

Mr Speaker, The Luanshya Copper Mines, then Roan Copper Mines had a problem of flooding. It was believed that there was a supernatural snake which was constantly releasing water and the mines were almost flooding. It took a man in the name of Mr Katanga, now late, to go and do some rituals for the water to stop filling up. There was a promise that the people of that area were going to benefit from the minerals or whatever proceeds of the mines, but soon after that man died and the water stopped flooding, nobody thought about the people of Ndola Rural. 

Whenever the donors come, they talk about the developed provinces. The Copperbelt Province is deemed to be one of the most developed provinces and yet they forget that the people that make the Copperbelt who are its genuine owners are the poorest. We the Lambas are the poorest people.

Hon. Member: You are being tribal!

Mr Namulambe:  We do not complain when there are new provinces being created and yet the wealth to develop them will have to come from our areas while we remain poor.

Hon. Government Member: Question!

Mr Namulambe: New infrastructure will be put in place, but the people in areas where the money is coming from will remain poorer.  This does not only happen here. If you go across the border in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), our brothers in the copper belt of Congo are the poorest. What sin have we committed such that when we are supposed to have a share, we are not considered?

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! Allow the hon. Member who is lamenting about poverty to continue.

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: You may proceed hon. Member.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, in the past, it would have been perhaps understand for the rural areas on the Copperbelt to have been underdeveloped because there was no mechanism which would have supported the sharing of mineral royalty revenue. Even the people that are arguing, who are the hon. Members of Parliament from the Copperbelt should be able to support what I am saying because it is based on facts.

Hon. MMD Members: Hear, hear!

Interruptions

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, most of the hon. Members who come looking for land in our area forget that they will need good roads, schools and hospitals. 

Hon. Government Members: Bicycles!

Mr Namulambe: However, this infrastructure can only come into existence when our communities start getting a fair share from the mineral royalties. It is for this reason that we are calling for this law to be implemented as soon as possible

Sir, during the time of the ZCCM, and I want to be open, our people had few schools in Ndola Rural, hence few people were educated. For that reason, we had few people who spoke on behalf of the people of Ndola Rural. If we had many educated people at that time, we would not have names like Sosala, Supuni and Kabiki.

Hon. Government Member: What about ba Nchinga?

Mr Namulambe: This was because our ancestors or our fathers were not educated enough. They were being employed as houseboys. In order to avoid getting fired for forgetting the name of a fork or spoon, parents used to name their children after the same utensils.

Mr Speaker, the few that were employed managed to educate only a few people. Now that more people are educated and we have sort of ‘woken-up’, we want a fair share of what belongs to us. If anything, we are blessed people because God gave us the minerals which we are supposed to benefit from. 

Sir, this is the more reason the Government came up with this law which we now need to implement. If this law is implemented, I am sure that we will support the Vice-President in the execution of his duties. However, for as long as we do not get a fair share, we will continue being resistant to Government interventions. 

Interruptions

Hon. Government Members: Bicycles!

Mr Namulambe: Yes, I am hearing something, but I am waiting for the resolutions. So, I do not want to talk about it now.

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! May the hon. Member on the Floor, please address the Chair.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, we have been hearing about the people of North-Western Province complaining that they get very minimal benefits from the taxes that are paid by Kansanshi and Lumwana mines. I think their cry is not baseless. They know that they have somewhere to lean on. The only asset that they have is what is being mined. They can only benefit from what is being mined through mineral royalties. They are not asking for too much.

Interruptions

Mr Namulambe: Ichongo!

Laughter 

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

May I, perhaps, issue a timely reminder. These uncalled for running commentaries emanating from my right are not welcome because they are unethical. You keep on talking about bicycles. I do not know which bicycles you are referring to. However, if the bicycles you are referring to have anything to do with cases that are in court, then avoid doing so because as you should already know, that is a no go area. I hope you will take heed of the timely advice.

May the hon. Member continue, please.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, I thank you for your protection. 

Sir, we just want a fair share. We know, for instance, that all the provinces in Zambia today are what they are now because of the revenue from our mines. However, up to now the road leading to Lufwanyama is not tarred. We do not know what is causing the delays. We do not know what is happening. The roads going to Kagem Mine, Grizzly Mine, and Pilala Mine are also in a deplorable condition with potholes full of water … 

Interruptions 

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! Do not tempt the Chair into naming specific people who are specialising in running commentaries because I am very alive to who is who and who is talking.

May the hon. Member, please continue.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, the roads leading to those areas are very pathetic. I am surprised that even the owners of these mines do not even feel shy to drive on those poor roads and yet, they are very rich. They have acquired a lot of money from our soils. I think it is high time that our people started benefitting from these mineral royalties.

Mr Speaker, this Motion is non-controversial. I would like to urge the Government to come up with a mechanism of how the people in their various communities can get their share from the mineral royalties. The local people need to benefit from the mining of their copper and emeralds.

Sir, last, but not the least, I would like to thank the mover for a well researched Motion. It is my sincere hope that the people who were in support of this law when they were in the Opposition will be able to implement the Motion as moved.

I thank you, Sir.

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! In order to allow many hon. Members to debate, let us avoid repetitions. There is no need to flog a point you have already made twenty times.

Dr Kalila (Lukulu East): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me an opportunity to add my voice to this important Motion that has been ably moved by my two colleagues, Hon. Mulusa and Hon. Mweetwa.

Sir, because of time, I will be very brief. As you all know, I am a man of few words. 

Laughter{mospagebreak}

Dr Kalila: Mr Speaker, first and foremost, it is important for all the nations in Africa to realise that the scramble for Africa by big powers is ultimately a scramble for resources.  The presence of vast land, minerals, timber and water in Africa is what provides impetus for the struggle. Definitely, this battle will be very fierce. 

It is, therefore, important that those of us who are in the Executive should definitely be alive to this realisation so that we make economic capital out of this huge demand in the world today for our resources. As you know, most of the resources are wasting assets. These resources have run out in some of these countries as a result of industrialisation over the years, living these resources to be available mostly in Africa. That is why my colleague has moved this Motion.

Mr Speaker, it is important that nations put in place mechanisms that will obviously benefit the people and will spur economic development. In fact, somebody said that on the global level, all the battles which we will experience from now onwards will be for resources. 

Sir, it is important, therefore, that nations should be prudent in how they utilise these resources. One of the ways is to obviously ensure that indigenous people benefit from them. This is the gist of this Motion. Secondly, and especially from the point of view of the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry, one of the ways to benefit from our resources is through value addition. Thirdly, obviously, is the judicious use of resources because they are wasting assets. We must be alive to the fact that these resources will run out and, if we do not put them to good use, there will be nothing tomorrow. Therefore, if there will be nothing tomorrow and our people do not benefit today, then there is nothing that we would have done other than leaving holes in the ground and massive areas of land that will be deserts as in the case of the exploitation of timber. 

Mr Speaker, as you have correctly guided, perhaps, we should move to new points. The gist of my standing here is to support this Motion and implore the Government that not only should we institute these mechanisms in the area of minerals but, also, in timber, noting that the hon. Minister is also responsible for environmental protection under which forests fall. 

Sir, let me mention that along the Kaoma/Lukulu Corridor, it is a very sad state of affairs to see how our forests are being decimated and this has been going on for a very long time. Every time I visit this place, my heart bleeds. With our resources being wasted, we must pay due attention to the indigenous people. In the area of timber, there is no benefit whatsoever to the communities. Huge volumes of logs are ferried from the forest everyday. Nobody knows where the revenue goes and our people get nothing. At the end of the day, there is desertification in these areas. Obviously, we know that this can lead to climate change and many untoward effects on the environment, thereby exacerbating poverty levels. Instead of the resources bringing prosperity to our people, we are actually making them poorer. That is what my colleague, Hon. Namulambe, was lamenting. 

Hon. Minister, apart from this issue of mineral royalties, it is important that …

Interruptions

Dr Kalila: Mr Speaker, when we speak, especially humble hon. Members of Parliament like us, we not only provide oversight but, also, advice. When our colleagues are not listening, sometimes, we feel it is a little unnecessary. However, …

The Deputy Chairperson: Proceed. The Chair is listening very attentively.

Laughter

Dr Kalila: Mr Speaker, I just want to urge the Executive to support this Motion and extend it to other wasting assets, such as timber, particularly in Western Province, which is already a semi-desert. For many years, we have continued to reap off its forests without due regard to replacement and beneficiation to the citizens. That is the gist of my debate. True to my word, being a man of few words, I would like to end here.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: Any hon. Member with contrary views? The feeling I get is that most of the hon. Members appear to be supporting the Motion. Let me give a chance to those with contrary views.

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, I understand your guidance of contrary views, but I look at the subject in a way that I believe I should deliver it. Since you have allowed me to debate, I will proceed.

Interruptions

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, this country, Zambia, …

Mr Mukanga: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The Deputy Chairperson: A point of order is raised.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I rise on a very serious point of order. Is the hon. Member on the Floor in order to proceed when he heard the ruling and guidance of the Speaker that, if he had contrary views, then he should continue? 

I need your serious ruling, Mr Speaker.

The Deputy Chairperson: The serious ruling is that the Chair was looking for hon. Members of Parliament who had contrary views and I allowed the hon. Member to debate in the hope that he was going to come up with a contrary view. If you have a contrary view, may you proceed.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I do not know how I will debate if, before I speak, you want to make a decision. I think before the debate is closed, …

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

When the Chair has made the order, follow it. All I have said is, may you proceed with your contrary view. 

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, this Motion is talking about a law that already exists. I feel that, while it urges the Government to introduce the systems, it should not be restricted to the sharing of the mineral royalty tax. We should be talking about the sharing of natural resources. At the time the mines were opened, support infrastructure had to be put up. The mines existed because of electricity. We know that, without electricity, the mines cannot operate. There are tangible things we can talk about, such as sharing of power, just like Hon. Lubinda is concerned about it.  

I want to state, Mr Speaker, that there are other people who suffered.

Mr Lubinda: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

The Deputy Chairperson: A point of order is raised.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I appreciate that my colleague is finding it extremely difficult to debate based on the fact that he is trying to argue with your ruling. Is he in order to draw me into his debate and start talking about power when he does not want to explain what he means when he says that what is required is to share resources? Can he, please, explain to us what he intends to give to this nation when he says we should share resources? The mover of the Motion rightly said he would like the mineral royalty tax to be shared. Therefore, is he in order to draw me into his debate?

The Deputy Chairperson: The hon. Member on the Floor is definitely not in order to drag another hon. Member who is listening attentively …

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!    

The Deputy Chairperson: … to his contribution in order to make sense of the contribution he is making. Be that as it may, may I, please, remind you that the Motion relates to the mineral royalty tax as provided for under the Mines and Minerals Development Act. Therefore, I am urging hon. Members to be as relevant as they possibly can. 

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, now that I have to restrict myself to the contrary view, …

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: … I want to specifically state that, while it is important to follow what is already provided, we should also consider other natural resources that went towards supporting mining. For example, we have had people who did not just lose out because of the digging of these minerals from the mines. We have had people removed from an area so that the Kariba Dam could be created. This Government should also be concerned about the displacement of such people. 

Mr Muntanga: I am depressed …

The Deputy Chairperson: Order, order! 

I feel obliged to guide. 

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: Order, order! 

The guidance is that there is a specific Motion that has fallen for debate. If hon. Members feel strongly that the sharing of royalties should extend to other areas, you are at liberty to bring Motions at an appropriate time. The advice of the Chair is that you should try and stick to the Motion as much as you possibly can. 

The hon. Member may proceed. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!    

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I am not surprised and only wish to say that Zambia is unfortunate. Once, my friends supported the mineral royalty tax. When the Government introduced the windfall tax, a lot of money was collected. However, this law was not implemented. Instead, the tax was withdrawn. This is the more reason we talked about the windfall tax with our friends in the Government when they were still on this side of the House. Now, they have changed their minds and are not supporting it. There will not be any windfall tax to raise more money for the Zambian people. Sometimes, I wonder what happens to my friends when they shift from this side of the House to your right. They may fight for the rights of the people while here but, when they get there, they easily forget. The mover has done an excellent job by telling Zambians that, before Solwezi loses out on its mineral wealth, the Government should be reminded to implement this particular law.  

Mr Speaker, in spite of those debating while seated, we will remind the Government that it is important that it does not abdicate this responsibility. It is a responsibility that is expected of any Government. What the hon. Member for Mpongwe said made sad hearing. It is a pity that the former Government did not implement the mineral royalty tax. On the other hand, it is a pity that the people who were in the forefront supporting it want to make it appear simple just because they are on the other side now. 

Interruptions

Mr Muntanga: They must be reminded that this Motion is intended to remind them that the people …

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

The hon. Member is doing his best to make his point. You may proceed. 

Laughter     

Mr Muntanga:  Mr Speaker, I want to urge this House not to just support the Motion but, also, to think of all the other areas that lose out on national resources. 

Mr Speaker, with all the difficulty of interjections from the Government and a little support from the Chair, I thank you.   

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Notwithstanding the fact that you strayed, the Chair gave you massive support. 

Laughter 

The Minister of Lands, Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (Mr Simuusa): Mr Speaker, I thank you for allowing me to add my voice and, indeed, the voice of the Executive to this debate on the Motion moved by the hon. Member for Solwezi regarding the implementation of Section 136 of the Mines and Minerals Development Act on the sharing of the mineral royalty revenue. 

Mr Speaker, from the outset, I would like to say that this Motion is actually pushing an open door. It is a sermon to the converted. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Simuusa: Mr Speaker, I wish to appreciate the mover of the Motion for acknowledging that, when we were in Opposition, we were very passionate about this issue. He acknowledged Hon. Kambwili, Hon. Mukanga, Hon. Musenge and myself as people who raised this issue. 

Mr Lubinda: And me. 

Laughter

Mr Simuusa: Including Hon. Lubinda. 

As the Opposition then, we were of the view that the mineral royalty sharing mechanism was necessary for us to equitably share the mineral wealth of this nation. It was it was very clear that the national cake was not being shared equitably. It was then that we decided that this was the way to go. 

Mr Speaker, I listened to Hon. Namulambe’s debate and it makes very interesting hearing because the mover of the Motion acknowledged that this Motion was shot down by the MMD Government. The difference now is that this Motion is actually in line with the PF Manifesto, on page 19, Chapter 4 and bullet 4, which says:

“The Government will design an appropriate formula for sharing national taxes collected within the jurisdiction of every local authority in order to strengthen the revenue of local authorities.”

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Simuusa: Mr Speaker, this was put in the manifesto even before we came into office. The sharing mechanism of the mineral royalty is a programme we are undertaking. I wish to say that the challenge we have, as a Government, is what hon. Members have shown by contradicting themselves, as demonstrated by the debate of Hon. Jack Mwiimbu. On one point, he advocated for the sharing of mineral royalties and on the other, proposed that every part of the country, even where there are no minerals, should have a share. 

Mr Speaker, this means that the mechanism that will be put together and presented to the nation, should take into account what happens in areas where there are no minerals. Personally, I would declare interest because Nchanga Constituency and, particularly, Chingola, would be the richest area in this country because we own the largest mining house. What will happen to areas that are in Kasama, Shang’ombo and Kaputa, where there are no minerals? As a     responsible Government, we want to make sure that, when we come up with a mechanism, we would have a situation in which the resources are equitably shared. In coming up with this mechanism, we will take into account what the hon. Member for Kalomo Central mentioned in terms of resources. We will look at it holistically. For instance, what would be the option in areas where there are no minerals? What happens in areas where we have timber, fish or resources that are not necessarily minerals? These are the issues to grapple with. 

Mr Speaker, obviously, as a Government, we will ask ourselves at what point the mineral royalty will be shared. Will it be at the point when the money reaches the Treasury or at the point of collection from the mining companies or source? How will the accounting and reporting be done? 

Sir, there may even be a need to amend the legislation to make sure that whatever mechanism we come up with is implemented clearly. We now have an opportunity because we are in the process of revising the Mines and Minerals Act and, if necessary, we will do so. The basic point, however, is that we are going to implement this. 

Sir, I would like to acknowledge the mover’s efforts and all the debaters in reminding us of our manifesto and helping us to remember that this Motion is what we are currently implementing and pondering on as the Executive and a Government. Very shortly, we will be coming up with the mechanism for tax revenue sharing.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I would like to say that we are a listening Government. If there are any reasonable and logical ideas or suggestions on this matter, they are welcome. I know that this issue is very emotive because traditional leaders have visited me and they feel very strongly about this issue, and from many other stakeholders. We are a listening Government and, if there are any logical suggestions, we will accept them. However, the fact of the matter is that this Motion is talking about something that we are already implementing and we want to acknowledge that fact.

Mr Speaker, with these few words, I wish to thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear! Boma!

The Deputy Chairperson: Any further debate? His Honour the Vice-President.

The Vice-President (Dr Scott): For clarity, Mr Speaker, are you inviting me to contribute to the Motion?

The Deputy Chairperson: Yes, please.

The Vice-President: Sir, I would like to say that there seems to be a fair amount of confusion on your left side ...

Laughter

The Vice-President: … as to what exactly we referred to as revenue sharing even if we confined it to the mineral royalty tax.

Sir, the interpretation by Hon. Mwiimbu, which has to do with compensation for people who are displaced or inconvenienced or have had other natural resources interfered with, is one interpretation. We must say that our track record on this is not bad. We are very carefully monitoring what is happening in, for example, Nansanga Farming Block, although that is not a mining area. In mining areas like those thriving in North-Western Province, we are very actively engaged and my office, in particular, the Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) and the Resettlement Department, are making sure that nobody of the traditional, indigenous population of these areas loses out. We have shown that we mean business in the case of Sichifulo, although, again, that is not a mining issue, and Mazabuka will certainly be covered. Therefore, we have taken the point and we have already taken the point that nobody should suffer for being close to these natural resources.

Sir, the totally different story that revenue is, as a matter of right, supposed to be split with the community requires a much more comprehensive framework of local government or devolution so that you know who you are dealing with. Are you dealing with the chieftaincy, the districts, the constituency or the province as the community that you are going to share the revenue with? We need to figure that out.

Sir, the argument about Mpongwe does not apply because it is an area that does not generate mineral royalties. It generates other forms of income, maybe, of district levy on the movement of grain, among others. However, you are coming dangerously close to saying, “Well, give the money to Chingola District, not to Mpongwe because it does not generate the income.” That, of course, as everyone has realised, creates problems, hence, the talk about equitable sharing of the money. Is that not what we are already doing?

Sir, others were saying, “Yes, but we need to get more from the imperialists.” I agree that investors should pay more tax and that there should be more tax compliance even under the existing tax legislation. I absolutely agree. Even so, it has to be thought through, clear; holistic and an integrated policy. Therefore, we cannot actually back your Motion, but we will take note of it.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mulusa: Mr Speaker, at the beginning of this debate, I had a very clear mind. Now, my mind is in a state of confusion. I do not know what message to take back to the people. However, I wish to thank all those who supported the Motion. I am sure the nation was listening, just like it did when the PF moved this Motion as the Opposition. It has also listened, today, to the position that the party has taken and the confused response that has been given, including the promise that the Government is going to revise the Act. This is very unfortunate. Mining areas are patients and all we are saying is that they should be given a bit of medicine so that they may have the state of health that everybody has. That is the simple argument.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mulusa: I thank you, Mr Speaker, and all the hon. Members who debated this Motion.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Question put and agreed to.

___________

BILL

SECOND READING

THE AVIATION (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2012

The Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication (Mr Mukanga): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Sir, the PF Government recognises the tradition of naming airports after heroes and heroines has there since the early days of commercial aviation. History has it that one of the first airports to be named was the New York’s LaGuardia Airport in 1947. It was named after Fiorello LaGuardia, the city’s Mayor who championed its construction in the 1930s. Since then, more than fifty major airports in the world have been named in honour of statesmen, members of royalty, artistes, footballers, composers, writers and revolutionary heroes. Within the region, a number of countries have had their major airports renamed after their heroes, such as Oliver Tambo International Airport, formerly Johannesburg in South Africa, Jomo Kenyetta International Airport, formerly Embakasi in Kenya and Kamuzu Banda International Airport in Malawi, just to mention but a few.

Mr Speaker, I believe that the renaming of the three designated international airports, namely, Kenneth Kaunda, formerly Lusaka, Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula, formerly Livingstone and Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe, formerly Ndola, by His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr Michael Chilufya Sata, after our revolutionary heroes is a positive development and will not negatively affect the operations of the renamed airports.

Sir, I am sure that hon. Members are fully aware of the contributions made by the heroes we are talking about during the liberation struggle and also after independence. I, therefore, urge all hon. Members of Parliament to support the proposed Aviation (Amendment) Bill, N. A. B. 2/2012.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Simbao (Senga Hill): Mr Speaker, I thank you for this opportunity to highlight a few issues contained in the Report of the Committee on Communications, Transport, Works and Supply on the Aviation (Amendment) Bill, No. 2, 2012 laid on the Table of the House on Tuesday, 20th March, 2012. 

Mr Speaker, I would like to state from the outset that the Bill is non-controversial and all the witnesses who made submissions before your Committee were in support of it. They informed your Committee that the tradition of naming and renaming of airports after heroes and heroines has been going on since the early days of commercial aviation. They also said that one of the first airports to be named after a personality was New York’s LaGuardia Airport, which was named in 1947 after Fiorello LaGuardia, the city mayor, who championed its construction, in the 1930s.

Mr Speaker, within the region, a number of countries have renamed their major airports after their heroes. For instance, Johannesburg International Airport was renamed Oliver Tambo International Airport, Embakasi International Airport was renamed Jomo Kenyatta International Airport and Lilongwe International Airport was renamed Kamuzu Banda International Airport.

Mr Speaker, your Committee was assured that, although there were cost implications on the part of operators and the National Airports Corporation (NAC), these were minimal and most were to do with re-branding. Further, your Committee was assured that the Bill did not contravene the Chicago Convention of the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO).

Sir, whereas your Committee appreciates the renaming of the major airports after the gallant sons of the land, it is important that the standard of these airports be commensurate with the honour of the names they will now bear. The Government should, therefore, be willing to invest in improving these airports in order to bring them to acceptable international standards.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Sir, I stand to support the Aviation (Amendment) Bill, 2012, which seeks to rename international airports and runways. I have, however, a few concerns to bring forth. 

Sir, I appreciate the fact LaGuardia Airport was named after the mayor of New York. It is true that even the John F. Kennedy Airport in the same city was named after a great leader. It is, therefore, in order that these infrastructure and institutions are named after people who contributed to the history and making of this country. I, however, would like to just pose one or two questions. The city of Lusaka was named after a human being, a chief. Here, where we are seated in the City of Lusaka, was the village of Chief Lusaka. What immediately comes to my mind, without so much thought, is that Dr Kenneth Kaunda, a great son of Zambia, did not deserve to get his name attached to the international airport here in Lusaka. I think that the feelings of the Soli people in Chongwe should have been taken into consideration before the name of their chief was replaced. 

Interruptions

Mr Nkombo: Sir, it is a pity. There is an adage that empty tins make a lot of noise. 

Laughter

Mr Nkombo: I require to be protected as I debate because these are my feelings.

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

Allow the hon. Member to debate in peace.

Mr Nkombo: I do have great respect for Dr Kenneth Kaunda and I am saying that he deserves to be honoured. I did not say anything to the contrary. All I have said is that Chief Lusaka was also a human being. Therefore, the difference between LaGuardia and the name it replaced was that the airport’s name was changed from one thing to that of a personality, not a name of a human being replacing another.

I also would like to put across the fact that Mr Michael Sata, the Head of State, is a Statesman. By my own definition, a statesman is one who is wise and fair. I think that, if I were Mr Michael Sata, I would have named Ndola International Airport after Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula and Livingstone International Airport after Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe in the spirit of …  

Hon. Government Members interjected.

Mr Nkombo: Shut up!

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

May you withdraw that phrase, hon. Member. It is unparliamentary.

Mr Nkombo: Sir, I take your wise counsel and withdraw the words ‘shut up’. I would like to state that, in the spirit of ‘One Zambia One Nation’, of which Dr Kaunda, the father of this nation, was a proponent, it would have been very nice if Livingstone International Airport was named after Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe and Ndola International Airport named after Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula. This is my view, not anyone else’s.

Mr Speaker, I am so thankful that one hon. Member on your right is nodding his head while another is shaking his head, but it is his wish to do so. I think that the people of Northern Province would have been very happy the northern part of Zambia, I beg your pardon would have been very happy to have the airport in Ndola named after Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula, who was a champion in bringing the White Paper to this country to gain our independence, and the Livingstone International Airport named after Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe, who was equally a very vibrant son of this country. My point is that we should not seem to be regionalising these names. If I were Mr Sata, this is what I would have done. 

Sir, I support the Bill and thank you.

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Mr Speaker, my contribution in supporting this Bill will be very brief. I would like to just attend to concerns raised by my honourable colleague who is just from debating. 

Sir, I was privileged to sit on this Committee and we tabled that issue with the various stakeholders who appeared before us. There were suggestions like relocating the international airport from Lusaka to Chongwe and that a Mr Lusaka, who was a chief, had already been greatly honoured because this whole city is named after him.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kampyongo: Therefore, naming just one institution within the city after another national hero would not deprive this man of the honour accorded him. I think it is worth noting that the suggestion the previous speaker put up was also put across to the Committee and, indeed, it is a good suggestion. However, I think the way it stands is still appreciated and will be recognised by our people.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chipungu (Rufunsa): Mr Speaker, obviously, the question that comes to mind is: Who is more heroic between the former President and headman Lusaka, who gave land for the creation of the Capital City we see today? I think the headman was more of a hero. I am not against the former President. Obviously, he also did his part, but I think it is wrong, in our tradition, to remove a heritage name and replace it with something else. 

Mr Speaker, while I support the Bill, the renaming of international airports, especially Lusaka International Airport, was done in bad faith. I am saying so because there was no consultation made, especially, with the stakeholders, who are the people of Chongwe. These people are still alive and needed to be consulted. Chongwe District has three chiefs, but I do not remember, at any time, anybody going to consult them. 

Mr Speaker, I remember, in 1991, the late Former President, Dr F. T. J. Chiluba, did a similar thing. He renamed the Lusaka International Airport, may be, to the same name. Representations were made to the late Former President and he reversed his decision. 

Sir, this is our heritage name and, therefore, removing or replacing it, I think, is really untraditional in as far as the people of Lusaka Province are concerned. I, therefore, beg that this name is left as it is because there is a history to it. Otherwise, if it is removed, it means you want to remove the people as well.

Hon. Government Members: Aah!

Mr Chipungu: Yes, Mr Speaker. The point I am making here is that this is a heritage name. We are all given names when we are born. So, why should that name be removed? As the people of Lusaka Province, we totally disagree and do not accept this.

I thank you, Sir.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Tourism (Mr Lubinda): Mr Speaker, I rise, obviously, to support the Bill. In support of this Bill, I just want to clarify one matter that has been belaboured by my good friends, Hon. Chipungu and Hon. Nkombo,

Sir, I would like to put it on record that the renaming of the former Lusaka International Airport to Kenneth David Kaunda International Airport was not, in any way, a replacement of one hero with another. I would like it to be on record that, in the same way that the Lusaka Intercity Bus Terminus is so called by the mere fact that it is in a city called Lusaka, that is exactly how the international airport acquired the name Lusaka International Airport. This is the very first time that the Government, on behalf of the people of Zambia, has decided that this piece of facility called the Lusaka International Airport in Lusaka must now carry a name of a personality. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!{mospagebreak}

Mr Lubinda: In the same way, a hotel in Lusaka is called Lusaka Hotel without necessarily being named after any particular individual. 

Sir, to try and make this an issue, a traditional issue, for that matter, is to be trivial because the airport called Kenneth David Kaunda is but a small facility in the bigger city that is named after Headman Lusaka. The whole province is also named after that very important headman. Unless my colleagues suggest that all names of facilities in Lusaka should remain Lusaka. If that is their argument, then I might understand them. However, to argue ...

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

May hon. Members consult less noisily? 

The hon. Minister may proceed.

Mr Lubinda: Thank you, Sir. I wonder whether my colleagues, Hon. Chipungu and Hon. Nkombo, will also quarrel with the fact that there are different townships within the City of Lusaka named after equally important personalities, such as John Howard, Libala and Kabulonga. The point is that this is the very first time that a deliberate decision has been made by the people of Zambia that the airport in Lusaka ...

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Mr Lubinda: I will not borrow the words of my friend, who uses vulgar language when he is jeered or heckled, but will simply appeal to my colleagues to also pay attention to others when they debate. 

Sir, I would like to appeal to my colleagues to kindly observe the fact that this decision was made without any malice whatsoever. Nonetheless, I would like to borrow the words of my colleague, Hon. Nkombo, and add to them. The naming is one thing, but the respecting and honouring of these personalities is another. 

Mr Chipungu left the Assembly Chamber.

Mr Lubinda: I appeal to hon. Members, such as Hon. Chipungu, who has decided to walk out the Chamber because he cannot stand my debate, for whatever reason, that, here in Lusaka, the Capital City of our great country, we ought to be seeing people like him putting resources together to honour that headman by putting up a memento by which he will be remembered forever. If Hon. Chipungu is serious about respecting Headman Lusaka, I propose to him to join hands with me. Let us find an artist so that he and I can pay for a big statue in honour of Headman Lusaka.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Lubinda: I will encourage others to join with me to also go to Kenneth David Kaunda International Airport and Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula International Airport and do the same. 

Mr Speaker, the issue of deciding which province a name should go to is also a matter that was not subject to any kind of consideration by this Government. We did not say Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula should necessarily be in Livingstone because of tribal inclinations. That was not the consideration whatsoever. Therefore, I would like to encourage my colleagues that, if there are other heroes and heroines who deserve to be honoured, please, be at liberty to come and present those suggestions to us. I will be very glad if Hon. Nkombo would come to this House and say we ought to honour the only Knight in Zambia, Sir Lewanika. If people propose that some property or facility, even if it is outside Western Province, be named after that great Knight of Zambia, we will support. However, there are only those three airports that were to be named and those three names happened to have been the names that this Government thought about.

Sir, I thought I should put this on record and clearly state that there was no malice in deciding which airport should be named after which hero. Nor was there any malice in replacing the name Lusaka with that of Kenneth David Kaunda. I, therefore, want to appeal to my colleagues to kindly support this very noble cause.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, I stand to support this Motion.  Someone talked about interjections, but is doing the same.

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

You can proceed because you have the Floor. Forget about the hecklers.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I rarely praise the Government. It is not in my blood.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: However, I want to say that President Sata has the ability to do what most people are scared to do. He was able to rename airports and that takes courage. He named the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport at Lusaka. Lusaka ends there. I do not want to debate who comes where, but I want to say that names you can change. It is like the changes being made to the districts. We will change them.

Laughter

Mr Mwiimbu: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, as regards international airports, reference was made to international airports in Kenya, Johannesburg and elsewhere. However, if you go to the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Kenya, you will see that they have improved the airport facilities. Big planes land there and you do not have to climb, run and get soaked when it rains. If this Government is serious about honouring our great leaders, it should show it by improving the airport facilities.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: It should not just please you to name the international airport after Kaunda, yet we are being soaked as we get into the plane if we do not rush as if we are in a village. You have taken one step. Even Zimbabwe, which experienced problems, has special landing pylons. What do you call them?

Mr Nkombo: Kamwamba buyo muCitonga.

Mr Muntanga: Cibwite kashi.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Where planes dock, you find there are special arrangements. Why can we not do this? There is nothing to say about the VIP rooms at the KK International Airport. They are deplorable. They are trying to knock some corners to clean, but there is nothing changing. If you go to the Julius Nyerere International Airport in Dar-es-Salaam in Tanzania, the VIP lounges are excellent. This renaming that you have done, we want it to be followed by improvement of facilities.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: There has to be infrastructure to show that you actually need …

Dr Chituwo: On a point of order, Sir.

The Deputy Chairperson: A point of order is raised.

Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to raise this very important point of order. 

Sir, health is a very important aspect of our lives and leadership in the health sector is cardinal. Is my colleague, the hon. Minister of Community Development Mother and Child Health in order to keep quiet and not acknowledge the heroic stunt that should be emulated by all of us in this House, particularly the women, by the hon. Deputy Minister of Community Development, Maternal and Child Health, who showed leadership to the women folk on television by undergoing screening for cervical cancer, which is rated the second largest cause of death in women in our country. Should the hon. Minister keep quiet over an issue that is life-threatening and killing our young women night and day because of lack of leadership? When this comes, surely, should we not acknowledge it? I need your serious ruling.

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: The serious ruling is that the hon. Deputy Minister in the same ministry did what she did on behalf of her hon. Minister and the ministry as a whole.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

The Deputy Chairperson: The hon. Member may continue.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, in supporting the renaming of the international airports, we need to follow it up with infrastructure development. We need to improve the infrastructure at Ndola International Airport. You go there, the docking of planes …

Hon. Members: Docking?

Mr Muntanga: The landing, yes, but they go and dock.

Hon. Member: Taxiing

The Deputy Chairperson: Remember to debate through the Speaker. That is why you are inviting people to engage you in a cross discussion.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the problem with the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and Tourism is that he cannot keep his mouth shut. He will continue to do this.

Laughter

The Deputy Chairperson: Order!

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I want to state …

Mr Lubinda: On a point of order, Sir.

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

A point of order is raised.

Mr Muntanga: Yes, you do it.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I thank you for allowing me to raise this point of order. Honestly, under your very careful watch, I am sitting here quietly trying to understand what that hon. Member means when he is talking about docking, yet he is talking about airports. I was trying to understand what he meant because planes do not dock. Now that he has run out of ideas, is he in order to bring me into his debate?

The Deputy Chairperson: The serious ruling is that the hon. Member was out of order to bring you into his debate. However, with regard to the terminology he used to draw the point across, he was in order because, after all, we are debating in a second language.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I would go ahead to state that we should now start lining up all the great heroes because I can imagine that Muchinga Province will have an international airport and we will realise that we should have taken Kapwepwe’s name there. I urge the Government to provide the infrastructure. What does it take to allow someone to rent and provide decent services at the VIP lounges at the international airport?

Laughter

Mr Nkombo: Nabamyeba that it is his second language. What is the problem?

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

I know there are many professors of English and others of Bemba, but this is not the time for you to be lecturing. You may proceed.

Mr E. C. Lungu walked out of the Chamber.

Mr Muntanga: Hon. Lungu, who can hardly debate, is running away. I accept that there is a need to clean up, hon. Minister of Information, Broadcasting and Labour and hon. Minister of Transport, Works, Supply and Communication Transport, together. It should not be only when the hon. Minister of Defence complains about the airport that we realise that we have not done anything. We have taken a step to name the airport after the great leader and should, therefore, follow it up.

Mr Speaker, I am also passionate that, as we change provincial capitals, we should also look at providing and improving airport facilities. This we need to do at the airport in Choma. We should be able to improve the airports at provincial centres so that we do not fight over names. The airport at Mongu should be improved. We are now saying that Choma is the provincial capital of Southern Province and the airstrip may be named after Munkombwe so that he is not forgotten. When we have an airport in Kalomo, we shall name it Muntanga Airport …

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: … so that we should have these names put together. Monze Airport should be named after Hon. Jack Mwiimbu.

Mr Mwiimbu: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: Mazabuka will also have its own name. There are so many leaders. However, let me advise because this Government can do anything without consulting anyone. Please do not change the name of the Capital City.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: We should not be taken aback to find that tomorrow, Lusaka City is no longer called by its current name.

Hon. Members: Like what?

Mr Muntanga: It may be called something else such as Lubinda City. 

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: We would like the name of Lusaka to remain the way it is, for the benefit of our children.  We do not want to fight over these names.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the Lambas in Ndola will need to rename their own things. We also want the Kalulushi Airport to be developed so that it is named after one of the people from there before we start fighting for Mpombo’s name to be given to the airport in Ndola.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: The only problem which we will have when we have an airport in Bauleni is people fighting that we call it Guy Scott Airport.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, at the rate at which this Government is going, I can foresee a lot of different places being renamed with all sorts of names.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: They can even tell you that Livingstone should become part of the Copperbelt.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: So, please, slow down.

I thank you, Sir.

Laughter 

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me yet another chance to wind up this Motion. Firstly, I would like to thank the hon. Members who have supported this Motion through their debates and those who have silently supported it from the comfort of their seats.

Sir, when it comes to renaming the airports and attaching related improvements to infrastructure, I would like to say that we have a plan as a Government to ensure that our airports are not just airports in name, but also have a facelift. We have started working on the airports. We have done some improvements to the Harry Mwaanga Nkumbula Airport. We even have plans to work on the Simon Mwansa Kapwepwe Airport. We shall also continue with works on the Kenneth Kaunda International Airport.

Mr Speaker, we will try to do everything we can in our powers and resources to ensure that we give our international airports a facelift that will be appreciated by the people. I am sure hon. Members who have traveled to various places at times have felt  embarrassed when comparing our airport to the airports that they find in other countries.

Interruptions

Mr Mukanga: If you do not compare, too bad. You can only learn through comparison. I think it is important that whenever you have time to travel to other countries, you compare what is there with what we have here so that you can see where to improve.

Hon. Government Member: Hear, hear!

Mr Mukanga: If a person does not learn from what others are doing, then that person has a problem. The PF Government will do everything possible within its power to ensure that it gives the people of Zambia the best infrastructure.

Mr Speaker, there have already been pronouncements by the Head of State that we will build aerodromes. We are already building some and will continue to do so. We have been given the mandate to improve things  so that we can make Zambia a better place than we found it. We will do that effectively. 

Sir, the people will see our seriousness when we our infrastructure development initiatives are in full swing. For now, I would like to thank the hon. Members for supporting the non-controversial Motion.  I thank you for your contributions. It is a pity that others were annoyed and walked out. That is not the spirit with which we should handle national issues. 

Laughter

Mr Mukanga: In order to debate effectively, we need to be here at all times so that we can have the opportunity to listen to the sentiments of other people.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 22nd March, 2012

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The Vice-President (Dr Scott): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

__________
 
The House adjourned at 1810 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday, 22nd March, 2012