Friday, 18^th July, 2025

The House met at 0900 hours

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY MADAM SPEAKER

PUPILS AND TEACHERS FROM CITY ANGELS PRIVATE SCHOOL

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I wish to recognise the presence, in the Public Gallery, of pupils and teachers from City Angels Private School in Lusaka District.

On behalf of the National Assembly of Zambia, I warmly welcome our visitors into our midst.

I thank you.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

GRADE 12 PUPILS FROM THIRTEEN SECONDARY SCHOOLS

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I wish to recognise the presence, in the Public Gallery, of a group of Grade 12 pupils from thirteen secondary schools in Ndola Central Constituency on the Copperbelt Province.

On behalf of the National Assembly of Zambia, I warmly welcome our visitors into our midst.

I thank you.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

EYE SCREENING EXERCISE BY KU MENSO EYE CLINIC

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I wish to inform you that Ku Menso Eye Clinic has been granted permission to conduct a free eye screening exercise for hon. Members of Parliament and staff. The exercise will be conducted from Monday, 21^st to Thursday, 24^th July, 2025, from 0900 hours to 1600 hours in the main reception area, here at Parliament Buildings. Interested hon. Members and staff are encouraged to take advantage of this free eye screening opportunity.

I thank you.

_______

BUSINESS STATEMENT

The Vice-President (Mrs Nalumango): Madam Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the House Business Committee met on Thursday, 17^th July, 2025, to determine and schedule Business of the House for the period 22^nd July to 1^st August, 2025.

Madam Speaker, the House Business Committee resolved to lay before the House the following business for consideration in the next two weeks:

Announcement

The Hon. Madam Speaker may make announcements, if there will be any.

Rulings

The Hon. Madam Speaker will render Rulings, if there will be any.

Ministerial Statements

Hon. Ministers will render Ministerial Statements on topical issues, if there will be any.

Bills

The following Bills will be considered:

1. the National Road Fund Bill No. 2 of 2005 at Committee Stage. The date is yet to be determined;
2. the Building Societies (Amendment) Bill No. 3 of 2025 at Committee Stage. The date is yet to be determined;
3. the Border Management Facilitation Bill No. 5 of 2025 at Committee Stage. The date is yet to be determined: and
4. the Superior Courts (Number of Judges) Bill No. 15 of 2025 will come for Second Reading on 29^th July, 2025.

Private Members’ Motions

The hon. Member for Nkana Parliamentary Constituency, Mr B. Mpundu, will present the following Private Members’ Motions during the period:

1. Motion on the subject matter to set up a film fund. This will be considered on 23^rd July, 2025; and
2. Motion on the subject matter to reverse the decision to surrender toll facilities to companies undertaking public-private partnership (PPP) road projects until completion. This will be considered on 30^th July, 2025.

Parliamentary Committee Reports

The following Committee Reports will be considered during the period:

1. the Public Accounts Committee will present the Report of the Auditor-General on the Accounts of the Republic for the Financial Year ended 31^st December, 2023, on 22^nd July, 2025;
2. the Committee on National Guidance and Gender Matters will present the Performance Audit Report on Effectiveness of Government Measures in Ending Child Marriage in Zambia 2020-2023, on 23^rd July, 2025;
3. the Committee on Planning and Budgeting will present the 2024 Annual Progress Report on the Implementation of the Eighth National Development Plan (8NDP) on 24^th July, 2025;
4. the Committee on Education, Science and Technology will present the Performance Audit Report on the Implementation of the Free Education Policy in Enhancing Access and Quality of Education to Learners in Zambia, 2020-2024, on 24^th July, 2025;
5. the Committee on Parastatal Bodies will present the Report of the Auditor-General on the Accounts of Parastatal Bodies and other Statutory Institutions for the Financial Year Ended 31^st December, 2023, on 25^th July, 2025;
6.  the Report of the Zambian Delegation to the 57^th Southern African Development Community Parliamentary Forum (SADC-PF) Plenary Assembly, held in Victoria Falls City, Zimbabwe, from 31^st May to 7^th June, 2025, will be presented on 25^th July, 2025;
7. the Committee on Local Government Accounts will present the Report of the Auditor-General on the Operations of Local Authorities for the Financial Year ended 31^st December, 2023, on 29^th July, 2025;
8. the Committee on Parliamentary Reforms and Modernisation will present the Report on Enhancing the Participation of the Public in the Work of Parliament on 29^th July, 2025;
9. the Committee on Local Governance, Housing and Chiefs’ Affairs will present the Performance Audit Report on the Utilisation of the Road Fund for Road Maintenance in Zambia, 2020 – 2022, on 30^th July, 2025;
10. the Committee on Health, Community Development and Social Services will present the Performance Audit Report on the Implementation of the Social Cash Transfer Programme in Zambia, 2018 – 2023, on 31^st July, 2025;
11. the Committee on Education, Science and Technology will present the Report on the Ratification of the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education on 31^st July, 2025; and
12. the Committee on Local Government Accounts will present the Report of the Auditor-General on the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) for the Financial Year ended 31^st December, 2023, on 1^st August, 2025.

Questions

Hon. Ministers will respond to ten Questions for Oral Answer and Questions for Written Answer. The list of the questions will be circulated to all hon. Members as an appendix to this statement. Further, the details of the questions are contained in the Notice of Questions for the period from 5^th March, 2025 to 20^th June, 2025, circulated to all hon. Members earlier.

Questions on Standby

The Questions on Standby to replace questions that may not be placed on the Order Paper on the designated day due to unforeseen circumstances have also been set in an appendix, which will be circulated to all hon. Members.

Suspension of Standing Orders

At an appropriate time, I intend to move a Motion to suspend the relevant Standing Orders to ensure that all business lined up is completed by the time the House will adjourn sine die.

Madam Speaker, on behalf of the House Business Committee, and in accordance with Order No. 44 of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024, I have the pleasure to present the business for the next two weeks to this august House.

 I thank you, Madam Speaker.

_______

URGENT MATTERS WITHOUT NOTICE

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, are the indications on the screen all Urgent Matters without Notice or we can skip this segment?

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Can we clear the list?

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Now, we are on Urgent Matters without Notice. We will start with the hon. Member for Lunte.

Hon. Member, do you have an Urgent Matter without Notice?

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, yes.

Madam Speaker: Alright, let us start with the hon. Member for Lunte.

MR KAFWAYA, HON. MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR LUNTE, ON THE VICE-PRESIDENT, MRS NALUMANGO, ON THE RECENT PRESS BRIEFING HELD BY THE PROGRESSIVE FORCE FOR SOUTH AFRICA

Mr Kafwaya (Lunte): On an Urgent Matter without Notice, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, yesterday, the President indicated that the Government is still in negotiations with the former First Family regarding the repatriation of the remains of the late Sixth President. I was very pleased when I heard that, and I look forward to the amicable conclusion of those negotiations.

Madam Speaker, yesterday, a group calling itself the Progressive Force for South Africa held a press briefing in South Africa. It claimed that the former First Family was trying to run away from justice in Zambia. Those claims by the group and several other people, including some hon. Members of Parliament, may hamper the amicable conclusion of the matter of repatriating the remains of the former President. I think, given the importance of the funeral to the President and the Zambian people, the Government has to state its position regarding the relationship between the funeral of the late former Sixth President, Mr Edgar Lungu, and the offences alleged to have been committed by the former First Family so that people, even those making claims in South Africa, can be aware that the former First Family avails itself to law enforcement agencies as and when it is required. Is it not important for Her Honour the Vice-President to come to this House to tell the nation the Government’s position on the relationship between the funeral of Edgar Chagwa Lungu and the offences alleged to have been committed by the former First Family?

I seek your direction, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Lunte, in your own words, you have said that there are negotiations going on, and that there are matters pending in court. You also brought in an organisation based in South Africa. Therefore, would it not be prudent for us to leave those matters as they are? If there are, indeed, negotiations going on, we should leave it at that. If Her Honour the Vice-President starts talking about the negotiations and the case pending in court, are we not going to pre-empt whatever is happening elsewhere? Why not allow the involved parties to discuss on their own? When they complete the negotiations, they will come and inform us; everybody will be notified.

Hon. Member for Lunte, I believe that the interest in the funeral is not for the President. You said that the President has an interest in the funeral. It is not the President, but the people of Zambia who have an interest in the funeral. In my understanding, it is the people of Zambia who have an interest in the matter. So, let us leave it at that. I think that it is best that we leave it at that. If, in the end, there is an agreement, then, let it be so.

Thank you very much.

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, thank you for your guidance.

Madam Speaker: Then, why did you bring it up? Alright, sorry, that was on the sidelines.

MR TWASA, HON. MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR KASENENGWA, ON THE HON. MINISTER OF TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS, MR TAYALI, ON ZAMBIA AIRWAYS

Mr Twasa (Kasenengwa): Madam Speaker, on an Urgent Matter without Notice.

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to raise an Urgent Matter without Notice directed to – he is even looking at me. The matter is directed to the hon. Minister of Transport and Logistics, my dear mulamu, cousin.

Madam Speaker, I sincerely seek your indulgence on the matter I am raising because it was once brought to your attention. The issue is very serious and very concerning. It concerns our national carrier. The feedback from the travel and airline industry on our national carrier is not very good, as 80 per cent of the passengers who use it do not want to use it again. Our national carrier has competitive fares that attract people, but they are beginning to weigh between the fares and other things.

A few years ago, I think, in 2024 or 2023, you directed the Committee on Health, Community Development and Social Services to tour the country and conduct some reviews on how the health sector was performing.

I rise on this matter, Madam Speaker, to beseech you to ask your Committee on Transport, Works and Supply to meet with the national airline and the Ministry of Transport and Logistics to find out how the airline is performing and how it can be helped. Coming to discuss this issue in this House may bring out some sensitive issues, which may not be pleasant for its market to hear. However, if the Committee looks into the issue, we can get a lot of help to see how our airline can survive.

Madam Speaker, I seek your indulgence.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Kasenengwa, I do not know if you were in the House during the course of this week. I think, it was yesterday or the day before, when the hon. Member for Chitambo said that it takes four hours to fly from Johannesburg to Lusaka and vice versa. I jokingly asked him what he had carried – I am sure you were in the House – and I gave guidance accordingly.

 Hon. Member, if you would like a matter to be discussed by a Committee, bring the initiative. You also have the right, hon. Member for Kasenengwa, to present a matter before a Committee. If there is justification and grounds for that matter to be discussed by a Committee, take it to a Committee. In your own words, you have said that if the matter is discussed on the Floor of this House, certain issues that would not be good for business will be brought out. So, then, why is it being brought out again? You are bringing it up on the Floor of the House. The matter does not even qualify to be raised as an Urgent Matter without Notice. Explore other means and ways by which it can be brought to the House or before the Committee responsible for transport. The matter is not admitted.

MR KANG’OMBE, HON. MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR KAMFINSA, ON HER HONOUR THE VICE-PRESIDENT, ON THE ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE FOOD RESERVE AGENCY TO EXPORT ONE MILLION METRIC TONNES OF MAIZE TO THE DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF CONGO

Mr Kang’ombe (Kamfinsa): On an Urgent Matter without Notice, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised by the hon. Member for Kamfinsa.

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, I was going to direct this matter to the hon. Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry and the hon. Minister of Agriculture, but since they are not present, I wish to direct it to Her Honour the Vice-President.

Madam Speaker, this matter is in relation to the announcement that was made yesterday by the Government, through the Food Reserve Agency (FRA) board chairperson, that 1 million metric tonnes of maize will be exported to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The House may be aware that the Government is yet to procure the maize that was produced under the Ministry of Agriculture through our small-scale farmers. Arising from yesterday's announcement, there is a lot of apprehension from the small-scale farmers in different places, and they are asking whether the Government is failing to buy that maize because it has plans to reduce the price by having it exported into the DRC.

Madam Speaker, is Her Honour the Vice-President in order to not come to Parliament to assure our small-scale farmers that maize will be procured and that a decision to export maize can only be made after food has been secured for the people of Zambia? This is an important issue. Yesterday, the response was not provided when this matter was raised. I think, it would be a great opportunity for Her Honour the Vice-President to assure our small-scale farmers before we start talking about exporting 1 million metric tonnes of maize.

Madam Speaker, I seek your indulgence.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Kamfinsa, again, yesterday, this matter was discussed on the Floor of this House through the Acting hon. Minister of Agriculture. After the question was handled, I gave guidance to the Acting hon. Minister to come back to the House on Wednesday, next week, with a Ministerial Statement. So, I do not know whether you are not always in the House when we are discussing these issues, or you are in the House but not paying attention. Guidance was given on that matter, and I went to great lengths to explain, after the question was asked by the hon. Member for Nakonde, bringing in the aspect of the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) and the requirement that farmers should sell, at least, ten bags of maize to the Food Reserve Agencies (FRA). The hon. Minister indicated that he was going to render a Ministerial Statement in the House on Wednesday, next week. So, those issues will be addressed.

If you have any other questions, hon. Members, reserve them for that time so that when the hon. Minister presents the Ministerial Statement, you can also ask for clarification. I think that is where we were at yesterday.

Order!

_______

THE VICE-PRESIDENT’S QUESTION TIME

Madam Speaker: Some people are eating with two hands, eh?

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Lunte, you may proceed.

Hon. Members: Sikongo!

Madam Speaker: Oh! Is it Sikongo? Okay.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: No, no, no, it is Sikongo. I do not know how Lunte featured as the first one.

Laughter

Mr Simushi (Sikongo): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, when we, as the United Party for National Development (UPND) Government, took over the responsibility of leading this nation, we found ourselves in a very difficult situation. We had huge debt, corruption was too high and the mismanagement of financial resources was at its peak. However, through prudent management, a methodical approach and discipline, this country today, has laid a good foundation for economic growth. Economic recovery has been achieved –

Mr Kapyanga: What is your question?

Interruptions

Mr Simushi: Just wait, my friend!

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Order!

Hon. Members, that idea of debating or interjecting while you are seated is going to see you outside. So, please, if we want to continue to be in the House, let us ensure that we observe our Standing Orders.

Hon. Member for Mpika, the other day, your Motion almost lapsed because of the same things you are doing today. So, please, restrain yourself.

Hon. Member for Sikongo, you may continue. Please, be precise and to the point. Ask your question so that we can have as many hon. Members as possible ask as well.

Mr Simushi: Madam Speaker, I am well guided.

Madam Speaker, given the good trajectory that this Government has managed to put the country on, the question to Her Honour the Vice-President is: Is the Government going to sustain the efforts it is making to achieve this projected 6.5 per cent economic growth for 2025?

The Vice-President (Mrs Nalumango): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Sikongo for taking note of what this Government has done under the leadership of our President, Mr Hakainde Hichilema. The hon. Member has said that though we found a difficult environment, through prudent management and a methodical approach towards the management of the economy, we have seen a turnaround in the economy. We are doing well. His concern is whether we are going to sustain the efforts on that trajectory so that we can achieve the projected 6 per cent economic growth. Hopefully, that is what he meant. Definitely, that is our intention. Together, as a nation, we have to sustain the policies that have been put in place and are working because that is the only way we are going to achieve the 6 per cent projected growth.

However, I am mindful of the fact that, even though he did not ask about it, people still tell us that we have not done anything. I always do not forget to say that all things being equal, what we want to achieve should be within our given environment. We should all work to see that our economy grows by 6 per cent so that it has a real effect on the livelihoods of the people.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker:  Thank you very much.

I have been advised that the hon. Member for Lunte was number two on the list. So, I will ask him to ask his question.  

Mr Kafwaya (Lunte): Madam Speaker, thank you so much.

Madam Speaker, the importance of elections to a democracy like ours cannot be overemphasised. In the House, we have newly-elected hon. Members of Parliament, and many people who have been elected, elsewhere, in the by-elections. That demonstrates the importance of elections. However, in bringing credibility to the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), is the Government considering removing Commissioners who belong to the United Party for National Development (UPND)?

Hon. Government Members: Question!

The Vice-President: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I would like to thank the hon. Member for Lunte for that question, which is difficult for me to understand.

Mr Kapyanga: How?

The Vice-President: That is the truth.

Madam Speaker, Commissioners are the same. So, it is very difficult for me to identify Commissioners who belong to the United Party for National Development (UPND). Otherwise, we will start visiting institutions to find out who belongs to the UPND.  Let us first look at the work of the commission. Is it doing well? I think it is fine and working. So, I do not know any Commissioners who belong to the UPND, who deserve to be removed.

In Zambia, we are all inclined to political parties, but the offices we occupy compel us to act in a non-partisan manner. I think that is the way it is. There have been allegations throughout. I like to tell the truth. Even in the past, people were accused. Normally, the commissioners at the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), would be said to belong to the Ruling party. However, that is not true. Zambians belong to different political parties, but when one is in a public position, his/her conscience should tell them that they are now operating in a non-partisan office. So, those Commissioners are non-partisan. Therefore, nobody deserves to be removed.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Mutinta (Itezhi-Tezhi): Thank you, Madam Speaker, and good morning to Her Honour the Vice-President.

Madam Speaker, during the last Address by the President to the House, he laboured to emphasise the need for the country to uphold the national values and principles. The President is on record encouraging all of us to ensure that issues concerning alcohol abuse and the behaviour of our teenagers across the country are addressed. However, over the past week, the country has been intoxicated with pornographic materials on social media, despite the enactment of the Cyber Crimes Act. We have seen many young girls involved in sharing videos that are not of good taste to the eyes of adults.

Ms Mulenga interjected.

Mr Mutinta: I know you have watched the videos, hon. Member.

Ms Mulenga Niwebo!

Laughter

Mr Mutinta: Madam Speaker, the concern here is that those young girls are our children. The President is on record saying that we need to uphold values. As the mother of the nation, what advice does Her Honour the Vice-President have for our children on the need to desist from such so that Zambia remains on record as a Christian nation?

Madam Speaker: Thank you very much.

The way the hon. Member for Kasenengwa is laughing, it appears as though he has watched them.

Laughter

The Vice-President: Thank you, Madam Speaker, and good morning to the hon. Member for Itezhi-Tezhi.

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for that question in which he referred to the President’s Address on National Values and Principles, and the fact that they should be upheld. Other than being a nation, we are also a Christian nation. We should be exemplary in the manner we behave in upholding values, which are mainly based on Christian values. His concern is on pornographic materials that have filled the cyberspace. He then asked: What advice can I give to the young people?

Madam Speaker, the advice starts with us. As I said last week, the advice starts from home. How are we bringing up our children? A child is nurtured by us, the parents. Some may have watched the videos, and others may not. Unfortunately, from what we hear, some of the things being talked about involve parents leaving their children in what they think is a secure home, to go after small girls, or is it small boys? I do not know. I think it is sad. It is we, the parents, who must feed the minds and hearts of our children with values. That is where we are. Yes, there is influence and peer pressure on our children, but that means there is a child who has not been properly nurtured and is influenced by others. All I can say is that God loves us. God loves Zambia. Therefore, let us teach our children.

Madam Speaker, the love for money is another issue that leads to such things. Pornography should not be allowed to become a business in our country. Let all of us take responsibility. I should take responsibility for my children and my grandchildren, and others should do the same. Bringing good influence starts with one family, just as one family can also bring negative influence. The responsibility begins with us. It is sad to see what is happening, but what are we doing as parents?

Madam Speaker, it is a painful thing and I did not like the question, I must say.  For those found wanting, that is why we have enacted the Cyber Crimes Act. Some of the Acts fall under many laws. I have lawyers here on my left and they can tell us that some of the perpetrators may end up facing the law.  They are breaching the law by doing what they are doing. When the law takes its course, they should not think otherwise. So, if they are caught, they should face the law.  I do not know why people record what should not be recorded.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Chisopa (Mkushi South): Madam Speaker, thank you so much, and good morning to Her Honour the Vice-President.

Madam Speaker, my question is based on good governance and the rule of law. This House passed the Cyber Security Act and the Cyber Crime Act, and it is on record that the Opposition rejected these laws. Now, the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ) has taken you to court.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

Stop the clock.

Let me guide. Hon. Member, this House passed those laws. In accordance with the Standing Orders, it is a collective responsibility, so you cannot say this one was passed in this manner. Maybe, it is how you are asking your question. However, the laws were passed by this House, hon. Member for Mkushi South. So, please, be guided accordingly. You may proceed.

Mr Kambita: What do you know about the law?

Mr Chisopa: Madam Speaker, I need your protection from the hon. Member of Parliament for Zambezi East.

Mr Kambita: Question!

Mr Chisopa: Madam Speaker, we attempted to bring the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill No. 7 of 2025, which was withdrawn. Now, LAZ has taken you to court.

Madam Speaker, the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) has banned the use of Patriotic Front (PF) T-shirts, when it knows that we are in an alliance. The United Party for National Development (UPND) came into power based on an alliance. We know some of the hon. Members of Parliament who came through an alliance, and they were using their own regalia. In 2006, the UPND and the United Democratic Alliance (UDA) were allowed to use different regalia. Today, the ECZ has banned the use of PF T-shirts, without any law backing the decision.

 

Madam Speaker, even if we know that the people of Zambia have made a decision to kick you out next year, …

Mr Munsanje: Question!

Mr Simumba: Hear, hear! Hammer!

Mr Chisopa: …you do not behave like this.

Her Honour the Vice-President, are you happy with what is obtaining now?

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, thank you, and I would like to thank the hon. Member for Mkushi South.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Member said a number of things, but at the end, the question he asked is: Are you happy? Was he referring to the Government, or me as the Vice-President? As the Vice-President, not as Nalumango, I am happy.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Hon. PF Members: Question!

The Vice-President: Let us listen. It is not even political. This is a legal matter, colleagues.

Madam Speaker, yesterday, when the hon. Member for Chama South was debating, he said that this House sometimes enacts laws against itself. Do hon. Members remember? At least on this one, the hon. Member has caught me on the right foot. We have to remember that there is a law. Laws, normally, will lie dormant. The hon. Member for Mkushi South is seated next to a lawyer (Pointed at Mr Chisanga). Laws are enacted and, sometimes, they lie dormant because no offence is committed. So, do not think this is new. I will take my time, Madam.

Mr Kasandwe: Cite the law.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

Let us listen to what Her Honour the Vice-President is saying. Do not ask which law, because you are the people who enact the laws. The laws should be on your fingertips. If they are not on your fingertips, at least, go and research. You will come across these laws.

The Vice-President: Exactly.

Madam Speaker: May Her Honour the Vice-President continue.

The Vice-President: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for that protection that I need today from Mkushi South.

Madam Speaker, yes, there is a law, the Electoral Process Act No.  35 of 2016.

Mr Chisopa: Question!

Interruptions

The Vice-President:  I will read what Section 29 (3) states, and let us listen very carefully. It states the following:

“a candidate or political party may, during an electoral campaign, publish or distribute campaign materials of such a nature and in such a manner as may be prescribed by the Commission”.

Further, Section 29(4) of the same Act states the following:

“that for the purposes of this section “campaign messages” means an activity, statement or any other form of expression aimed at promoting particular political ideas, policies and strategies for purposes of obtaining votes for a candidate or political party contesting an election.”

So, we are moving slowly. First, you have the right to distribute, and then what do you distribute for the purpose of winning an election.

You may also wish to note, Madam, that material, which is regalia, is defined in Section 2 of the same Act, the Electoral Process Act, as party or candidate manifestos, advertisements, billboards, posters, T-shirts, clothes, which can be Chitenge or other material, depicting colours regarding symbols and other designs of a party or pictorial images of a candidate.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, let me go on.  I can shorten the explanation but, today, allow me to explain in detail. Section 89 (1) (n) of the Electoral Process Act is very instructive and it states or provides the following:

“being a candidate, use a symbol in the course of an election other than the symbol registered with the Chief Electoral Officer …

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: I am just reading what the law states. I was not here in 2016. We passed the law through my members here.

Laughter

Mr Munsanje: And who passed the law?

Interruptions

Madam Speaker:  Order, hon. Members!

We are losing time. Let us listen to the answers.

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, losing time is to my advantage.

Can I continue reading, hon. Colleagues?

Mr Nkandu: Yes.

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, Section 89 (1)(n) states the following:

“being a candidate, use a symbol in the course of an election other than the symbol registered with the Chief Electoral Officer in accordance with this Act and any regulations thereunder or, in the case of any other person, associate any candidate with, any symbol in the course of an election other than the candidates registered symbol.”

Madam, like the hon. Member stated, we have alliances. I do not think there is a law that provides for alliances in an electoral pact.

Interruptions

The Vice-President: Let me just speak off-the-cuff. I can read the Act later. There is no law on alliances; they exist by convention. That is why I stated that, sometimes, laws lie dormant. You might think that a certain law does not exist, but it was enacted here. At the moment, political party alliances are not registered or known, and they have not been provided for under the law. What we have found on the ground has invoked a law that been lying dormant.

Interruptions

Mr Sampa: So, why ban them?

Mr Kasandwe: So, what is the crime?

The Vice-President: There is a law that has been invoked. That is what I am telling hon. Members.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

Let us not debate while seated.

Hon. Member for Bangweulu, please, desist from doing that. That group there should be quiet. The hon. Member for Mporokoso does not debate; he just sits there. Please, guide your people; you are the leader of that group. Guide them to be quiet.

Hon. PF Members: We have no leader here. He sits behind us!

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members for Mporokoso, Mkushi South and –

Mr Sampa stood.

Hon. PF Members: He is our leader.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Matero, guide your team there. You are the leader.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Speaker: The leader of the Backbenchers.

Mr Sampa started walking to the Leader of the Opposition’s seat.

Madam Speaker: You are the leader of the Backbenchers.

You will be named, hon. Member for –

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Sampa sat on the seat for the Leader of the Opposition.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Matero, you risk being named. Can you go back to your seat, please.

Mr Sampa got up to return to his seat.

Madam Speaker: You are not the Leader of the Opposition.

Hon. UPND Members: Shame!

Mr Amutike: Walk of shame!

Mr Sampa resumed his seat.

Madam Speaker: I can see that power is very sweet, especially when you lose it. It can be very sweet, indeed.

May Her Honour the Vice-President continue.

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, I was saying that the law, which was enacted in 2016, has been lying dormant because no difficulty occurred. Now, a difficulty has arisen.  

Madam Speaker, today, political party alliances are called by different names. I do not know whether the Ukwa or Tonse alliances still exist, but there are different political parties in those alliances. A political party alliance is not a registered entity, according to the law. However, members of political party alliances have been campaigning during elections, and that is what has given energy to the law. When people in political party alliances go to campaign, they wear different party regalia, like that of the Patriotic Front (PF) and – which is the other one – the Leadership Movement and Kalaba’s party. They wear different party regalia while campaigning for one candidate in the so-called alliance. A candidate belongs to the PF, for example, but the people who campaign for him wear all sorts of party regalia. When they get caught committing offences, they say that they are not members of the PF.

Hon. Government Members: Yes!

The Vice-President: Therefore, we cannot hold them accountable.

Interruptions

The Vice-President: Hon. Colleagues, this is a fact.

Mr Kampyongo: Question!

The Vice-President: Zambians must understand that that has happened.

Interruptions

The Vice-President: You have given me an opportunity to speak. So, allow me to do so.

Madam Speaker, when members of different political parties commit offences during an election, they disassociate themselves from the candidate they campaigned for because they wore regalia for different parties, but they worked for a particular candidate. That is what the law tried to cure. The law was enacted to ensure that everybody was responsible during campaigns.

Mr Nkandu: Quality!

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, I will say that the law might have looked advantageous for those who were the majority in the House then. We must not do that, hon. Colleagues (pointed at UPND hon. Members), because the law always catches up with you. The law in question was enacted so that people would be responsible during campaigns. If a political party has no candidate in a by-election, its members should not wear party regalia during campaigns.

Mr Muchima: You are right!

The Vice-President: They should wear the candidate’s party regalia. That is what the law says.

Madam Speaker, that law is not only good for us on the right, but also for hon. Colleagues on the left who enacted it (pointed at Opposition hon. Members).

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, let me correct the hon. Member for Mkushi South. He made the statement that the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) has banned the use of different party regalia during elections. No, the ECZ has not banned the use of different party regalia for parties that are not participating in an election. The ECZ has enforced the law.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Those are two different things.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: So, hon. Colleagues, let us think through everything we do. Let us not make laws here because we are the majority in the House. No, let us make laws because they are good for Zambia. I think, the law in question is a good one.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Speaker: I see that three female hon. Members have indicated to ask questions. Maybe, I can give them an opportunity to ask questions. I will start with the hon. Member for Isoka.

Ms Nakaponda (Isoka): Madam Speaker, good morning to Her Honour the Vice-President.

Madam Speaker, in most constituencies, especially in Isoka, drainages are not maintained. Roads in Isoka Town are impassable because of the state of the drainages. I know that we can use the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), which is a game changer, to work on them.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Nakaponda: However, we need a lot of money to work on those drainages. My question to Her Honour the Vice-President is: What is the Government doing regarding the issue of drainages?

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, good morning to the hon. Member for Isoka, and I thank her for that question.

Madam Speaker, her concern is drainages; I hope I got that right. I believe that when drainages are not worked on, we risk having floods. I think that should be the concern at the end of the day. I hope I heard the question right. Her question was whether we can use the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to work on drainages and what the Government is doing about them because it is costly to do that.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister of Local Government and Rural Development is here, and all of us in this House are interested in the CDF. Are we saying that we are not allowed to use the CDF to work on drainages? We are allowed. The CDF is part of decentralisation. So, a community can identify its needs, prioritise them, and then use the CDF. That is the principle use of the CDF. We have said that schools should be built in communities using the CDF. It does not mean that communities cannot work on drainages because schools should be built. Communities should prioritise their needs and use the CDF because it is an open resource for constituencies. So, indeed, that is what the Government is doing.

Madam Speaker, there is another resource that can be used under the Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) and the local government. For instance, the Cash-for-Work Programme can be used to do such kind of work when there is a need. The kind of work to be done under the Cash-for-Work Programme is not determined. So, a community can prioritise the work to be done. I have seen drainages being cleared in Lusaka under that programme. However, I must say that it is disappointing to know that people get rubbish from drainages and put it on the side of the road. Later, it is pushed back into drainages by the rain.

That is wastage, not prudence. Therefore, I am calling on hon. Colleagues, particularly from Lusaka, where I see that happening, to take an interest in that. Money cannot be used in that way. It is like some government we learnt about years back which, in order to create jobs, would dig a trench, and cover it up. Again, the next day, another is one would be dug so that money would be collected.

Laughter

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, that is what we are doing by allowing the workers under the Cash-for-Work programme to clean drainages, then, leave things on the side of the road. When rain falls, they are washed right back in the drainages. Then, you pay people again to clear the drainages. Come on. What is going on?

Zambians, this is your money. When you do that, you spoil your own money. When you say ‘Government’, you are the Government. You must be mindful of how you use your money whether you are given work to clean drainages or, indeed, drainage construction. You can use the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) or the cash-for-work programme funds. That is money given to you to prioritise needs.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ms Mulenga (Kalulushi): Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity, on behalf of the people of Kalulushi, to ask Her Honour the Vice-President a question.

Good morning to Her Honour the Vice-President.

Laughter

Ms Mulenga: Madam Speaker, three months ago, we had a serious pollution incident in my constituency, and Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited and Rongxing Mining Limited were pointed out as the polluters. A month later, the hon. Minister announced that K16.1 million would be given to those who were affected by the pollution. It is three months down the line, and this money has not been given to those who were affected. Last week, to our surprise, the same mining entities gave out mealie meal and money, and one of the conditions they gave was that those people should not cultivate. One can imagine that from last year, those people have not had food because they are farmers. The money they were betting on was the compensation. However, the only compensation that was given were bags of mealie meal, cooking oil and salt.

Madam Speaker, the Disaster Management and Mitigation Unit (DMMU) falls under the Office of the Vice-President. What is Her Honour the Vice-President’s take, as the one in charge of disaster management, on the inconsistencies with the mining entities, because their pay out is long overdue, and the people are becoming extremely anxious as hunger looms in her constituency?

The Vice-President: Forgive me, Madam Speaker. I just want to hear the name of the mine in particular. Are you talking about Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited?

Ms Mulenga: Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited and Rongxing Mining Limited, those two mining entities.

The Vice-President: Good morning to the hon. Member for Kalulushi. I would like to thank her for asking this very important question on the pollution that occurred, I believe, in February, and, particularly, caused by Sino Metals Leach Zambia Limited. I am familiar with that disaster.

Madam Speaker, her concern is what is happening to the people in terms of survival. I think, for us, as the Government, we are calling it compensation, to a point. We have not forgot what has happened. We are working on that and, truly, if mealie meal was given, I cannot tell the House what initiative it was. It could be a stop-gap issue. From the Government side – ­where is the hon. Minister? –­ My hon. Ministers are in the House; the Minister for Copperbelt Province and the Minister of Mines and Minerals Development. That is true – ­ we are seriously working on that. The hon. Member can rest assured that there will be compensation. We had to be clear on the kind of compensation.

Madam Speaker, I can tell you the thinking now is that, hopefully, as they chat, there will also be compensation for the lost crop. We had to be systematic and methodical, as our President. Compensation for the lost crop is coming. We had to be sure of how to do it. There is also compensation for, at least, cultivation. We are sure when they say “No cultivation”, that it is not out of malice because, up to now, we have not been told how deep, how much and how long the pollution will last. So, we will not allow our people to cultivate without being sure that the crop that will grow will not be poisonous. So, our agreement for now is that there will be compensation for the crop and one rainy season; 2025/2026. So, when we stop them, it is not like we are saying “Go and die”. There will be compensation, but not beyond that until we are certain about how much has been damaged.

Madam Speaker, I must say that the hon. Member can help with some of them, as she is part of the Government. There are some who are sitting and cultivating in mining – What do you call them?

Madam Speaker, designated areas where people are not supposed to be. Please help us. They should leave. They may just get compensation for the lost crop, but they have no claim to the land. So, as soon as they get their compensation for the crop, let them move out of that area. Again, the hon. Member can come to us. Let us work together on the issue of resettling them, if they have nowhere to go and are willing. That is also under the Office of the Vice-President. We cannot sleep. They are our people. We are working to see that they get adequate compensation. Again, we cannot also allow encroaching in areas where they are not supposed to be.

Madam Speaker, that is the work that is being done. The hon. Member can assure the people that compensation will come. If there is an initiative from the companies – ­ I am looking at my hon. Minister – ­ of giving mealie meal to those affected, I am sure, the mining entities are just feeling for the people because they know that they lost their maize.

Madam Speaker, that is what we are working on.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Stop the clock. Just to remind the House that this issue was debated. There was a Ministerial Statement presented on the compensation that was being given partially. I believe the hon. Member for Kalulushi was not around.

Hon. Member for Kalulushi, you may need to get in touch with the hon. Minister of Green Economy and Environment just to clear the issues you wanted to raise.

Thank you very much.

We were busy with the by-elections.

Mrs Sabao (Chikankata): Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I thank Her Honour the Vice-President, as she receives greetings of honey and milk from the people of Chikankata.

Madam Speaker, as the people of Chikankata, we are excited about the New Dawn Government because we are benefiting from the national cake and, most importantly, the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). However, we have a challenge with the contractors on the ground in terms of delayed and stalled works. What message does she have for the contractors and the local council officers, who are the supervisors of the contractors?

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Chikankata who has acknowledged that the national cake is not just distributed to one side of the country. He says that the people of Chikankata have also received a piece of that cake. That means that the resources of the country are fairly distributed, as it should be.

Madam Speaker, her concern is on the contractors under the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. To start with, who gives the contracts? I think it starts from the terms of reference and the scope of work that they are given. There should be – What do we call them? Site engineers? There should be engineers from the council who must check on such works. 

Madam Speaker, the hon. Member is basically referring to the poor quality of work that is exhibited. That is experienced in many places and it should not happen.  I do not want to call it a disaster. For every resource we pay the contractor, firstly, the people who are contracting him must ensure that he has the capacity. They must ensure that the contractor adheres to what has been agreed to. So, indeed, the council must be awake and follow-up the works, if it is the one that has awarded the contract. This is because if one does not perform, one breaches the contract.

Madam Speaker, I am sure we have heard of contracts being cancelled. The House may remember that in 2021 and 2022, many contracts were cancelled under the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development because of that kind of behaviour. I am happy I am not involved in any contract. I know that any performance contract or service that one may want to provide should have a time limit or time frame within which it should be performed.  Quality work is also expected.  When people fail to perform, they should not be paid. I think they can be chased, even though I do not know what terms are contained in those contracts.

Madam Speaker, all of us, as hon. Members of Parliament, including yourself, can raise issues if we see that the contractors are failing to perform. We can go to the council. The hon. Member is a number one call, not the Vice-President, who has not been to Chikankata. That becomes difficult. This is a general statement, and I urge the hon. Member to go back to the council. The failure of the councils reflect badly on us as hon. Members of Parliament. So, let us make ourselves number one supervisors. Hon. Members should be supervising the councils. That is why they should go back to the councils. How they removed themselves from the councils is unbelievable. They should go back, but even without being there, people there should know their role as hon. Members of Parliament.  They are the people’s representatives. They should make themselves inspectors. We cannot continue to waste our resources on work that is not durable and not according to specifications.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Ngowani (Mpongwe): Madam Speaker, there is an increase in the number of accidents involving motorcycles in Mpongwe and the country at large. Most people have lost their lives. Are there any plans by the Government to stiffen the law which regulates the use of motorcycles on public roads? This is because most riders do not have licences and their motorcycles are not registered.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for Mpongwe for that concern. I think it is a concern for almost everybody here. We appreciate the use of motorcycles as a new mode of transport. It is working quite well. This is the new mode of transport, particularly, in rural areas like Mpongwe. However, the concern –

Mr Kapyanga: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President: Aha! Because he gives motorcycles!

Laughter

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, the concern is that something should be done. It is important that motorcycles are there. As I have said, everybody is concerned about what should be done. I think something ought to be done. Truly, motorcycles can be a nuisance on the road, even in Lusaka. There is something that could be done. I think we all learn how to ride motorbikes just at home because I do not know where the training school is.  I think there is a need to train them. So, there is a need for training, not only for the riders but also for other road users, because this is a new thing. We need to know how to allow the motorcycles. I think there is a need to look at the highway code. We may have to look at that so that we incorporate this new phenomenon.

Madam Speaker, truly, there are too many accidents everywhere. People ride without helmets. So, the law is there, but it needs enforcement. There is a need to emphasise on proper dressing, which lane should be used, and many other things. I think that is a very important question. The hon. Minister responsible has heard, and there is a need to work on that. However, training is cardinal for our people.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: We still have four seconds left. I thought Her Honour the Vice-President would continue until the time expires.  The hon. Member for Chinsali has an opportunity.

Mr Mukosa (Chinsali): Madam Speaker, in July 2024, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) revealed that they were investigating some hon. Government Ministers for corruption. However, to date, the Government has not announced who those hon. Ministers are, and the country does not know the results of those investigations.

Madam Speaker, this week, the Auditor-General completed the forensic audit on the Zambia Medicines and Medical Supplies Agency (ZAMMSA). Of course, the audit was conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) on behalf of the Auditor-General, and that report has not been shared with the public.

Madam Speaker, for the sake of transparency, why is it that the Government seems to be very economical with transparency when it comes to issues that will attract negative criticism on the Government?

The Vice-President: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Chinsali, for that important question.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Member premises his question on what was revealed in July 2024. I do not know who announced that. Was it me? He said that there were hon. Ministers who were under investigation, yet to date, we do not know them. I hope that is the way he put it.

Madam Speaker, I cannot tell him how far they have gone with their investigations or whoever was involved. I am sure names were not given. So, if names were not given and they find that Nalumango is not guilty after investigations, I would not go to court. However, if they find something on me, then I will go to court.

Madam Speaker, white-collar crimes take a little too long to investigate.  So, as long as something happened, people should take their time.  Umulandu tabubola.  It will catch up with them. However, if it was said, I cannot tell because we do not know the names of those hon. Ministers and if investigations are going on or not.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Member also said that the forensic audit report has not been given to the public. Did he say public?

Mr Mukosa interjected.

The Vice-President: I am asking – I am genuine. I may be wrong. So, do not be surprised, just give me an answer.

What the hon. Member has said – In fact, can I over-answer, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, a question was asked that: Why is the forensic audit report not here? I took time to find out. We do not have a record here of any forensic audit report that has been brought to this House. So, the forensic audit report does not come to Parliament. I am just giving an extra answer because there was that kind of concern. You can check. There are different types of audit reports brought to this House, for example, the special audit report, but not the forensic audit report. That is what I was told when I asked.

Madam Speaker, the question was: Why was the report not given to the public? Is it that we are hiding something? Did he say something like that? Did he say that the Government is hiding something? No. This forensic audit was ordered by the President, therefore, by the Government. How would we, therefore, hide what we ordered? It is not about hiding. It is about knowing the purpose of the forensic audit. The forensic audit is really a basis of investigating into details about the people who may have done something wrong.

Madam Speaker, the forensic audit report, from the little that I have learnt, will look like the Zambia Medicines and Medical Supplies Agency (ZAMMSA) one, which the hon. Member is probably referring to. It was meant to find out what was wrong when donors raised concerns. It was important for the President to ask for the audit to be done so that we could find out the underlying issues that led to the complaints of pilfering, pure theft and mismanagement. So, was it a structural issue? Was it a management issue? Was it just pure fraud? So, those are the things that the audit report was looking at.

Madam Speaker, however, the audit report does not pinpoint that the person who did this did it out of fraud, for example, or whether it was a structural weakness. It addresses too many things and does not point to criminal behaviour. It is a general report. That is why the report is given to investigative wings so they can go through it and find out if somebody is culpable and liable, and that person is the one who will be followed. It is not meant for here. It is meant for the investigative wings. I have declared here on behalf of the President of the Republic of Zambia and hon. Colleagues, that there will be no sacred cows. So, that report is in the right hands, in the hands of the investigative wings. The media also behave like investigators in their own way, but I do not think it was given to anybody. However, I do not want to fault anybody. It is not a public document because people will start apportioning – You understand the fear? People will start saying “yes, Hon. Kafwaya took the company there, was given a contract, when in fact, it was not a registered company.” However, you will find out that there was no register at ZAMMSA; everybody was applying from nowhere.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: We had a bonus of seven minutes, almost eight minutes. So, –

Mr Kalobo: On a point of order, Madam.

Madam Speaker: The hon. Member for Wusakile is rarely in the House. Now that he is raising a point of order, maybe, we can hear it because he only comes – Yesterday, he was here for ten minutes and then, he went away.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Wusakile, what is your point of order.

Mr Kalobo: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order on Her Honour the Vice-President, pursuant to Standing Order No. 71.

Madam Speaker, when Her Honour the Vice-President was responding to the question from the hon. Member for Kalulushi regarding the farmers who suffered setbacks due to the pollution by Rongxing Investments Limited and Sino-Metal Leach Zambia Limited, she indicated that after being paid, people should leave the farming land when she knows that the Mines and Mineral Development Act, now fragmented into two Acts, the Mineral Regulation Commission Act and the Geological and Mineral Development Act, directs clearly on the relocation of farmers and also on how the boundaries where mining activities are taking place should be treated.

Madam Speaker, the House may wish to note that those who are mining found people farming there, and already settled there. Why should Her Honour the Vice-President say that people should leave the sites after being paid instead of them pressurising the mining companies to adhere to the laws that are there?

Madam Speaker, was Her Honour the Vice-President in order to say that people should leave the farming land instead of directing the mining companies to follow the relocation rules and treat the boundaries the way the law directs? I need your serious ruling. Is she in order to direct people to leave the sites?

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Wusakile, I was also here in the House listening to the debate and following with interest. I even guided the hon. Member for Kalulushi, that there was a Ministerial Statement that was rendered on that issue, and how compensation was being paid partially to start with. That was not even a point of order, but some argument that you were bringing out. I did not hear Her Honour the Vice-President say that those people who are in the mining areas should leave. She was advising the hon. Member for Kalulushi that being part of the Government, she should encourage the people who are not authorised to be there to relocate. That is what I heard her say. So, hon. Member for Wusakile, I do not know at what point you joined us, but that is the disadvantage of not being in the House because you do not follow the debate properly. Her Honour the Vice-President was in order. She was not out of order as you brought it out that she was not giving correct information. So, that point of order is not admitted.

 Let us make progress.

_______

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

INSTALLATION OF ROAD FURNITURE IN KASAMA DISTRICT

382. Ms S. Mwamba (Kasama Central) asked the Minister of Local Government and Rural Development:

1. whether the Government has any plans to install the following road furniture in Kasama District:

1. road signs and markings in the Central Business District;
2. street lights; and
3. pedestrian crossing points;

1. if so, when the plans will be implemented; and

1. if there are no such plans, why.

The Minister of Local Government and Rural Development (Mr Sialubalo): Madam Speaker, the Government, through the Kasama Municipal Council, is installing road signs and road markings in the district. So far, 2 km of the road markings have been done out of the targeted 5 km, using the motor vehicle licensing funds that come from the Ministry of Transport and Logistics under the Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA).  The council is in the process of procuring street lights for a total of 3.6 km at an estimated cost of K1.1 million.

Madam Speaker, pedestrian crossing points are being installed as part of the road marking works, with one already done at the police park.

Madam Speaker, plans are being implemented as indicated above.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ms S. Mwamba: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for his response.

Madam Speaker, road furniture ensures road safety and provides clear communication among various road users. In her response to the hon. Member of Parliament for Mpongwe, Her Honour the Vice-President said that there were many accidents involving cyclists and motorists. Kasama has grown, and many people have bought motor vehicles. Roads without proper signage are hazardous and increase the risk of fatal accidents.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister has talked about road markings as well as street lights, but we also need road signage. The Highway Code has many road signs, but if we do not have proper road furniture, how do we expect motorists to adhere to the code? What measures will the ministry take to ensure that Kasama Municipal Council is adequately supported, both technically and financially, to install and maintain road furniture?

Mr Sialubalo: Madam Speaker, Her Honour the Vice-President gave a perfect response to the question on drainages from the hon. Member of Parliament for Isoka. If that is really a critical concern for the people of Kasama District, we have enough resources under the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to handle it. Some resources from the CDF can be channelled towards that issue. So, my clarion call to my dear hon. Colleague is that she is part and parcel of the CDF community, and, therefore, she should take interest in the matter. Resources are available. To make matters easy, there are also some funds from the Road Transport and Safety Agency (RTSA) under licensing. So, resources are available. As a result of decentralisation, the hon. Member needs to take centre stage and allocate enough resources for road signage.

Madam Speaker, road furniture was there initially, but vandalism has taken a toll on Kasama. Today, road furniture is installed, tomorrow it will not be there. What is needed is sensitisation for members of the public in Kasama so that they know that road signage should not be seen as scraps to get and sell. So, while resources are there, sensitisation should also take centre stage in addressing that problem in Kasama.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Zulu (Nyimba): Madam Speaker, when answering the question from the hon. Member of Parliament for Kasama, the hon. Minister said that the money from licensing under the Ministry of Transport and Logistics is helping with installation of road furniture in Kasama. Councils across the country, including in Kasama and Nyimba, were supposed to receive K3 million in December last year, but they did not received that money. The K3 million for 2024 was received last month. Is the hon. Minister in a position to speak to the hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning or the hon. Minister of Transport and Logistics so that they can quicken the disbursement of that money?  The money is available, and that is money that is collected by councils. What is so difficult for the Government to release the money on time so that projects such as installation of road furniture in Kasama, Nyimba and Ndola Central are done? We need to help people in reducing accidents, especially in rural areas where motorcycles are killing people every day.

Mr Sialubalo: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for that supplementary question.

Madam Speaker, a follow-up will be made so that resources can be disbursed to all the districts, if the correct position is that councils have not received the money. Luckily, the hon. Member of Parliament normally visits my office. We need to make a follow-up so that resources are made available to all the districts for road furniture works to be undertaken.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ms S. Mwamba: Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister spoke about finances being readily available. One issue that he has not touched on, which I would like assurance on, is technical support. I really feel that our local authorities need technical support when it comes to road markings. It is not just about drawing white lines; the paint needs to be reflective and the right quality. In most cases, road markings fade after two weeks because local authorities use low-grade paint or paint that has overstayed. Could the hon. Minister, please, assure the people of Kasama Central Constituency that the works that are yet to be done will be of good quality, and that there will be proper technical support when it comes to road markings, not a lay person just drawing road signs anyhow.

 Mr Sialubalo: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the hon. Member of Parliament for Kasama Central for that follow-up question.

Madam Speaker, as a ministry, we think that that work should be done locally. What I mean by that is that installation of road signs does not need extensive skills. Now, if Kasama does not have people with such skills, and the hon. Member has realised that the work done locally does not last, the ministry will take up the work and do it centrally, instead of leaving it to the district. I can assure the hon. Member of Parliament that we are taking steps to get a contractor centrally who can do a good job, since Kasama is finding it difficult to find a good road furniture designer.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

_______

ANNOUNCEMENT BY MADAM SPEAKER

SUBMISSION OF THE REPORT ON THE LANDS AND DEEDS REGISTRY (Amendment) BILL BY THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, LANDS AND NATURAL RESOURCES

Madam Speaker: Let me make an announcement before we go for our break.

Hon. Members, on Wednesday, 16^th July, 2025, the hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources presented the Lands and Deeds Registry (Amendment) Bill, No. 13 of 2025, and the Bill was referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Lands and Natural Resources for examination until further notice.

I wish to inform the House that the Committee on Agriculture, Lands and Natural Resources will submit its report on the Bill to the House on Wednesday, 30^th July, 2025.

I thank you.

_______

Eng. Daka (Chadiza): Madam Speaker, looking at the –

Madam Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1040 hours until 1100 hours.

[MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

Eng. Daka: Mr Speaker, before business was suspended, I was saying that the works that we are discussing are routine. What I mean is, for example, a road sign can be in a certain place one day, but the next day it might not be there because of pilferage or sabotage from the general public. A street light can be in a certain place but, maybe, due to accidents or other factors, the next day, it may not be there. The other factor that was raised by the hon. Member for Kasama Central was that of technical support. She referred to road markings, as an example. The ideal paint needed to work on road markings is what we call thermoplastic paints. The question is: Do local authorities have the capacity to differentiate between ordinary paint and the ideal paint? That is what she was trying to get at. Therefore, my substantive question is to find out whether the ministry can consider performance contracts to cure this problem that we are experiencing countrywide. Why should the installation of a road sign take months when it borders on the safety of road users on that particular road? Is the ministry considering awarding performance contracts, which are being used in most jurisdictions, to cure this problem?

Mr Sialubalo: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Chadiza for that submission, which I concur with. I think that is what should be done. Indeed, road furniture is vandalised, and its period of existence is not permanent. So, it is important to engage our local authorities so that they can consider having annual or periodic contracts for road furniture. That would be a good idea. The hon. Member has made a good submission that we should consider. Many road markings, even here in Lusaka, are faded, including the street names. It is difficult for anyone to know where Addis Ababa Road or Alick Nkhata Road is because there is no signage. They are gone. So, it is important that, as a ministry, we heed his question. It is something that should be considered as soon as possible.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Kandafula (Serenje): Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, my question has somehow been overtaken by what Hon. Eng. Daka has mentioned. However, what message can the hon. Minister send to our local authorities? Everything has a season. Those who undertake work on road markings and other things during the rainy season, even though they know that the markings will not last, do it as a deliberate move to waste money.

Mr Sialubalo: Mr Speaker, we are all leaders in this House. If a wrong thing is done, we should not wait for Parliament. We need to act, as a matter of urgency. The concern that the hon. Member for Serenje has raised about road signs that are worked on during the rainy season, definitely, plagues my thoughts. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to know that that is abuse of resources. One should know when to paint road infrastructure. So, if the local authorities, indeed, award contracts for road signage during the rainy season, it is the wrong period. That is abuse of resources that we should not even accept or tolerate. They should know the right time. I believe, those are basic things that anyone called an engineer should know. So, if they do not have what it takes to know, we have engineers in the local authorities who should know when to work on road signage.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

_______

BILLS

SECOND READING

THE NATIONAL ROAD FUND (Amendment) BILL, 2025

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation (Mr Haimbe, SC.) (on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane)): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, I rise to present the policy statement on the National Road Fund (Amendment) Bill No. 2 of 2025. The importance of the road sector cannot be overemphasised as it is a cardinal conduit for economic growth and stability. To effectively maintain road infrastructure, resource mobilisation is at its core. Therefore, the legislative framework must be adaptive to answer to dynamics in the sector.

Mr Speaker, the National Road Fund Agency (NRFA) was established through the National Road Fund Act No. 13 of 2002, with the mandate of financing major road projects throughout the country. Over the years, the need to develop major networks has resulted in implementing agencies contracting projects, which were not funded ultimately, risking exposure to litigation and execution against the assets of the NRFA.

Mr Speaker, the current legislation is inadequate in dealing with issues relating to execution against the NRFA. Therefore, the introduction of the provision against execution will protect and prevent the NRFA from disruptions in its operations of the construction of key road infrastructure in the country. In view of this, we propose the introduction of the National Road Fund (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

The object of the Bill is to amend the National Road Fund Act, 2002, so as to:

1. provide for immunity of the agency or property of the agency from execution, attachment, or other proceedings arising from a judgment court order; and
2. provide for matters connected with, or incidental to the foregoing.

Mr Speaker, allow me to address some concerns raised by stakeholders who appeared before your Committee, and I shall ventilate the issues in detail once the report of the Committee has been presented.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Ms Sefulo (Mwandi): Mr Speaker, the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters was tasked to scrutinise the National Roads Fund (Amendment) Bill No. 2 of 2025, pursuant to its mandate as set out in Order No. 207 (j) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024.

Mr Speaker, the National Road Fund (Amendment) Bill No. 2 of 2025, seeks to provide for the immunity of the agency or its properties from execution, attachment or other proceedings arising from a judgment or order of a court. It also seeks to provide for matters connected with, or incidental to the foregoing.

Mr Speaker, let me state from the outset that all stakeholders who appeared before the Committee were in support of the proposed Bill. However, they raised a few concerns, which are documented in the report for the information of the House.

Mr Speaker, this is a non-controversial Bill, and the Committee supports it. However, allow me to discuss one issue which is of concern to your Committee. As already stated, the Bill seeks to provide immunity for the agency or its property from execution, attachment, or other court-related proceedings. The Committee is concerned that this may have a negative effect. The Committee shares the concern of stakeholders that suppliers, contractors and financiers may view the immunity clause in the Bill as a threat to the security of their investment. Furthermore, banks and financiers may reconsider lending terms to projects involving the National Road Fund Agency (NRFA), possibly, by raising interest rates to cover the potential payment risks. This could lead to higher costs of contracting or reluctance to engage with the agency.

Mr Speaker, the Committee is of the view that there is need to establish clear payment timelines to mitigate creditor concerns and, therefore, recommends that the amendment be accompanied by regulations requiring the NRFA Director to settle judgments within a specific timeframe.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion and on behalf of the Committee members, I wish to express our deepest gratitude to you and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly of Zambia, for the guidance and support rendered to the Committee throughout its deliberations. The Committee is further, indebted to all the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Kafwaya (Lunte): Mr Speaker, thank you for according me the opportunity to comment on the amendment. I would like to appreciate the hon. Minister for bringing the amendment on the Floor of the House. I also appreciate the chairperson of the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters.

Mr Speaker, the object of this Bill is to ensure that there is immunity on the property of the National Road Fund Agency (NRFA). For example, in case somebody trades with the NRFA and NRFA fails to pay and the matter is taken to court, the court judgment will not be executed on the property of the NRFA. The Committee and several other people are saying that this is a good measure meant to protect the operations of the NRFA.

Mr Speaker, when one is protected by non-performance, one should just know that he or she will be scrutinised by stakeholders, and the benefit will reduce. Let me be clear. The Committee is saying that stakeholders submitted that suppliers, contractors and financiers might view the immunity clause in the Bill as diminishing their security. Furthermore, banks and financiers might reconsider lending terms to projects involving the NRFA and possibly, raise interest rates to cover potential payment risks. That is where it gets to. When an entity has immunity for poor performance, financiers will say, “For me to lend you money, the loan has to be more expensive because you are a risk”. So, one creates a risk perception for himself or herself.  As a matter of fact, those people who conduct risk assessments will agree that that particular entity is a risk. What then will follow? Banks will say that they cannot fund the projects or that they can fund them expensively.  When that happens, the cost of production is raised. In what country? It is in Zambia, where the promise is to reduce the cost of conducting business. That is negating the promise, the trade environment, and causing chaos in business.

Mr Speaker, higher costs of production will only mean failure to fund. Remember, we are talking about a budget, which is substantially funded by debt. So, when the cost of living is high, it means acquiring more debt to fund projects. Therefore, projects will not be funded, and we are going to have a situation where the Government, through the NRFA, will start undertakings that will go nowhere.

Mr Speaker, I also have to link that to the fact that NRFA has continued to give away its responsibility of collecting toll gate fees.   By deploying its assets, NRFA will not only be plugging in possible funding from financiers but also, its own capability to generate funds.  That is a problem.  While the NRFA will feel it is safe because no person will walk away with its assets, and no court judgement will be executed, the business community will say, “You will get no money from no one. After all, you have given away even your toll gates”.

While the NRFA will walk away feeling that it is safe, no person will walk away with its assets, and no judgement will be executed. The business community will be looking with another eye saying “you will get no money from anyone. After all, you have even given away your own tollgates.”

Mr Speaker, high credit risk has implications. As I have already said, one of the implications is expensive debt financing and also higher scrutiny from stakeholders. What do you think all the stakeholders of the NRFA will do when they look at their financial reports? They will scrutinise them much more stringently and the ripple effect of that higher scrutiny will be that the NRFA will be at a disadvantage. This is why the Government should not be single-dimensional when looking at these matters, but it should look broadly and consider the broader effects of the decision that it makes. However, it has to do that in the context of the broader business environment.

Mr Speaker, it is good for management to feel safe, but will they be able to raise money? They may just not be able to raise the money, and it is going to be problematic for asset creation, service delivery and everything that is connected with the services and products that have to be rendered by the NRFA. From that perspective, even though I will join all stakeholders, including the chairperson, –

Mr Speaker, I will still say that it is important for the Government to consider its strategy and it should look at its plans and see how this clause is going to affect its strategic planning in terms of road development. The hon. Minister said that the importance of road development cannot be overemphasised, and I agree with him. Will we be able to develop it? Time will tell.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mundubile (Mporokoso): Mr Speaker, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity to debate the business on the Floor of the House.

Mr Speaker, I will start by agreeing with the previous speaker, Hon. Kafwaya, who talked about the impact, this particular amendment will have on the cost of projects.

Mr Speaker, as highlighted in the report, many stakeholders raised concerns regarding the cost. Ideally, what happens is that whenever financial institutions feel that they are lending money to contractors who may not be able to recover or be able to get timely payments, they make the cost of lending expensive. So, the first thing to look at is the impact; the cost to the Government.

Mr Speaker, when you look at the resolve date of the National Road Fund Agency (NRFA), you will see that it was set up to mobilise resources, which resources will be employed in the road sector for road development as it were. However, looking at the situation as it stands today, whilst this was a very good idea, the Government is giving away toll gates. On one hand, it gives away toll gates, meaning that it is reducing its domestic resource mobilisation in the road sector. On the other hand, it is the same Government that is now introducing Bills on the Floor of the House to protect the institution, but the wider impact is really on the sector because what will happen is that with increased costs of road development, less kilometres of roads will be developed.

Mr Speaker, I think there was need for a deeper reflection on how the NRFA is operating because there are also engineers there. Every year, there is an annual work plan, which is aligned to the Budget. So, then, one wonders, why should it come to a point where people have to sue and even threaten to foreclose on the agency? It means that there is some misalignment in the way that the NRFA, the Road Development Agency (RDA) and, indeed, local Government are operating.

Mr Speaker, we need to secure the independence of the NRFA. Let those professionals who are employed there be able to work independently. What do I mean by working independently? What I mean is that, for instance, there was recourse to the annual work plan. They understand which roads are critical and which roads the Government needs to work on. At the same time, they have a responsibility to ensure that local contractors and local businesses are also protected because at the end of the day, we do not want to end up in a situation as it was in a neighbouring country, where that particular country did not protect the local contractors. Huge contracts were channelled out and one day, the foreign contractors walked out. Since there was no capacity within the local contractors, they began to struggle to maintain those particular contracts. So, the alignment we are talking about is for the NRFA to be sensitive. Just like one of the recommendations from the chairperson, there must be regulations that will ensure that timely payments are made. However, the starting point is to ensure maximum resource mobilisation. The NRFA and the RDA should stop giving away tollgates. The recent giving away of tollgates between Ndola and Lusaka was very unfortunate.

Mr Speaker, it is a known fact that the busiest road in Zambia is the Ndola/Lusaka Road, and that is where the NRFA should have ensured that it maximises toll collections. However, what happened was that those particular tollgates were given away. So, firstly, let us stop giving away toll gates so that the NRFA can collect maximum toll fees. Secondly, let us align the annual plan to the Budget so that contractors get timely payments. The benefit to the Government is that there will be a low cost of production. The Government will not need to pay expensively for these contracts because finance institutions will want to protect or guard against the risks of default and, thereby, lend expensive money as it were. So, the idea of the lists that come from the RDA and the local Government should end because those lists have no recourse to what the priorities really are. The engineers at the NRFA should be able to see where the priority lies. However, if the interference is from responsible ministries without recourse to the objectives that are supposed to be realised, what happens is that those that are supposed to get paid are not paid because for some reason, they are not on those special lists and in the end, there are delays in when they get payment. Now, because they are a business, they will look for legal redress and find ways to try and get their payments.

Mr Speaker, now, we are here today to insulate the NRFA. I do not think that is really the way to proceed because if the works are in the annual work plan and there is proper alignment and the engineers at the NRFA are left to operate independently, there will be smooth execution of works as it were. So, my contribution really is that yes, the Government may feel very strongly about insulating this particular institution, but it should also think about the impacts that this would definitely have on the cost of projects going forward.

Mr Speaker, with those few words, I thank you.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation (Mr Haimbe, SC) (on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane)): Thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, let me begin by thanking the chairperson of your Committee for the report that has been rendered. Indeed, the Government has taken note of the concern regarding payment methodologies and payment on time. As part of the administrative processes, the Government will ensure that creditors receive payment in accordance with the manner in which they provided services. So, certainly, whilst the points that the Committee raised are very important, we shall put in place mechanisms as it were to address the concerns. Nonetheless, we thank the chairperson.

Mr Speaker, let me also thank the hon. Member for Lunte and the hon. Member for Mporokoso for their insights into the subject of our current debate.

Again, I would like to use this opportunity to allay some of the concerns that have been put forward, or, perhaps, give them a proper context, in terms of the impact and import of this particular proposed amendment.

Mr Speaker, first and foremost, it is important that we use the correct terms. It has been repeatedly stated by both the hon. Members for Mporokoso and Lunte that the National Road Fund Agency (NRFA) has given away tollgates. Unfortunately, that is a simplistic approach. Stating that tollgates have been given away does not assist the people of Zambia, at all, in understanding the true context in which tollgates have been assigned to specific projects as a mode of ensuring that, in fact, the NRFA is able to undertake one of its core mandates. What do I mean by that? The tollgates that have been assigned to particular projects, and I am using simple language for all of us to understand, are in relation to Public-Private Partnership (PPP) arrangements. What do the PPP arrangements entail? They entail that a concession is given to a contractor for a specific period to build and maintain roads for a certain period, twenty-five years, for example.

So, the Government has not given away tollgates. It has merely provided a means through which the contractor doing that important work on behalf of the people of Zambia can be paid. The tollgates are specific to particular projects and not holistic, as suggested by some hon. Members. So, the tollgates have not been given away, and they are not a loss of income. In fact, they are specific to a project and through the undertaking of that project, the people of Zambia are able to receive quality services in form of road construction and maintenance by the contractor. So, let us be very clear when we speak to the people of Zambia in this regard.

Mr Speaker, in the same breath, there has been a suggestion that the NRFA is selective in the manner in which it makes payments. I think that it is very important, again, to give context. The hon. Member for Mporokoso hinted at the fact that there has been abuse of the NRFA in the process of giving out contracts. Perhaps, I should very quickly point out that one of the key challenges is the historical situation that we faced when we came in as a new Administration. What is the historical situation I am referring to? Immediately prior to this Administration, there was a habit of giving contracts outside the scope of what the NRFA could manage within the funds that were availed to it. So, that led to a situation where, one, contracts were overstated, two, contracts were awarded without work being undertaken and, three, punitive provisions were placed in contracts, resulting in the inflation of the amount payable to alleged or purported contractors under those contracts.

Mr Speaker, the mechanism being put in place is in order to protect the NRFA in the context of the historical aspect of the numerous spurious claims that were made against the NRFA, like garnish orders, for example. What are garnish orders? If there are any monies in the account of the NRFA, as we speak, those monies are subject to enforcement if a court order is issued. Now, what this legislation is trying to do is to prevent that sort of situation; garnish orders and any property of the NRFA being attached to claims. If we prevent attachment of properties and monies aimed for development purposes to claims, especially spurious claims, we will protect not only the people of Zambia, but the NRFA. So, those people who supplied or purported to have supplied goods and services to the NRFA through fake contracts, for example, or inflated contracts and collected money from the NRFA, will not be able to do so anymore.

Mr Speaker, we will build integrity and rigour in how the institution can exercise its mandate. That is the simple purpose of this particular amendment; to protect the institution from spurious claims, many of which are historical and came from a situation when people took advantage of the institution as a money-making venture. This amendment is being put in place to ensure that the institution functions as it was meant to in the first place.

Mr Speaker, to use the language of the hon. Member for Lunte, the system being put in place will, first of all, be self-regulatory. Any institution worth its salt is well aware that if it creates a   reputation of being unable to pay when it is due to pay, then, naturally businesses will shun it. That is what I mean when I say that this particular provision will create a self-regulatory system. The NRFA has to be prudent, knowing that nobody will do business with it in the event that it is unable to meet its obligations. That, if you look at it more holistically or broadly, as suggested by the hon. Member for Lunte, is one of the key advantages of putting in place the particular provision of immunity. It is mandatory or by force for people to do business with the NRFA. Should the agency not act prudently going forward, it will not be able to garner any sort of financing, or those doing business with it will not be able to garner any sort of financing. It follows, therefore, that the argument that this provision will increase the cost of doing business falls away because the system will be self-regulatory. There is no need to be doomsayers, in this regard. Essentially, what this provision is going to do is to address the question of the risk of doing business on the part of the NRFA. Therefore, the NRFA has to be more prudent in the manner in which it engages in any financial obligation, knowing very well that failure to do so will have consequences.

Mr Speaker, all in all, while I thank the hon. Members for their submissions, I also want to underscore that this provision cannot be considered negative in any way and, therefore, I ask that all hon. Members support the proposed amendment.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 24^th July, 2025.

THE BUILDING SOCIETIES (Amendment) BILL, 2025

Mr Haimbe, SC.: Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, I have the pleasure to present the policy statement on the Building Societies (Amendment) Bill, 2025. Let me begin by thanking the Committee for the work that it has undertaken in reviewing the Bill.

Mr Speaker, allow me to reiterate that the object of the Bill is to amend the Building Societies Act so as to revise the date on which the financial year of a building society shall end. The House may wish to note that the Building Societies Act was enacted in 1968. There have been a few amendments since 1968, the last being in 2005. However, that has not been in tandem with the legislative reforms that have been undertaken since then, particularly the enactment of the Public Finance Management Act of 2018, the National Planning and Budgeting Act of 2020, as well as the Public Debt Management Act of 2022.

So, the aim of this amendment, which is before the House for consideration, is to align the Zambia National Building Society (ZNBS) financial calendar to the National Budget cycle. It is worth noting that the current legislation is inadequate in enabling the society to effectively address financial processes due to the different financial year ends between the society and the Government.

Mr Speaker, we have taken note of the concerns raised by stakeholders, and we shall address them after the report has been submitted.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Ms Sefulo (Mwandi): Mr Speaker, the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters was tasked to scrutinise the Building Society (Amendment) Bill, No. 3 of 2025, pursuant to its mandate set out in Order 207(j) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024. The Building Society (Amendment) Bill No.3 of 2025 seeks to amend the Building Societies Act, Chapter 412 of the Laws of Zambia, so as to revise the date on which the financial year of the Building Society shall end.

Mr Speaker, allow me to state from the outset that all the stakeholders who appeared before the Committee were in support of the Bill. However, they raised a few concerns, which have been documented in the report. The Committee also supports the Bill. In doing so, allow me to discuss an issue that caught the Committee’s attention. The Committee appreciates that ending the financial year on 31^st December will provide clarity and ensure global alignment and regulatory ease. However, the Committee agrees with the stakeholders on the fact that there may be a downside to this change during the transition. As stakeholders rightly observed, that could, in some cases, strain resources during a busy period and misalign with business cycles. The Committee, therefore, recommends that the Government puts in place measures that will mitigate potential business disruptions during the transition period.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, and on behalf of the Committee members, I wish to express our deepest gratitude to you and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly of Zambia for the guidance and support rendered to the Committee throughout its deliberations. The Committee is further indebted to all the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Haimbe, SC.: Mr Speaker, it only remains for me to thank your Committee for the diligent work done. I have taken note of the concerns that have been raised. Perhaps it may be of comfort to your Committee and, indeed, to the public that the concerns relate to administrative and operational matters that can be dealt with through proper management of the processes at the year-end, in terms of production of the necessary documents.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Tuesday, 22^nd July, 2025.

THE BORDER MANAGEMENT AND TRADE FACILITATION BILL, 2025

Mr Haimbe, SC. (on behalf of the Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry (Mr Chipoka Mulenga)): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Why are you acting in two ministerial positions?

Mr Haimbe, SC.: Capacity, Mr Speaker.

Laughter

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Haimbe, SC.: Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to present the statement on the Border Management and Trade Facilitation Bill of 2025.

Mr Speaker, as you may be aware, the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry is responsible for promoting trade, investment and business development in the country. The Border Management and Trade Facilitation Act of 2018 was enacted to ensure efficient movement and clearance of goods so as to promote the development of a globally competitive economy. However, the law is not adequate to conform to international standards as it faces a number of challenges that have had a negative impact on border management, particularly on the time it takes to clear goods at the border, inadequate simplification, standardisation and harmonisation of procedures among border agencies, and the lack of a single payment platform for border agencies. The Border Management and Trade Facilitation Act of 2018 requires to be repealed and replaced to address these identified gaps in the law. The House may wish to note that repealing and replacing the Act to address the identified gaps, thereby, making it conform to international standards, will be of benefit to our statute books. It is necessary to repeal and replace the said Act because of the number of challenges that I have already alluded to.

Mr Speaker, the objects of the Bill are to:

1. provide for co-ordinated border management and control for the efficient movement and clearance of goods;
2. give effect to the provisions of agreements relating to one-stop border posts;
3. provide for simplified trading arrangements with adjoining States relating to the movement and clearance of goods;
4. establish control zones and provide for powers of officers in control zones;
5. provide for the development, management and maintenance of border infrastructure;
6. authorise the application of the laws of the Republic and the laws of an adjoining State at a one-stop border post;
7.  repeal and replace the Border Management and Facilitation Act of 2018; and
8. and provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

Mr Speaker, a proper border management system will streamline the processes, enhance inter-agency collaboration, promote trade efficiency, improve border security and reduce the cost of doing business. It also aims to align border management practices with international standards and regional protocols, particularly under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the repeal and replacement of the Border Management and Facilitation Act of 2018 will establish a modern, transparent and co-ordinated border management framework, and its enactment is essential for improving service delivery at borders, promoting legitimate trade, strengthening border security, as aforementioned, and ensuring Zambia’s compliance with regional and international trade agreements.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Ms Sefulo: Mr Speaker, the Committee on National Economy, Trade and Labour Matters was tasked to scrutinise the Border Management and Trade Facilitation Bill No. 5 of 2025, pursuant to its mandate as set out in Order No. 207 (j) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024.

Mr Speaker, the Border Management and Trade Facilitation Bill No. 5 of 2025 seeks to, among other things, provide for co-ordinated border management and control for the efficient movement and clearance of goods, and give effect to the provisions of agreements related to the one-stop border posts. The Bill also seeks to establish control zones and provide for the powers of officers in control zones, and repeal and replace the Border Management and Trade Facilitation Bill No. 12 of 2018.

Mr Speaker, let me state from the onset that all the stakeholders who appeared before the Committee were in support of the Bill. However, they raised concerns, which are documented in the report.

Mr Speaker, the Committee also supports the Bill and, in doing so, it made some observations and recommendations. Let me now highlight some of the Committee's observations and recommendations on the Bill.

 Mr Speaker, the Committee expresses concern that while the Bill outlines the membership of the Steering Committee, and the National Trade Facilitation Committee, it does not provide clarity whether an individual serving on the Steering Committee may also be appointed to serve on the National Trade Facilitation Committee. The Committee is also concerned that lack of clarity could lead to cross-membership, which has the potential to prevent governance and accountability challenges.

Mr Speaker, given the distinct roles of the two Committees, the Committee, therefore, recommends that the Bill explicitly provide for the membership eligibility to the two Committees to address the challenges of cross-membership.

Mr Speaker, the Committee also observes that the Bill in Clause 16(1), provides for six appropriate authorities to operate at the port of entry. However, the Committee contends that the clause is restrictive about authorities to operate at a border post. In this regard, the Committee recommends that the Bill should empower the hon. Minister responsible for Commerce, Trade and Industry, to add to the list as and when need arises.

Mr Speaker, the Committee observes that Clause 16(2) provides for an association from the private sector to operate at the point of entry. The Bill, however, does not clearly outline the criteria under which such an association will be permitted to operate at a point of entry. In view of this, the Committee recommends that, to avoid operational challenges, the Bill must clearly spell out the role an association will play at the point of entry.

Mr Speaker, with regard to joint controls provided under Clause 24, the Committee observes that the clause permits a Zambian border official to rely on inspections conducted by personnel from an adjoining State to a border agreement.

Mr Speaker, the Committee, however, recommends that in order to ensure due diligence, Zambian officials must be obliged to conduct their independent inspections as a means of guarding against potential smuggling and illicit trade. The Committee further recommends that for the purposes of preventing unnecessary delays, joint controls can be standing operating procedures.

Mr Speaker, the Committee also observes that Clause 50 of the Bill provides for immunity to a member of the Steering Committee on Trade and Facilitation or an appropriate authority in respect to an act or thing done, omitted, or to be done in good faith in the exercise of their performance of the powers, functions or duties. While the Committee notes that this provision encourages the efficient execution of duties without fear or personal liability, it must be carefully balanced to avoid abuse. The Committee recommends that this provision should be complemented with robust accountability mechanisms, including internal disciplinary processes and access to judicial reviews, to ensure that protection is not extended to acts of negligence.

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

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Mr Speaker, the people of Chilubi would like to make a few observations on the proposed Bill.

Mr Speaker, let me start by saying that Clause 5 of the Bill, places the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) as the Lead Agency in the proposed Bill. Further, Clause 6 of the Bill states the functions that are supposed to be performed by the ZRA. However, if we compare Clause 6 of the Bill with the Zambia Revenue Authority Act, Cap. No. 321, which was last amended in 2024, we note that some of the functions that have been given to the Lead Agency may be overlapping. So, there will be a need for the Zambia Revenue Authority Act to also be attended to as the Lead Agency.

Mr Speaker, the functions of the Steering Committee on Trade Facilitation, under Clause 7 of the Bill, are not clear. As you may know, Clause 7, is about the Steering Committee, not the National Steering Committee. If you read further, there are no clear functions of the Steering Committee in this particular Bill.

Mr Speaker, the functions of the National Trade Facilitation Committee under Clause 8 are clear. However, the Third Schedule of the Bill has many State actors as opposed to non-State actors. I noticed that currently, the private sector, in terms of commerce is larger than the public sector. Largely, the public sector plays a role in the regulation and control of the commercial space. For instance, the Third Schedule of the Bill lists thirty-three State actors and only twelve non-State actors.  I think that if that was attended to, it could have been a bit more balanced because some of the State actors that are so critical, possibly would have been infused in. 

Mr Speaker, Clause 11 of the proposed Bill talks about the Border Management Committee. It is more like a nucleus of the National Steering Committee and the other committees, which seem to be on top. It is also supposed to monitor the implementation of the policy as it has been directed by the higher committees. I think that needs to be attended to.  However, the main matter that the people of Chilubi want to bring to this House is in Clause 12.

One of the roles it is supposed to play is to monitor the implementation of policy as directed by the higher Committee, and that has to be attended to.

Mr Speaker, the main matter that I, on behalf of the people of Chilubi, want to bring out in this House concerns Clause 12, which talks about trade agreements. Trade agreements border on Articles 60, 62 and 63 of our Constitution. Further, they also border on the ratification of the International Agreement Act No. 34 of 2016. I am bringing this matter into the debate because the President is positioned as the main contact for trade agreements and he further delegates to the hon. Minister, but the role of Parliament is not mentioned anywhere.

Mr Speaker, when you look at what I have referred to and the Constitution, you will find that there is something amiss. It means that this particular trade agreement cycle is not complete. It would have been better if after positioning the President as the main contact for trade agreements, who further delegates to the hon. Minister, the role of Parliament is mentioned because for the trade agreement cycle to be complete, Parliament has to approve the agreement. However, it is just the President and the hon. Minister who have been mentioned.

This, Mr Speaker, does not obey the spirit in Article 1 of the Constitution. As we know, any law that we make must be in tune with the supreme law of the land. If, for instance, the ramification of International Agreement No. 34 of 2016 is recognising the role of Parliament, it means that all international agreements, be it trade, diplomatic or economic diplomacy, are supposed to pass through Parliament. According to Clause 12, there will be finality when the President enters into a trade agreement and possibly further delegates to the hon. Minister. Maybe, they would have created another clause, let us say Clause 4, that qualifies that for the trade cycle to be complete, Parliament has to come in.

Mr Speaker, I just wanted to make those observations on behalf of the people of Chilubi. Generally, on this particular Bill, we need to realise that we are now in a liberalised economy. We are no longer in a commandist economy; therefore, control measures have to be checked. When talking about maize marketing and many other factors, we have been emphasising the word ‘smuggling’. In other countries, smuggling is not so much emphasised because if they are in a liberal space, it means that safe measures have to be put in place. Laws, like this one, are supposed to create a landing platform for traders, especially Zambian traders who want to cross borders, so that they are not caught within the whelms of smuggling. For instance, last year, we saw some people visiting homes in Ndola. Then, after finding some mealie meal in those homes, they would say that the owners of those homes were about to smuggle. I know that the word ‘smuggling’ is not included in the definitions, but we need to start killing the smuggling mindset because we need to realise that all the laws we are making are supposed to resonate with a liberalised economy.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Chinkuli (Kanyama): Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity given to me on behalf of the people of Kanyama to add a word or two to the debate on the Floor. However, in the interest of time, allow me to comment on two issues that were raised in the report.

Mr Speaker, streamlining and simplifying procedures involved in international trade is very important and must be supported. However, there is a need for the Government to maintain effective customs controls to safeguard tariff revenues, which is the end goal of having institutions.

Mr Speaker, coming up with a lead agency will enable effective trade facilitation. However, the House will realise that there are certain technical issues that need to be attended to by a qualified person. We have borders that are designated to allow the importation of goods while others are restricted. So, in the event that there are no qualified officers from the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA), – It is important that as the lead agency appoints people, it defines what they need to do because if you leave it to each and every individual, you will realise that the ZRA might not protect the country. There are a number of issues that go with importation. The ZRA officials are trained and know how to search for contrabands. It is through contrabands that drugs are brought into the country. So, if we just leave that task to somebody who is not trained, we will not achieve what needs to be achieved despite having officials from the agency at the borders.

Mr Speaker, I also want to talk about Clause 24 of the Bill, which talks about allowing a republican agency to conduct inspections with adjoining agencies or relying on the inspection that has been conducted by the adjoining agency. For me, that does not sit well because we are living in a world where crookedness is at play. How do we trust someone at the expense of the revenue that we need to collect? So, I would like the hon. Minister to comment on that when he comes to respond.

Mr Speaker, the other issue I want to talk about concerns Clause 50, which talks about immunity versus good faith. How do we measure immunity and good faith when someone is not entitled to perform a particular function even if funds have been secured? I just want that issue of immunity to be addressed. Otherwise, I support the Motion, and we should make sure that our revenue is collected efficiently as we try to facilitate trade in the region.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Haimbe, SC.: Mr Speaker, let me begin by thanking your Committee, as I mentioned earlier, for the diligent work that was undertaken. Let me also thank the hon. Member for Chilubi and the hon. Member for Kanyama for their valid contributions to this debate.

Mr Speaker, the concerns of the Committee, as I captured them, are that Clause 16 is restrictive. Th Committee was also of the view that there is a need to provide clarity on the operating procedures at points of entry and on the manner of conduct of independent inspections by Zambian officials and the apparent duplication in roles or oversight of cross membership on the part of members of the Steering Committee on the one part, and the Trade Facilitation Committee on the other.

Mr Speaker, the concerns have been noted. They are matters relating to the drafting of the particular provisions and, I am sure, they can be addressed as this particular Bill goes through the process of enactment.

Nonetheless, we have taken note of those particular provisions and the concerns raised.

Mr Speaker, similarly, the hon. Member for Chilubi raised a number of concerns that are, more or less, on drafting. On Clause 6 relating to the Zambia Revenue Authority (ZRA) as the lead agency and the possible overlap between the provisions of Clause 6 and the provisions of the Zambia Revenue Authority Act, I want to mention for the benefit of the hon. Member for Chilubi that in terms of statutory enactment, there are clear provisions that relate to the hierarchy of laws. For instance, the Constitution is superior. So, if there is a provision in any of the laws or statute books that appears to contradict the Constitution, the Constitution will always prevail. Nonetheless, I would like to thank him for bringing that up. Similarly, where there is potential contradiction between the provisions of Acts of Parliament, there is a way in which that is dealt with. So, certainly, by bringing those matters up at this stage, the drafters will be able to attend to them. Once again, I would like to thank the hon. Member for Chilubi for bringing that up.

Mr Speaker, perhaps, what I should mention in response to the concern raised by the hon. Member for Chilubi that Parliamentary oversight will have been overtaken on account of the manner in which Clause 12 of the Bill has been drafted is that the nature of drafting of legislation is such that if a particular provision is silent on the procedural steps to be undertaken, a substantive piece of law that deals with that will kick in. So, with regard to treaties and agreements, there is already a provision of the law that requires parliamentary oversight before a treaty comes into effect. The President cannot have the last say because the provisions of the law are already there. So, please, I hope that is re-assuring enough.

Mr Speaker, importantly, on some of the aspects raised by both the hon. Member for Chilubi and the hon. Member for Kanyama with regard to the management of border facilities, I must hasten to mention that the Bill provides for the Zambia Electronic Single Window system aimed at facilitating more efficient operations at the borders, including dealing with matters of theft and mismanagement that have been spoken to. In fact, the single window is aimed at ensuring that the users ultimately have a better experience at the border through that process where every agency is collapsed into one, and one process for payments. There will be more efficiency, transparency and larger oversight, in that regard. I hope that re-assures members of the public and the hon. Members for Kanyama and Chilubi, respectively.

Mr Speaker, with regard to the final provision referred to by the hon. Member for Kanyama, we have taken note of the issues on Clause 24. Again, those are drafting issues, but the substantive issue on Clause 50 is in relation to immunity for officers and the good faith provision that has been put there. Unfortunately, legislation is such that you cannot enact or legislate for every possible eventuality. So, this will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, on fact, or whether or not the good faith provision kicks in to protect an officer and give them immunity or whether they would have acted in bad faith.

Mr Speaker, with those remarks, I thank you and the hon. Members.

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

Committed to a committee of the whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 24^th July, 2025.

_______

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

EVICTION OF RESIDENTS FROM TRADITIONAL LAND IN MULOBEZI BY A FOREIGN INVESTOR

(Consideration resumed)

324. Mr Mabenga (Mulobezi) asked the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources:

1. whether the Government is aware that about 10,000 people are currently being evicted from a 400,000 ha piece of traditional land in Mulobezi Ward in Mulobezi Parliamentary Constituency by a foreign investor trading in timber;
2. whether the consent of the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) was obtained before the title deed was issued to the investor; 
3. if not, whether the Government will cancel the title deed;
4. whether the Government will compensate the people once they are evicted;
5. whether there is land available to resettle the people who may be evicted from the said land; and 
6. what will happen to the infrastructure in the area, such as Government schools, hospitals, police posts, railway lines, markets and churches.

The Minister of Lands and Natural Resources (Mrs Masebo): Mr Speaker, the Government was made aware of issues relating to possible eviction of people in Mulobezi Ward, Mulobezi Constituency.

Mr Speaker, according to the Zambia Statistics Agency’s (ZamStats’)2022 Census of Population and Housing Report, Mulobezi Ward has a population of 8,409, contrary to the 10,000 people highlighted. In addition, our records also indicate that the size of the affected land is not 400,000 ha, but 4,072.7422 ha. In short, it is 4.1 ha.

Mr Speaker, going by the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources’ Survey Record No. 37 of 1931, the main property, Farm No. 946, was numbered and surveyed in 1931. At that time, it became crown land converted under His Majesty the King of England. The subdivision Farm No. 946/A, which is now in issue, was created from the same property that I have just indicated.

Mr Speaker, according to the Lands Register, on 28^th August, 1918, there was an agreement between Paramount Chief Yeta III and the British South African Company. The agreement was registered on 16^th September, 1918. In addition, several other agreements were registered in 1926 and 1929 between His Majesty, Paramount Chief Yeta III and Zambezi Sawmills Limited. In 1942, subdivision A of Farm No. 946, measuring 4,072.7422 ha was created. However, in 1999, the same subdivision A of Farm No. 946 was allocated to Zambezi Sawmills Limited, which was a parastatal company, and a certificate of title was issued.

According to our records, Zambezi-Sawmills Limited is the current owner of the land, and no change of ownership has been registered. However, we are not in a position to confirm, at this point, if there was any further engagement with the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) before the certificate of title was issued in 1999. My ministry has already commenced engagements with relevant stakeholders, including the receiver of the company, to establish how the certificate of title was issued. I, therefore, seek more time to conclude these engagements.

Mr Speaker, as indicated above, we are yet to establish how the certificate of title was issued.

Mr Speaker, the ministry is currently engaging all relevant stakeholders to establish how many people will be affected on the said property, and to get more information, even from the royal establishment. Based on the outcomes of the findings, it is at that stage that the ministry will take action.

Mr Speaker, given the outcome in the response to part (d) of the question, the ministry will, again, involve all the relevant ministries on the infrastructure in the area.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Eng. Mabenga: Mr Speaker, after giving the ministry one month to research, does it still need more time? I want to know how much time is required for the ministry to conclude this issue because people are living in fear.

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: I think, I should give guidance on this one. The hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources will be requested to come with the responses on 31^st July, 2025.

Mr Lumayi (Chavuma): Mr Speaker, arising from your guidance, I wish to withdraw my question.

Eng. Mabenga: Mr Speaker, thank you for that guidance.

Mr Speaker, my question is: Why should we allow one person to displace 8,000 people? Is this the normal way of treating Zambians? The person is just an investor who did not even plant a tree in the area. That investor just found the trees, and started cutting them down. Now, that investor is evicting the people. Why should we allow the issuance of a title deed for that land?

Mrs Masebo: Mr Speaker, I would like to state that we have several such issues in this country. As the House may have noted, this matter dates back to 1918. If one looks at the information that we have, one will note that there were some conversations between the Barotse King then and the Royal King of England at the time. Later in the years, in about 1930 or 1946, the discussions ended up with a parastatal, which was a Government institution. I am sure it was at that time that even those buildings were constructed. It is also possible that, at that time, there may have been people living within the same area. I think, those are issues that have to be established.

Mr Speaker, the other point to note is that we are not aware whether after Litunga Yeta III had the discussions, it means that he was aware that Zambezi Sawmills Limited was going to do that business on behalf of the Government, the people of the Western Province and Zambia, in general. Somehow, from 1946 to 1999, the title was only issued in 1999. We have not yet found the actual file to look at the application filed by Zambezi Sawmills Limited to see whether, at that point, there was a need for consent, whether that land was still traditional land or, maybe, it had become state land. These are issues that we need to validate. That is why I have sincerely asked for more time.

Mr Speaker, in addition, we found that some lawyers are involved in the same land issue. Some Zambian lawyers are involved and have joined in partitioning and selling this land. So, it is not a small matter on which I can just make statements in this House, because whatever I say on the Floor of this House will be used against the people in Mulobezi, since I am speaking on behalf of the Government. They will say that the Minister said that the title was okay, and then the people will have no recourse to anything. That is why I said that the ministry should be allowed to conduct further investigations.

Mr Speaker, as the House may have heard in the statement, there is even a liquidator. I do not know at what point the liquidator came in. We also have information that this company became bankrupt. Whether the rules of liquidation were followed is not clear or, as usual, we have clever lawyers in this country who know how to manipulate and, sometimes, end up becoming estate agents. These things are not just in Mulobezi. They are all over the country. So, let us work together. Let us not look like we are fighting or favouring anybody. No. We are working for the people of Zambia. We have a heart for them. As I stand on this Floor, I am an elected official on behalf of the people of Zambia, including the people of Mulobezi. I would not want them to be evicted. Let us work together to see how this certificate of title was issued. Let us also talk to the traditional leaders, maybe, they have files that they can help us with.

Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources is an old ministry, and it has been presided over by many. So, even finding information is not that easy, especially when there are some dubious plays in the game. So, let us work together, let us help one another so that we help the people of Mulobezi.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members who have indicated, the hon. Minister will come back to the House on 31^stJuly, 2025.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order!

_______

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

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

Question put and agreed to.

_______

The House adjourned at 1229 hours until 1430 hours on Tuesday, 22^nd July, 2025.

____________