Thursday, 31^st July, 2025

 

The House met at 1430 hours

 

[MADAM FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM

 

PRAYER

 

_______

 

ANNOUNCEMENT BY MADAM FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER

 

PUPILS AND TEACHERS FROM VARIOUS SCHOOLS

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, I wish to recognise the presence, in the Public Gallery, of pupils and teachers from the following schools:

 

1. Al-Furqan Islamic School of Lusaka District;

 

1. Mazabuka Girls School of Mazabuka District; and

 

1. Kizito Community School of Lusaka District.

 

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

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

_______

 

MOTION

 

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 27(2)

 

The Minister of Defence, and Acting Leader of Government Business in the House (Mr Lufuma): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that Order 27(2) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024, be suspended to enable the House to sit until business on the Order Paper is completed on Friday, 1^st August, 2025, and, thereafter, adjourn sine die.

 

Madam Speaker, Standing Order 27(2) provides that the House shall adjourn at 1300 hours on Fridays. The Motion, therefore, seeks to suspend the Standing Order to enable the House to sit until all the business on the Order Paper on Friday, 1^st August, 2025, is completed and, thereafter, adjourn sine die. By the time of adjournment, the House would have sat for thirty-one days, and considered 108 questions, thirty-one Motions to adopt reports of parliamentary Committees, three Motions to adopt reports on parliamentary delegations to international conferences and three Motions to adopt reports on the ratification of international treaties. Further, the House would have passed eight Bills, and considered fourteen Ministerial Statements explaining and clarifying Government policies on various issues. In addition, thirteen annual reports from Government and quasi-Government departments and one action taken report would have been tabled. It is clear from these statistics that the House has transacted a fairly large amount of business. This is attributed to the commitment, dedication and hard work of all hon. Members of this august House. I, therefore, wish to commend hon. Members for the job well done.

 

Job well done, hon. Members!

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lufuma: Madam Speaker, in view of the foregoing, it is necessary that the House takes a break to enable hon. Members attend to other duties outside the House. Having said that, allow me to thank the Hon. Madam Speaker, you, Madam First Deputy Speaker, and the Hon. Mr Deputy Second Speaker for the able and impartial manner in which you presided over the Business of the House. I also wish to extend my sincere gratitude to the staff in the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly of Zambia, the Office of the Vice-President and Parliamentary Business Division, and officers from various Government ministries and departments for the services rendered who ensured that the Meeting was a success. I urge them all to continue with the spirit of hard work. As we prepare to adjourn and head back to our various constituencies, I would like to urge every hon. Member to carry the spirit of this House with them. Let us remain committed to the welfare of our people and continue to work tirelessly to address their concerns.

 

Madam Speaker, I would like to urge hon. Members to take time during the recess to visit their constituencies and assess how the harvesting of various crops is going, and encourage our people to not sell everything they have harvested, but ensure food security at the household level before selling the surplus. Last year, we experienced the most devastating drought in living memory, which affected crop production. However, this year, God gave us good rainfall, and the hardworking farming community planted various crops on a large scale, resulting in an unprecedented bumper harvest. It is, therefore, important that we all secure and preserve the harvest to forestall hunger, especially at the household level.

 

Madam Speaker, with regards to selling maize, our farmers should not sell at a price lower than what the Government is offering through the Food Reserve Agency (FRA). They should not be enticed by briefcase buyers who offer low prices. They should be patient to get a good return on their investment in the land. Hon. Members should also check on ongoing developmental projects in their constituencies and, where there are challenges, approach relevant authorities for solutions. As the rainy season is only a few months away, it is important for hon. Members to encourage our people to start preparations to plant the next crop early.

 

Madam Speaker, this is a procedural and non-controversial Motion. Therefore, I urge all hon. Members to support it

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Mumba (Kantanshi): I am representing Mr Kapyanga.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mumba: Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to comment on the Motion that has been moved on the Floor of the House. Indeed, I would like to join the Government …

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

 

Mr Mumba: … in recognising the hard work that has been put in by hon. Members of Parliament, especially from your left. I think that quite a good amount of work has been done on the Floor of the House. The reports that the Government referred to, have been a clear indication that the Government has a lot of work to do, particularly those that came through audited accounts. Again, the interactions we have had have also clearly shown the efforts that the Government is making to ensure that our economy is turned around. At the same time, the Government has emphasised the issue of maize. So, as we go back to our constituencies, we also wish to see that those who will supply maize are paid on time so that what the Government is worried about, regarding people getting lower maize prices, does not occur. The farmers will only get encouraged if they see their colleagues paid on time. That is the challenge we give to the Government.

 

Madam Speaker, we also learnt that the levels of illicit flows of funds have continued to increase. Again, that is something that the Government should aggressively work on. It has an opportunity to do that as we look forward to the Meeting of the House in September, through the President’s Address to the nation, and the National Budget.

 

Madam Speaker, we are going back to our constituencies as happy hon. Members of Parliament, because we have held the Government to account.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mumba: On several occasions, the Opposition reminded the Government about the procedure for a Bill.

 

Mr Kapyanga: Question!

 

Mr Mumba: Are you not happy?

 

Hon. Members: No!

 

Mr Mumba: You are not happy.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Kantanshi, please, address me.

 

Mr Mumba: Madam Speaker, I was emphasising the point because, maybe, the hon. Members have forgotten.

 

Madam Speaker, I believe we have held the Government to account as the Opposition. A lot of work has been done in the last thirty-one days, and we should be proud because when the Government succeeds, it is because there is a hard-working Opposition. So, I do not agree sometimes when the Government says that the Opposition is disorganised. The efforts put in by the Opposition have put the Government on its toes, and together we will succeed as a country.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, this is a non-controversial Motion. We are supposed to adjourn tomorrow.

 

So, the Acting Leader of Government Business in the House, please, wind up the debate.

 

Mr Lufuma: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, I would like to acknowledge the short debate that has been presented on the Floor of this Parliament today, by the hon. Member of Parliament for Kantanshi. I want to assure him that this Government will endeavour to pay the farmers on time. He should be assured of that. I am happy that he will go back to his constituency as a happy hon. Member of Parliament. He should come back a happy hon. Member of Parliament in September.

 

Madam Speaker, I am very grateful to the House for supporting this non-controversial Motion.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: We move to the next segment, Urgent Matters without Notice, although we are adjourning tomorrow.

 

_______

 

URGENT MATTERS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

MR ANAKOKA, HON. MEMBER FOR LUENA, ON MR LUFUMA, HON. MINISTER OF DEFENCE AND ACTING LEADER OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS IN THE HOUSE, ON THE CIRCULATED DOCUMENTARY TITLED – CHINESE INVESTMENT IN ZAMBIA

 

Mr Anakoka (Luena): Madam Speaker, on an Urgent Matter without Notice.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

 

Mr Anakoka: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to raise an Urgent Matter without Notice. If I am not mistaken, this is the first time I am raising an Urgent Matter without Notice. I do so because my matter is very compelling.

 

Madam Speaker, yesterday, I came across a video that has been circulating on the Internet titled, “Chinese Investments in Zambia.” The video is purported to have been produced by a national publication, a media house in this country, which I will not mention because it is not in the House to defend itself. Nonetheless, I bring this matter for the attention of the Leader of Government Business in the House.

 

Madam Speaker, the documentary is full of insinuations about corruption supposedly going on between Government officials and investors. It focuses particularly on Chinese investors in the country. The video seeks to drive a wedge by painting investors who have brought the much-needed investment to this country as unworthy investors. It accuses them of all sorts of things without any evidence beyond insinuations.

 

Ms Mulenga: Do you have evidence?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Kalulushi, please, do not debate while seated.

 

Mr Mubika: Bana Mulenga!

 

Mr Anakoka: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, while the Government is working so hard to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) for the benefit of the people of this nation, some people are seeking to sow disunity and paint one set of investors as undesirable investors in this country.

 

Mr Fube: His time is up!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Chilubi!

 

Give him chance to raise his matter.

 

Hon. Member, you may wind up. Your time is up.

 

Mr Anakoka: Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I wish to ask whether the Government is in order to remain quiet in the face of such malicious and untruthful productions being circulated on international media.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: As I mentioned, hon. Members, tomorrow we are adjourning. Even if we were to ask the hon. Minister to come up with a Ministerial Statement, it would not be possible because he needs time. So, I urge the hon. Member for Luena to approach the hon. Minister and arrange, maybe, for the hon. Minister to give him a brief somewhere.

 

Is the list I am seeing here all for Urgent Matters without Notice?

 

Hon. Members: Yes!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Mmm!

 

Laughter

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: What is happening? We are adjourning tomorrow. No one will attend to these matters.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

MR MTAYACHALO, HON. MEMBER FOR CHAMA NORTH, ON MR MTOLO,  HON. MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE, ON THE OPEN SALE OF HARMFUL HERBICIDES

 

Mr Mtayachalo (Chama North): Madam Speaker, on an Urgent Matter without Notice.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

 

Mr Mtayachalo: Thank you, Madam Speaker, for giving me the opportunity to raise an Urgent Matter without Notice. My matter is directed at the hon. Minister of Agriculture.

 

Madam Speaker, the increasing number of suicide cases in the Eastern Province is extremely worrying and of grave concern. Yesterday, the Police Command in the Eastern Province issued a statement in which he stated that the province has recorded sixty-eight suicide cases from January to 24^th July this year. It is feared that the number may be much higher, especially given that some cases were not reported. In Chama, for example, every week or fortnight, we record cases of suicide. The cases are attributed to people consuming grain herbicides, the aluminium phosphates tablets, which are used to preserve maize. Anyone can enter an agro shop and buy the tablets and consume them. I think, there is a need to regulate how the tablets are sold openly to avert the continued loss of lives.

 

I seek your serious indulgence in this matter, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Chama North, you had clearly indicated that that matter started a long time ago. It has been happening for some time. So, it is not a new matter that happened in the last twenty-four hours.

 

Hon. Member, just like I guided the other hon. Member who raised another matter earlier, kindly, approach the hon. Minister so that, as you go back to your constituency, you can carry some good news for your constituents. Go and have a discussion with the hon. Minister of Agriculture. If Her Honour the Vice-President will be in the House tomorrow, you can also take that opportunity to ask a question during The Vice-President’s Question Time.

 

MR MUTELO, HON. MEMBER FOR MITETE, ON THE VICE-PRESIDENT, MRS NALUMANGO, ON THE FUNERAL OF THE SIXTH PRESIDENT

 

Mr Mutelo (Mitete): On an Urgent Matter without Notice.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: An Urgent Matter with Notice is raised.

 

Mr Mutelo: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, as we have just heard, the House is adjourning sine die tomorrow.  My Urgent Matter without Notice is directed to Her Honour the Vice-President, but in her absence, I will direct it to the Acting Leader of Government Business in the House. 

 

Madam Speaker, out there, there is anxiety because people want information on the funeral of the late Sixth President. I know you have ruled on the matter before, but we will still be asked about that funeral when we go back to our constituencies. What are we going to say? Even our hon. Colleagues there (pointing at PF hon. Members) who had travelled did not see the remains of our Sixth President. After we adjourn tomorrow, what are we going to tell the people out there because I know they will be asking about that issue? Some people are just busy saying, “Freemason, freemason” when it is not the case.

 

Ms Mulenga: Wenu umuntu?

 

Mr Mutelo: Such a thing has never happened in the entire world. It is shocking and people are expectantly waiting.

 

Madam Speaker, it is an urgent matter.

 

Hon. PF Members: Ifyakwikata ikata!

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mutelo: Madam Speaker, I seek your indulgence.   

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Mitete, if Her Honour the Vice-President will be in the House tomorrow, take that opportunity to ask a question. You can also visit Her Honour Vice-President and discuss with her.

 

_______

 

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

 

ALLEGED EVICTION OF 10,000 PEOPLE FROM A PORTION OF LAND IN MULOBEZI

 

The Minister of Lands and Natural Resources (Mrs Masebo): Madam Speaker, I wish to start by thanking you most sincerely for giving me this honour and privilege to present a ministerial statement on whether the Government is aware that about 10,000 people are likely to be evicted from 402,000 ha of traditional land in Mulobezi Constituency by a foreign investor trading in timber and whether those people will be compensated once they are evicted. In addition, the statement will also tackle the issue of whether consent was obtained from the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE) before the title deed for the land in question was issued to the investor and, if not, whether the Government will cancel the title deed. Furthermore, the ministerial statement will address whether there is land available to resettle the people who may be evicted from the said land and what will happen to the infrastructure in the area, such as schools, hospitals, police posts, railway lines, markets and churches.

 

Madam Speaker, the Government is aware of the concerns raised by settlers in Mulobezi regarding their land rights and livelihoods. The Government is also aware of the investor’s concerns regarding legitimate business operations. This situation, therefore, requires a balanced approach that upholds the law, protects the rights of all parties and promotes sustainable economic development.

 

Madam Speaker, a review of the land register at the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources revealed that in 1931, there was an agreement involving three parties namely, His Majesty, King George V, represented by the colonial office, His Royal Highness Paramount Chief Yeta III and Zambezi Sawmills. The nature of that agreement is not specified. On 23^rd November, 1932, the three parties, namely His Majesty, the British South African Company and Paramount Chief Yeta III agreed and Machele was declared a forest area. This is the area today known as Farm 946. It now became a protected area. On 29^th October, 1942, His Majesty, Paramount Chief Yeta III and Zambezi Sawmill made an agreement and a licence was issued to do certain things. The agreement does not specify what was meant by certain things.

 

Madam Speaker, according to the records at the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, in June, 1931, Subdivision A of Farm 946 was first surveyed, which has an area size of 4,072.7 ha, contrary to the reported 402,000 ha. The remaining part of Farm 946 after this subdivision was created as protected forest areas now called Naluwama, Luangula, Situmbo and Lonze.

 

Madam Speaker, during the period 1931 to 1968, Zambezi Sawmills operated on a lease title since its establishment until January, 1999, when a certificate of title was issued. The ministry established that Zambezi Sawmills was placed on receivership by Atlas Mara Bank, which was owed about K14 million. However, a new investor bought Subdivision A of Farm 946 from the bank, which was previously owned by Zambezi Sawmills of 1968 Limited in liquidation for only K2 million.

 

Madam Speaker, we were informed by the receiver of Zambezi Sawmills (1968) Limited that prior to the investor purchasing the said Subdivision A of Farm No. 46 at only K2 million in 2024, last year, which he bought as it was then, with all its encumbrances, the receiver approached the hon. Member of Parliament for Mulobezi on two different occasions and proposed that the hon. Member of Parliament could facilitate the purchase of the same Subdivision A Farm No. 946 through the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), since the bank was agreeable to forego the price difference of about K12 million. Unfortunately, the hon. Member of Parliament never took it up until the new investor bought the said farm at K2 million.

 

Madam Speaker, I wish to state that my ministry undertook a verification visit to Subdivision A Farm No. 946. Our fact-finding mission revealed that there was a need to undertake a social survey in order for the Government to establish the exact number of people who are currently occupying Subdivision A of Farm No. 946. The fact-finding mission further revealed that there are, indeed, several Government properties on the said farm, namely:

 

1. one secondary school;

 

1. four primary schools;

 

1. six community schools;

 

1. two Government clinics;

 

1. five health centres;

 

1. one police post; and

 

1. four storage sheds.

 

Madam Speaker, in addition, there are the following facilities on the land:

 

1. wildlife offices;

 

1. the Zambia Railways Limited (ZRL) train station; and

 

1. the railway line.

 

Madam Speaker, there is also a heritage site and a community dam. In addition, there are 105 housing units for former workers of the sawmill company, although at the moment, the housing units are accommodating Government officers working in the ministries of health, education and local government and rural development, including the police. Other structures which were found include water tanks, markets, churches and playgrounds. It was also observed that there is Subdivision 1 of Subdivision A of Farm No. 946, which was surveyed in 1982, representing 263.8 ha, where the above-listed infrastructure is mostly concentrated. However, to date, no title has been issued to Subdivision 1.

 

Madam Speaker, in addition to the fact-finding mission, which was undertaken by officers under my ministry, my senior staff and I had a meeting with the new investor, including the receiver of Zambezi Sawmill Company, at my office. From the discussions we had, it was established that the new investor was willing to hive off part of the land on which all Government properties were sitting within Subdivision A of Farm No. 946 and to surrender them to the relevant Government ministries.. The new investor further informed us that he had no intentions whatsoever to evict any person from Subdivision A of Farm No. 946. In any case, the new investor was also ready to hive off the area which was occupied by the people and give it to them without asking for any compensation and to remain with the part of the land he wants to concentrate on for his business. The new investor is the sole employer of some of the people residing on Subdivision A of Farm No. 946, who are purported to have been evicted from the same area.

 

Madam Speaker, the Government’s primary objective is to ensure that any resolution is fair, transparent and mutually beneficial. We are committed to protecting the rights of local communities, who are often the custodians of our natural resources, while also fostering an environment conducive for responsible investment that contributes to national development. In this regard, we urge all parties to exercise patience and restraint as the Government diligently works towards finding a lasting solution. We are confident that through continued dialogue and adherence to due processes, we will make sure that an amicable solution is found, which will be favourable to all parties concerned.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members are now free to ask questions on points of clarification on the Ministerial Statement presented by the hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources.

 

Mr Miyutu (Kalabo Central): Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for the comprehensive Ministerial Statement that she has issued to the House and to the nation. My question follows my remark that land is life. Land was there at the creation of life. Life does not exist without land.

 

Mr J. Chibuye: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Miyutu: Madam Speaker, the date 1931 has been mentioned. Our great-grandparents lived on the land at that time. There have been understandings among the three parties. Has there been any change of the title deed from the previous owner to the current investor? At first, the transaction was for lease of the land. Then the lease was changed to a title deed. Has there been a change of title deed to another person?

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for his question.

 

Madam Speaker, to the best of my knowledge, the title deed to the land was issued in 1999 to Zambezi Sawmills Limited and it has not been changed to another name.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Mulebwa (Kafulafuta): Madam Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources for that comprehensive Ministerial Statement.

 

Madam Speaker, I wish to find out whether other legal procedures were followed. She said that there was a title deed involved. Legally speaking, when somebody occupies a place for more than five, ten or twelve years in Zambia, that place becomes theirs, which means that the person occupying that place must be compensated when he is evicted from the place. I am wondering if the hon. Minister found out whether there was a resettlement action plan or public disclosure meeting. An investor cannot occupy a place without the consent of the people who are staying there, whether they have a title deed or not. The fact that they have stayed in that place for so long means that the law entitles them to be compensated. I wonder if the hon. Minister has those details so that our minds can be clear.

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, to the best of my knowledge, that is not what happened.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Tayengwa (Kabwata): Madam Speaker, the issue of people fraudulently acquiring titles is on the increase. Several people have fraudulently acquired titles. The case of the area in Mulobezi and the Zambezi Sawmills Company is one of those cases that involves fraudulently obtained titles. The land had Government property on it. I want to find out at what point the lease was given. Was there any consent from the Litunga?

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, in the land register for 1931 and 1932, there was an agreement to undertake certain things. I think that is all that we found. At some point, the land was leased with the agreement of the Litunga, His Majesty King George V and the Zambezi Sawmills Company. Fast forward to 1999, a title was issued. The question that we are not clear on is whether the initial lease agreement with the Litunga could have been the basis on which a title was issued. Further, whether there was a need for consent from the Litunga at that time is another question that needs to be answered. Those are details that might come to light if we found the application form for the change from a leasehold to a title. We should remember that a leasehold is just that. It means that at some point, the investor can leave, and the land reverts to whoever leased it. However, when a title is given, it means that the piece of land has been sold and the owner no longer has any rights.

 

Madam Speaker, the good part about this deal, as we have learned from the receiver and the buyer, I think, is that at the point when the buyer bought the property, he was fully aware of those encumbrances; the Government structures, the communities, the houses and the people. We learned from the receiver that when he made the sale, he was told that the bank was only interested in clearing the debts in its books, and did not want to get involved with other things. So, the buyer knew that he was not just buying the land and those properties, but the people who were on site.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.  

 

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, let me start by acknowledging and commending the hon. Minister for deferring the Bill on land titling that she brought to this august House. Clearly, the hon. Minister has a lot of work to do as far as cleaning up the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources is concerned.

 

Madam Speaker, listening to the details of the transaction, looking at the genesis that the hon. Minister has given with regards to the history from 1931 up to the time the title was issued in 1999, and then the bank coming in, leaves many of us in this House concerned. Now, we are hearing about a new investor who the hon. Minister says could have bought the piece of land, subdivision A, with the existing interests. She has said that even the people who were on the land were bought. I would like to know the kind of transaction that could have been, which created a situation in which the parcel of land was sold with the existing interests before officers from the ministry could undertake a survey to understand the parameters of the free land and the land that had existing interests. How was the transaction facilitated between the receiver and the so-called new investor without considering the existing interests that were on that portion of land?

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, firstly, let me just make one point clear. The Zambezi Sawmills Company was the legitimate owner. Looking at what is listed in the register showing the three parties, which included the King, the Litunga and the company, I would like to believe that they had an agreement on a lease that went on for twenty years. So, one would assume that at that stage, that land was crown land, but not fully, because they signed a lease agreement with the Litunga, meaning that they also acknowledged the rights of the Litunga. However, by 1999, at the point of change from a lease, I would like to believe that the change may have been acceptable because the company was Government-owned. The hon. Member may be right when he asks the question: How then did it change? Where is the information? The good part is that the title issued in 1999 is still the same title to date. It has not changed, and we all know that the company was a Government parastatal.

 

Madam Speaker, I think, the problem can only be at the point of the recent sale last year. Due diligence should have been done but, again, these are complicated matters, because the land does not belong to the Government per se. On one hand, the buyer bought property through the bank, and on the other hand, there is the community, traditional authority and also a political leader; the hon. Member, who, as we have heard, was informed about the issue. If I were told, I would have paid the K2 million. I mean imagine K2 million for schools and other properties. The fact remains that the buyer bought the piece of land. Maybe, the people who were on the ground were not aware. The liquidator showed us an advertisement that was run in our national newspapers when the bank was selling that piece of land under the company. So, maybe, the people may have slept again on their rights. They did not see it. As the hon. Member may be aware, those are rural areas, and people may not see the newspaper. The hon. Members of Parliament may have seen the newspaper. Personally, I saw it, but I did not pay attention to the details. However, the advertisement was there.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Eng. Mabenga rose.

 

Laughter

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Mulobezi, in fact, you are supposed to be the next hon. Member to ask the question. This is a matter that concerns your constituency. Can you now ask your question.

 

Eng. Mabenga (Mulobezi): Madam Speaker, I am very disappointed with how the whole issue has been addressed. The hon. Minister has been very economical in giving out the truth of how the title deed was obtained. The title deed was fraudulently obtained without the knowledge of the Barotse Royal Establishment (BRE). There was a letter written by the Senior Chief of Mwandi, which I gave to the hon. Minister here on the Floor of the House, stating that the title deed was fraudulently obtained, because the person who signed the papers was from the Southern Province. The land in question is in the Western Province. How can that be? That is why I said that I am very disappointed because this information has not been highlighted in her statement. The truth is not coming out.

 

Madam Speaker, there must be a scam in this particular land. When the hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources had a meeting, she should have had the courtesy of calling me or the BRE to be present.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member of Parliament for Mulobezi!

 

You are not supposed to debate the question. You are simply asking questions on points of clarification. Can you ask a question on where you do not agree or where you feel something has not been stated well. Put it in the form of a question.

 

Eng. Mabenga: Madam Speaker, can I continue?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Yes, you can go ahead.

 

Eng. Mabenga: Madam Speaker, since I was not invited to the meeting the hon. Minister had last week, nor was the BRE, my question, therefore, is: How does the ministry hold a meeting without a stakeholder being present? Did they bother to check how the title deed was issued? There is a letter from the Senior Chief himself stating that the title deed was given fraudulently.

 

Mrs Masebo: Thank you, Madam Speaker. I also thank the hon. Member for his question and the sentiments that he has expressed.

 

Madam Speaker, I must admit that we did not have the opportunity to speak to the Royal Establishment. I must also mention here that it is true that there was a letter from the hon. Member of Parliament addressed to me, stating that as far as the traditional authorities were concerned, the title deed was fraudulently issued. What the hon. Member has said is a fact. However, what the hon. Members of Parliament need to understand is that when the hon. Minister issues a statement here, it is not prepared by just one individual. We sit as a team. We review the file and the digital system that we have. What we bring here is only that, which is in the files. I mentioned that we were not able to come across the application. Therefore, I cannot come to the House and give information that I am not sure about. The information I am giving is only that which I found. If you have noted, I have tried to remain in the middle without necessarily supporting either side, but looking at facts as they have been presented to me.

 

Madam Speaker, the question the hon. Member of Parliament asked is cardinal. He wants to know how the issue of the land moved from a leasehold to a title deed. However, like I said, from 1931 to 1999, there was a lease, then the title deed came out in January 1999. Further, although there is a buyer who has paid the bank, there is no change of title deed from Zambezi Sawmills to this new buyer. All we know is that there was a transaction. By the way, we also learned that this investor has been in that community for quite some time. He has been one of the community members, just like any other person, carrying out some other business on the same farmland.

 

Madam Speaker, what is also good from our interaction with the liquidator and the alleged new owner is that there was an understanding, and he acknowledged finding people there. He also agrees that the receiver informed him that, even as they were selling him that piece of property, he needed to note that there were already people there, and they are the encumbrances. Therefore, that is why he said that he is prepared to dialogue with everyone concerned and to not evict anyone. All I brought here is exactly what we gathered.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Eng. Mabenga: Madam Speaker, I am still very disappointed because the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources was given enough time. This is the third time this issue is being presented on the Floor of this House. They did not bother to investigate the truth.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

 

Eng. Mabenga: Madam Speaker, what we are getting on the Floor of the House is half-baked information, which I cannot use anywhere, because the ministry did not investigate this matter in detail. The BRE was not involved. No one was involved. They sat alone and made a judgment. Under the Lands Act, does the ministry have powers to cancel a fraudulently obtained title deed?

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, I love that question. It was only this week that this Government was trying to bring back the powers of the Registrar, which powers the Registrar had from the time the Lands Act was enacted in 1914, until 2014. In 2014, the courts of law interpreted the Act and ruled that the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources and the Registrar, had no powers to cancel a title deed, instead they should refer cases to court. From 1914 to 2014, 100 years had passed. During that period, the Registrar was the one cancelling a title deed when he/she felt there was a problem with it, or that it was erroneously or fraudulently issued. However, in 2014, when a title deed got cancelled, a particular individual went to court to complain. It was during that case that the courts ruled that the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources had been exercising powers wrongly since 1914 and that had no such power. So, since 2014, we have been having many cases like the one in Mulobezi. They are all over the country. The truth of the matter is that Zambians are being displaced, and all we tell them is to go to court.

 

Madam Speaker, this afternoon, I want to appeal to the hon. Member that this matter be taken to court because there is nothing else the ministry can do at this point in time other than negotiate, dialogue, and hope to find an amicable solution for this problem. I appreciate this concern and feel for the people. I also agree with him in some instances, but our hands are tied. We can only talk about these issues. So, questions of how, what, and the others may be valid, but that is what it is.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Hamwaata (Pemba): Madam Speaker, listening to what the hon. Minister is saying, it is very clear that the title deed was fraudulently acquired. Therefore, the ministry should go into negotiations before any investigation is done so that if the buyer and the seller are found wanting, they are prosecuted. Will the ministry consider conducting some investigations through the investigative wing before any negotiations?

 

Mrs Masebo: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, there is only one issue that is remaining and that is the issue of issuance of a title deed in 1999. Like I said, we have started the discussions and we are still going to go further in the discussions. The Member of Parliament is saying that we have been given enough time. I think, that is a very unfair statement. The matter started in 1931. I have been in the ministry for only one year now. When that matter came up, we have done what we could and we have spoken to the investor not to move the people and the investor is agreeable. We still need to get the chiefs, the Litunga or the BRE in the Western Province to understand their side of the story.

 

Madam Speaker, I am aware that representatives from the BRE were at the ministry last week. They did not meet with me, but they met with the Commissioner of Lands. I am sure that we shall be meeting very soon and the matter will also be tabled. So, like I said in my concluding remarks, there must be patience. All parties should exercise patience and restraint as the Government diligently works towards a lasting solution. We are confident that we will find a lasting solution. Therefore, trying to conclude the issue through this Ministerial Statement would be unfair to the parties involved.  We have to be fair to all parties. We need to remember that it was the bank that sold the land in question and not the Government. Whether the price was high or low, it was the bank that sold the land. As I said, we run a Government of laws and we have to respect the Laws of Zambia, whether they are bad or good because the law is the law. That is why when those of us who have been elected and put in office see how the Zambian people are suffering and being displaced, we need to come here and change the laws.

 

Madam Speaker, we make laws for the good of the Zambian people. However, when we come here, some people do not see beyond an individual’s face. They only see Masebo. They do not see that I am just a representative of the Zambian people. So, when I bring a piece of legislation here, I am not just doing it by myself as the Minister. No, there is a team of experts involved. Educated men and women have been employed by the Zambian people under the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources and they are the ones who prepare the documents brought here. Of course, it does not mean that I am a robot and do not think. I think and we agree with my team on the course of action to be taken.

 

Madam Speaker, the House will recall that from 1914 to 2014, we did not have any problems. It was after 2014 and when the Patriotic Front (PF) came into office that things got worse.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

 Mrs Masebo: Today, we have problems in this country. There are dual titles and many other issues, such that no one can like it.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Awe! You were PF. You were the Minister of Local Government.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam Frist Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, I am not surprised that people are fighting the Bill I presented. Maybe, they are culprits. Yes, I was the Minister of Local Government.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

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

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Kampyongo: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order pursuant to Standing Order No.71. First of all, the issue of land titling is a process. That process is what should be watertight, such that when the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources is issuing title deeds, it should have done its due diligence. I am happy that the hon. Minister has acknowledged that she was the Minister of Local Government and dealt with issues of land under the Patriotic Front (PF) Government. So, let us not bring up issues of political parties here. Let us deal with the processes.

 

Madam Speaker, cancelling of title deeds is not a solution. What seems to be coming out is that the system has collapsed. From the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development to the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, there are processes that should be watertight. There are guidelines on how verifications should be done and how people should go on the ground to conduct due diligence. When the hon. Member for Mulobezi brought up the issue, he asked about the process which took place before the title was issued. What due diligence was done in terms of surveying? Is the hon. Minister of Lands and Natural Resources in order to acknowledge that it is good to have corruption at the ministry and insurance of title deeds should be pilling up without a system and that the problem can only be sorted out by cancelling title by the Commissioner of Lands? People are scared of such a scenario.

 

Madam Speaker, the response from the hon. Minister to the hon. Member for Mulobezi has not been thorough. It clearly shows that there must have been corruption in the way the title was issued because it was done without involving the traditional leaders who were on that land in 1931. So, is the hon. Minister in order to start passing the buck? The PF never tried to change the cancellation of titles, which is done by the courts.

 

Madam Speaker, we need the matter settled in the best interest of the people of Mulobezi ...

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … and the hon. Member of Parliament, who has been complaining about the issue. The hon. Minister must be ordered to do the right thing. Yes, the essence of the Ministerial Statement is to clear the air so that the hon. Member for Mulobezi can go back to the traditional leaders and the people concerned and explain to them. However, is the hon. Minister in order to abdicate her duty to respond to the issues raised by the hon. Member for Mulobezi and start passing the buck by using lame excuses?

 

Madam Speaker, I seek your serious ruling.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Shiwang’andu, you have actually taken more than two minutes. You debated your point of order adequately and because of that, your point of order is not admissible. We are not supposed to debate our points of order.

 

Mr Malambo (Magoye):  Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, how possible is it that a large piece of land that was the Government’s property could be sold just for K2 million? Can the hon. Minister provide clarity on the valuation process and confirm if the price of K2 million was the market value?

 

Mrs Masebo: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

 Madam Speaker, I believe that in the statement I said that the bank was owed K14 million. In my understanding, the K14 million was not the actual valuation, but that was the amount of money that the bank was looking for. However, after failing to get that money, the bank, through the receiver, decided that K2 million would be fine. After advertising the land for some time, the receiver approached the hon. Member of Parliament on two occasions to see if it was possible to get the Government involved. However, that did not happen. Later on, a member of the community, who is an investor, made a deal paid the K2 million and became the owner of the land. So, I would not say that that could be the value of the land itself without the properties. However, because of the number of properties on the land, such as schools, of course, the value must be much more than that. That was the price the investor was given, and it was a straightforward deal.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Rev. Katuta (Chienge): Madam Speaker, –

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Do you have a question, hon. Member?

 

Rev Katuta: Yes, Madam Speaker, of course. I was not expecting to be called upon.

 

Madam Speaker, every Zambian has the right to own land. I heard the hon. Minister say, in her Ministerial Statement, that an investor intends to get the land in question and evict the indigenous people. My only question to the hon. Minister is: Who is more important, the so-called investor or the indigenous people, who are the rightful owners of the land and the voters?

 

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, firstly, in any country, the nationals are very important, but investors also have their space.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

_______

 

MOTIONS

 

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ON THE RATIFICATION OF THE GLOBAL CONVENTION ON THE RECOGNITION OF QUALIFICATIONS CONCERNING HIGHER EDUCATION

 

Mr Kamboni (Kalomo Central): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that this House adopts the Report of the Committee on Education, Science and Technology on the Ratification of the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education, laid on the Table of the House on Wednesday, 30^th July, 2025, for the Fourth Session of the Thirteenth National Assembly.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

 

Ms Phiri (Milanzi): I beg to second the Motion, Madam Speaker.

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Mr Kamboni: Madam Speaker, the Committee, in accordance with its terms of reference, as set out in the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024, considered the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education. The overall objective of the convention is to facilitate academic and professional mobility, enhance international co-operation and promote access to quality higher education across borders. I wish to state from the outset that the Committee is in support of the proposal to ratify the convention.

 

Madam Speaker, ratifying the convention will provide an opportunity to promote global recognition of qualifications from Zambian universities and colleges of higher education. As a party to the convention, other member states will be obliged to recognise Zambian qualifications, as long as they are not substantially different from those of the receiving countries. This will consequently cure the problem of Zambian degree qualifications being downgraded in some jurisdictions. Ratifying the convention is also intended to foster global mobility of labour and students. In this vein, it will open up opportunities for Zambian students to study abroad without being subjected to bridging courses or repetition of academic programmes on the basis of non-recognition. It will also enhance opportunities for graduates of Zambian universities and colleges to seek employment in international organisations and other member states, as their qualifications will be comparable to qualifications at the same level in those countries.

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee is, however, cognisant of the fact that in order to realise the objectives of the convention, various measures have to be taken by the Executive. The Committee has, therefore, made recommendations contained in the report, and I would like to believe that hon. Members have had an opportunity to read the report. In this regard, let me highlight a few salient issues contained in the report.

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee observed that the approval of the 2023 Zambia Education Curriculum Framework by the Cabinet is a demonstration that Zambia is on its way to aligning with global standards on education. However, the Committee urges the Executive to review existing laws, such as the Higher Education Act No. 4 of 2013, the Zambia Qualifications Act No. 8 of 2024 and the Zambia Qualifications Framework, with a view to establishing transparent, fair and non-discriminatory mechanisms for the recognition of qualifications. The Committee is also of the strong view that the review process should be extended to programme descriptors and the duration of training required for each qualification to align them with the global standards and the convention’s principles.

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee also observed that in order to meet the requirements of the convention, there is a need to upgrade both physical and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure for higher education, ensuring that institutions have the capacity to deliver quality education that aligns with global standards. Additionally, higher education institutions must implement targeted capacity building initiatives to equip their personnel at all levels with essential competencies, skills, and knowledge. The Committee, therefore, urges the Executive to mobilise the requisite funding to develop ICT infrastructure and conduct targeted capacity enhancement activities without delay.

 

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to the stakeholders who interacted with the Committee for the valuable insights they provided. Gratitude also goes to you, and to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the guidance and support rendered to the Committee throughout its deliberation.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you. 

 

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

 

Ms Phiri: Now, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to second the Motion that has been ably moved by the hon. Member of Parliament for Kalomo Central, Hon. Harry Kamboni. In seconding the Motion, allow me to comment on a few observations and recommendations made by the Committee.

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee observed with concern, the overlapping mandate of the Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA) with those of other authorities, such as the Higher Education Authority (HEA), the Technical Education, Vocational and Entrepreneurship Training Authority (TEVETA) and the Examinations Council of Zambia (ECZ). The Committee is of the view that overlapping responsibilities and fragmented systems can lead to laborious procedures for qualification, accreditation, evaluation and recognition, causing delays and confusion for higher education institutions, students, graduates and employers. In this regard, the Committee urges the Executive to review the mandates of the regulatory institutions in the education sector and institute the alignment process, as this will create a more efficient, transparent and user-friendly system that supports the goals of the global convention. The harmonisation of mandates is expected to foster greater trust in the education system, improve co-ordination among agencies and enhance the country’s ability to implement international standards effectively.

 

Madam Speaker, with regard to refugees accessing higher education, the Committee observed that the convention underscores the need for member states to put in place reasonable procedures for assessing fairly and efficiently whether refugees and displaced persons fulfil the relevant requirements for access to higher education and employment opportunities. In this regard, the Committee recommends that the Executive puts in place a corresponding legal and policy framework for the recognition of prior learning for refugees and displaced persons in conformity with the provisions of the convention.

 

Madam Speaker, with those few remarks, I beg to second the Motion.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Thank you, Madam Speaker, for giving me this opportunity, on behalf of the people of Chilubi, to add my voice to the debate on this Motion.

 

Madam Speaker, talking about this convention looks simple, but we are addressing matters of bread and butter because the people of Zambia are supposed to be global citizens. Currently, when it comes to qualifications, we are considered underdogs globally. At some point, the rating of our universities was matched with Makerere University and other universities in the region. At present, it is low in terms of classification. That is a source of worry. The people of Zambia cannot be confined to job opportunities only within Zambia. Just like other citizens of the world come to our country as consultants, we should also be able to get other jobs.

 

Madam Speaker, a few months ago, we talked about the audit that addressed issues in higher education in this House, and the Higher Education Act No. 4 of 2013 was on the firing line with regards to how it has not been taken seriously in our environment. We read details about how we have 300-plus institutions, many of which are registered with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), and yet only eighty are affiliated. The major problem is our environment. We have not even applied what is currently contained in the Act. So, even when we introduce amendments to dance to the tune of the global trends, we are not assured of the desired results. Attending to the Act involves synergising different curricula, including international curricula. For instance, when we train a nurse in Zambia, for that nurse to work in Canada, he/she has to study the course all over again in that country, and that is not good. Some people join their relatives in other countries, and others get married and, by way of the matrimony, they have to join their husbands or wives and start working. However, if they are prohibited by the nature of what they qualify and do not qualify for, then, it is a different scenario.

 

Madam Speaker, as I already emphasised, Zambia was comfortable with a colonial hangover kind of education. I know that before we changed from Form 5 to Grade 12 classifications, we used to write Cambridge examinations, which were just a carryover from the people who colonised us; the British. We duplicated everything in the hopes that we would factor in the global citizen and produce one who would fit into different fields. However, that was not achieved.

 

Madam Speaker, we also need to pay attention to Article 4 of the Convention, which outlines recognition and many other factors that go into how we need to appreciate the qualification system. In Zambia, there is a need to prepare ourselves. Like I said, currently, we have – forgive me for the term that I am about to use – mushrooming of colleges and universities in tertiary education. The audit, which was presented in this House, showed that those institutions are not properly monitored in terms of standards and many other factors. To accommodate a higher education institution, all we follow is whether it has buildings and offices to operate from. We are in a hurry to accommodate as many as possible under the Higher Education Authority (HEA) so that we register numbers, not equality.

 

 Madam Speaker, this report addresses the quality and reliability of qualifications, which is – I cannot tell in Roman numerals– I think, Article 18, on entry into force. When we look at the entry into force, we see that as long as we want to be a part of and engage in this convention, there is a need to prepare landing ground, and we need to clean up our own house to do so. This Article is about when the convention is supposed to come into force, but we cannot participate at that international level because an audit reported that we have many problems in higher education. It will mean that Zambia will remain behind in terms of appreciating the value that this convention may bring. As things stand, we are at the weakest point. We are the underdogs in terms of participating in the convention.

 

Madam Speaker, it is good that the report raised certain issues. However, I would like to call for a reflection on trying to create a group of citizens who can participate. We always say education is an equaliser. We attain education to have access to good jobs and a good quality of life. Through education, some people will be consultants, others will be hired on subcontracts or have permanent jobs. That is education. That is when we will be at a station where education can become an equaliser. If education is an equaliser, I am appealing to the good hon. Minister of Education to first attend to implementing what is currently in the Act before we even think about making amendments. This is because the audit report exposed weaknesses in the implementation, infrastructure and personnel. That is interlinked to the implementation of the Act. Therefore, we need to position ourselves in a manner that we can be able to participate. Otherwise, we will be participating in this convention for academic purposes. We have 300 registered institutions and, out of those, only eighty are affiliated with the HEA, but even those that are affiliated do not meet the quality and reliability standards.

 

Madam Speaker, with those few words, I rest my case, as I support the adoption of the report.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Rev. Katuta (Chienge): Madam Speaker, this is a very important report, and I must say that I filed in a question to the Ministry of Education regarding qualifications for our people to become global professionals or academics.

 

Madam Speaker, we have a challenge in Zambia. The Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA) has certain courses or disciplines in its system, which do not align with what is offered at the universities. As a result, most Zambians who are outside the country face challenges securing jobs. When they produce the certificate to a particular institution, it is sent back to ZAQA. The University of Zambia (UNZA) may offer a particular course that is not listed in the ZAQA system. That renders the document irrelevant. Firstly, we need to put our house in order. The Higher Education Authority (HEA) and ZAQA should sit down and ensure that all courses approved by the HEA are also listed on the ZAQA system. This will enable Zambians to be global professionals or academics. I have been waiting for the response from the hon. Minister, since I filed in the question during the last Meeting of the House. This question has not been presented on the Floor of the House. I thought that if the ministry addressed the question, many Zambians in the diaspora would be helped.

 

Madam Speaker, this global convention is working out for countries that are serious about the welfare of their people. I will give an example of the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA). You will find that courses offered by colleges, universities, and other schools are listed in the SAQA system. In Zambia, it is a different story. So, how do we even participate in the global convention and expect Zambians to be recognised as global professionals when we have not done our homework? My earnest appeal to the Ministry of Education is that it is high time the HEA, working together with ZAQA, merged all the courses that are being offered by colleges and universities. After all, it is the HEA that authorises courses.

 

Madam Speaker, not to take up much time of the House, I would like to say that this convention cannot work. Our people will still be considered not educated enough. There was a time the British Government considered the UNZA qualification as being at the level of a diploma because of the quality of education that Zambia was providing. When we were young, in the 1980s or 1970s, UNZA used to have international students. However, today, we do not even have international students because the standards have dropped.

 

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

 

Rev. Katuta: Madam Speaker, we first need to improve the quality of education, which UNZA, the Copperbelt University (CBU), Mulungushi University and private universities are offering. This is the reason we cannot even be –

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

A point of order is raised.

 

Mr Miyutu: Madam Speaker, I did not intend to raise a point of order. I am rising on this point of order not to the desire of my heart.

 

Madam Speaker, I was listening to the debater, and she said something that caught my attention. She said that there used to be international students at the University of Zambia (UNZA), but according to her, there are no more international students at UNZA.

 

Madam Speaker, Standing Order No. 71 provides that what is said on the Floor of the House should be factual and verifiable. Does the hon. Member debating have facts that there are no students from outside Zambia at UNZA? Does she have evidence? If she has, can she lay that evidence on the Table?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Kalabo Central, did you cite the Standing Order that has been breached?

 

Mr Miyutu: Standing Order No. 71, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Thank you.

 

Hon. Member for Chienge, do you have evidence that there are no international students at the University of Zambia (UNZA)?

 

Rev. Katuta: Thank you so much, Madam Speaker.

 

In the first place, Madam Speaker, I am disappointed with that point of order because the quality of education that UNZA is offering to the Zambians is below par.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

 

Rev. Katuta: This is why Britain considered a degree from UNZA as a diploma.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Chienge!

 

I simply asked a simple question. Then I was supposed to continue with my ruling, but you have continued to debate. I asked for evidence. Do you have evidence that there are no international students at UNZA?

 

Rev. Katuta: Madam Speaker, it is on record. I cannot provide the evidence now, but if the hon. Member from Kalabo Central does not mind, with your indulgence, we can go and get the details from UNZA and then come and lay that on the Table.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member for Chienge, if you do not have evidence, it is better to not mention the issue or simply withdraw the statement and make progress. We are not sure of that information. The hon. Members in the House and the people listening need evidence to truly prove that we do not have international students. Just that. If you do not have evidence, just withdraw and proceed with your debate.

 

Rev. Katuta: Madam Speaker, thank you so much. It is very sad that –

 

Interruptions

 

Rev. Katuta: Guys, let us be serious. We are not giving proper qualifications to our children.

 

Interruptions

 

Rev. Katuta: It is below par, that is why they go to Apex University and the University of Lusaka (UNILUS).

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Chienge …

 

Rev. Katuta: Madam Speaker, they are disturbing me.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: … you are debating and addressing me. Not addressing the other hon. Members. Moreover, you are all hon. Members, not “guys”. There are no “guys” in the House. There are only hon. Members of Parliament.

 

Rev. Katuta: They are misbehaving, that is why I called them that.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Please, just focus on my guidance so that we make progress.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mabeta interjected (While leaving the Assembly Chamber).

 

Rev. Katuta: Do not start with me. I am not in the mood.

 

Mr Mabeta: You cannot be calling us guys.

 

Rev. Katuta: Just go. Do not start with me. I am not in the mood.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Mbabala.

 

Mr Munsanje rose.

 

Mr Mabeta: You should never tell me that. Niwe wandetele muno iwe?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kankoyo!

 

Ms Mulenga: Awe, pamwanakashi!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

 

Hon. Member for Kankoyo, can we have order in the House.

 

Mr Mabeta sat on the Opposition side.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: We are all hon. Members in this House. There is no hon. Member who is more senior except for the Ministers. The Backbenchers are all the same. Let us observe the rules of the House. Let us respect one another. Imagine if that behaviour – I hope people outside there did not see what transpired. Can we respect one another. Can we maintain decorum in the House. This is not any other place where you can just stand and start shouting. Please, let us observe the decorum of the House. We are hon. Members of Parliament. Let us behave in that manner so that the people out there respect us. We deserve to be respected.

 

I had called upon the hon. Member for Mbabala to debate.

 

Mr Munsanje (Mbabala): Madam Speaker, thank you so much for giving the good people of Mbabala an opportunity to support the Motion.

 

Mr Mabeta: You think you can challenge me, iwe! (Addressing Rev. Katuta) Ulichipuba. Nikwisa wa mbwenepo ukwiba ine?

 

Mr Simumba interjected.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Nakonde!

 

There are rules that you are supposed to follow. Just follow the rules. Do not even complain where you are seated. Just indicate that you have a point of order.

 

Mr Mabeta left the Assembly Chamber.

 

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

 

Mr Munsanje: Madam Speaker, he has not even logged in so just send him out.

 

Laughter

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

 

Mr Munsanje: Chilandijisa.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Munsanje: He has not logged in, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Mbabala!

 

I think, you are not the Presiding Officer to instruct other hon. Members. Your role is to stand up and debate the Motion before us.

 

Ms Mulenga: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Munsanje: May I proceed, Madam Speaker?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

A point of order is raised.

 

Ms Mulenga: Madam Speaker, I stand here as a very disappointed and disgraced woman in this Chamber, especially since the Presiding Officer is a woman.

 

Madam Speaker, the hon.  Member for Kankoyo just called the hon. Member of Parliament for Chienge, “Ichipuba iwe”.

 

Madam Speaker, even though we are all equal, I think, respect should be of utmost importance. Some hon. Members in this House are chased out of the Assembly Chamber for debating while seated, but a male hon. Member is insulting and degrading a woman, but he goes scot-free.

 

Madam Speaker, I seek your serious ruling.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Can you cite the Standing Order that has been breached, hon. Member for Kalulushi.

 

Ms Mulenga: A precedence has been set in this Chamber, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Question!

 

Ms Mulenga: Iwe, it is No. 204. You do not know? Go and read. It is Standing Order No. 204.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Chienge!

 

That is also disorderly conduct. Hon. Member, Standing Order No. 204 talks about the functions of the General Purposes Committees.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Laughter

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: The problem, hon. Member of Parliament, –

 

Ms Mulenga interjected.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kalulushi!

 

From where I am seated, sometimes it is very difficult to get the exact words that are being mentioned, especially at the far end. However, I saw the unfortunate behaviour and I know in my mind and heart that I have truly guided the House. I did not like the behaviour that occurred. That is why I had to stop the debate and guide the House. So, I have already guided the House. We know the behaviour that is expected in this HouseopHoHouse. If you have a complaint, hon. Member for Kalulushi, please, just bring that complaint to my office. We will go and listen to the recordings. So, just bring your complaint to my office. It is never too late.

 

Hon. Member for Mbabala, you may proceed.  

 

Mr Munsanje: Madam Speaker, thank you so much for giving me an opportunity, on behalf of the good people of Mbabala, to support the Motion on the Report of the Committee on Education, Science and Technology on the Ratification of the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education.

 

Madam Speaker, the topic under discussion appeals to the people of Mbabala because of the serious implications for the people of Zambia as we support the country ratifying that convention. The Motion speaks to the issue of access to higher education, which is a privilege for only a few in our country because of the pyramidal nature of our education system. There are many people who enrol at the primary school level, but when you get to secondary school and university, the numbers drop. Therefore, for us to rectify the situation, given the fact that education is an equaliser for all, we need to join a global framework that allows our qualifications to be recognised everywhere.

 

Madam Speaker, I am speaking as a beneficiary of various international scholarships. For example, the Cambridge Commonwealth Scholarship and the Royal British Scholarship took me to Cambridge University and I was learning with people who were educated in Britain. If we ratify that global convention or framework, Zambian qualifications will be at the same level with qualifications overseas and Zambian students will be able to join prestigious universities. Once we are in that kind of atmosphere, many Zambian people will be able to get scholarships to international universities such as Cambridge, Oxford, Harvard and many others out there, which have very high standards. What is obtained from such institutions in terms of academic qualification as well as skills, experience and knowledge is very important for service delivery in this country today. Those of us who benefited from international scholarships have come back to serve our country.

 

Madam Speaker, ratifying that convention will also open up a lot of job opportunities for our people at the international level. At the moment, there are few Zambians working for international agencies. Other nationals, such as Nigerians or Kenyans are many. One of the reasons is that Zambian qualifications need to be universally acceptable. If Zambian qualifications are acceptable anywhere in the world, it will carry a lot of weight. Therefore, it will become much easier for many Zambians to join international organisations.

 

Madam Speaker, right now, we have a challenge because there is so much human resource in this country. So many people, including hon. Members of Parliament, carry huge files of curriculum vitaes (CVs) for people looking for jobs. So, we need more people to go out of this country and work for international corporations. Many countries are looking for people to work as teachers or nurses as long as they have strong qualifications that are recognised globally.

 

Madam Speaker, there are things that we have to attend to locally in terms of lecture theatre capacity, quality of lecturers and people with standard qualifications and experience from good universities. They should become lecturers so that we can start producing quality education.

 

Madam Speaker, let me also talk about infrastructure. Most institutions need to improve their infrastructure for them to deliver quality education. One of the challenging areas I have observed of late is the fieldwork for most university students. During our time at school, we carried out proper fieldwork in rural areas. One would even spend three months to carry out the fieldwork. We also did fieldwork in urban areas and prepared reports. Nowadays, I have observed a trend whereby students have nowhere to go and they are so many. As a result, they are coming out of university without doing proper fieldwork. There are so many universities nowadays that are just graduating students without proper training. Therefore, the supervision of universities by the Higher Education Authority (HEA) needs to be strengthened because they are not giving students actual experience for them to come out fully baked. We have a really big job on our hands to improve our internal situation or capacity so that when Zambian graduates go out there, we can continue to produce quality work that we are known for.

 

Madam Speaker, I have no doubt that Hon. Syakalima is up to the job at hand. He is doing an excellent job in the education sector.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Munsanje:  We will continue to push with him to ensure that we succeed in ratifying that global convention so that we are able to produce quality Zambian students who will take up the mantle of global leadership. We have a lot of foreign students right now who are in this country. I have seen Swanas, Namibians, Tanzanians and Zimbabweans. They are all flooding our universities. Why is that so? It is because we are a flagship country that is known for quality. So, our job is to simply maintain that quality and even go higher by looking at every aspect of education. We need to give scholarships to the best students, the way it used to be in the past.

 

Madam Speaker, I knew Mr Syakalima as one of the best students when he graduated from the University of Zambia (UNZA). He was my lecturer under the student retention programme. We need to continue with programmes of retaining the best students so that they can become lecturers. We can then have a good education hon. Ministers. Mr Syakalima is a good hon. Minister of Education because of the experience he gained by being retained at UNZA. He went out to study in Europe and then come back and continued lecturing. It is from such situations that we get good quality education and we must continue on that trajectory. We need to look at all aspects of higher education institutions.

 

Madam Speaker, the recommendations contained in that report are very important and I fully support it on behalf of the people of Mbabala. We know that children in Kabanze, Mayobo, Mutanga and Mpinda will one day benefit from those recommendations and become doctors and professors. Thereafter, they will be in industry and many other areas of development.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: We have to conclude debate on this report before the break.

 

Debate under three minutes, hon. Member for Lunte.

 

Mr Kafwaya (Lunte): Madam Speaker, it is difficult to tender a discourse under three minutes. However, since that is what you have offered me, I would like to urge the hon. Minister to read the report on page 6, where the Government is being urged to align laws and policy. This means that policies and laws are not aligned to support higher education qualifications. I wanted to elaborate, but I will not. I also advise the hon. Minister to read item number two on the same page, where the Committee is calling for the harmonisation of mandates for institutions in the education sector. Having institutions with mandates that are not in harmony is a recipe for confusion. When you confuse the institutions that are there to assist, then, you have a situation whereby outcomes lack credibility. That is why harmonisation of mandates of various institutions is very important.

 

Madam Speaker, on the same page, under item number three, the Committee has recommended investment in capacity and infrastructure. To produce high-quality degrees, you require a high-quality educational system. To do so, we need not only sufficient but also appropriate infrastructure. It should not end there; we also need appropriate technology so that we can mix the ingredients of investment in the educational delivery system. In the absence of an appropriate structure and technology, it is virtually impossible to deliver quality.

 

Madam Speaker, what does it mean to strengthen these systems? It means that we need to have a good legal and policy framework. From what the Committee has written, this is lacking in our higher education system. Now, once we get a policy and legal framework that is not only good but consistent, then, we will need a good or appropriate structure. Then, we will need to resource that structure. This is why, when we talk about budgeting, which is normally discussed in this House, the Budget should be aligned with the difficulties of making adjustments to the entire governance system. It is unfortunate that the lack of consistency has even gone to higher education.

 

Madam Speaker, while I support the ratification of the convention, I urge the Government to take note of what the report is saying. As I said, three minutes is certainly not sufficient for me to deliver what I intended to deliver appropriately for the benefit of the United Party for National Development (UPND) Government.

 

Madam Speaker, I support the ratification of this convention.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

The Minister of Education (Mr Syakalima): Madam Speaker, on behalf of the Ministry of Education, I rise to sincerely thank you for granting me this opportunity to deliver this statement following the successful debate on the Motion to adopt the Report of the Committee on Education, Science and Technology on the Ratification of the Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications Concerning Higher Education.

 

Madam Speaker, allow me to express my deepest appreciation to the mover of the Motion and the seconder for the manner in which they ably advanced the case for Zambia's ratification of this important international instrument.

 

Madam Speaker, I wish to commend the chairperson and all distinguished hon. Members of the Committee for the comprehensive and well-researched report that was laid on the Table of this House on Wednesday, 30^th July, 2025. The Committee's diligent work, including consultations with stakeholders, demonstrates a commendable commitment to strengthening transparency, accountability and evidence-based decision-making in our education sector. We are equally grateful to the hon. Members of this august House for their overwhelming support, constructive engagement and shared commitment to advancing Zambia's higher education agenda within the global landscape. Their endorsement of this Motion represents a major step towards promoting academic mobility, international recognition of Zambian qualifications and enhanced opportunities for our students, graduates and institutions.

 

Madam Speaker, I wish to acknowledge and thank the various stakeholders who made invaluable submissions to the Committee. In particular, we commend the Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA), the Higher Education Authority (HEA), the Technical Education, Vocational and Entrepreneurship Training Authority (TEVETA) and our public and private higher education institutions for their continued efforts to uphold the quality and credibility of our national qualifications framework.

 

Madam Speaker, the ratification of this convention presents an opportunity to align our higher education system with global standards, strengthen quality assurance and enable Zambian qualifications to gain wider recognition internationally. This will not only facilitate cross-border academic and professional mobility, but also position Zambia as a competitive player in international research, innovation and collaboration. Let me also acknowledge the dedication of officers in the fields of education for their role in facilitating this process, as well as the technical and logistical support provided by the Clerk of the National Assembly and her staff throughout this inquiry.

 

Madam Speaker, as the Government, we are committed to implementing the recommendations of the Committee, including the domestication of the convention through relevant policies and accessible frameworks. We will continue investing in institutional capacity, regulatory coherence and infrastructure development to ensure that Zambia fully benefits from this important milestone.

 

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, I remain optimistic that this ratification will usher in a new era for Zambia's higher education system, one that is inclusive, internationally respected and responsive to the aspirations of our people and the demands of a rapidly evolving global knowledge economy.

 

Madam Speaker, let me just use the few minutes remaining to respond to  a few queries or observations which my hon. Colleagues put forward. I want to categorically say that we had so many foreign students in our land, yet in between, I do not know when, there was a slump. This time around, we have so many foreign students. In fact, we are even more competitive even without having ratified the convention, because there are so many things that we have actually done. I think that Zambia has addressed the issue of qualifications for refugees even without having a law regarding that.  The qualifications for refugees are assessed. Some refugees have been placed in higher education institutions like universities and colleges. So, it is not true that we do not have foreign students here. Yes, we acknowledge the slump which took place, but now we are on a trajectory to be competitive in the 21^st Century. This is why people have seen so many investors coming and linking themselves to universities and industries like fertiliser plants. There is a fertiliser plant that will be producing Urea, which wants 400 chemical engineers. So, the University of Zambia (UNZA), the Copperbelt University (CBU) and Mukuba University will be linked to that. All the investors coming to Zambia will be directed to our universities. So, that is already being done. There are so many investors coming into the country. Just yesterday, I received professors in medicine, and I linked them with the Levy Mwanawasa Medical University (LMMU). So, why are investors coming here? It is because they know how intelligent Zambians are.

 

Madam Speaker, you can see that these (pointed at Cabinet hon. Ministers) all hold degrees from the University of Zambia (UNZA). There seems to be a lack of consistency and uniformity with regards to the payment of various allowances that an officer might have been entitled to.

 

Madam Speaker, let me conclude by thanking you and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly of Zambia for the guidance and support you rendered to the Committee during its deliberations. I further wish to thank all the stakeholders who appeared before the Committee and the technical support rendered to it by the permanent witnesses. I also wish to appreciate the members of the Committee for their co-operation and dedication to Committee work, which made my role as chairperson easy.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

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

 

Mr Shakafuswa: Now, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the mover of the Motion, our able chairperson, Hon. Nyambose, for the able manner in which he has highlighted the critical issues contained in the Committee's report.

 

Madam Speaker, in seconding the Motion, allow me to comment on a few of the Committee's observations and recommendations that the mover has not touched on.

 

Failure to Remit Statutory Obligations

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee observed that 109 out of 116 local councils owed various institutions K3,552,262,650 in respect of taxes, pensions, insurance, and supply of goods and services, some of which has been outstanding from as far back as 2013. It is noteworthy that most of the local councils have no capacity to liquidate their debt and lack strategies to do so. The Committee finds this unacceptable and urges the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, together with the Ministry of Finance and National Planning, to find a lasting and sustainable solution to this overarching challenge.

 

Weak Internal Control Systems

 

Madam Speaker, the Committee learned that most local councils had poor internal control systems, resulting in unsupported payments amounting to K2,073,779 made by twelve local councils, six local councils had missing payment vouchers amounting to K3,683,718, while K379,067 was unacquitted during the period under review. The Committee urges the Executive to strengthen the audit function in local councils, and further recommends that officers who fail to execute their fiduciary duty be surcharged under their conditions of service, and have matters dealt with to their conclusion.

 

Propensity to Use Force Accounts to Implement Projects

 

Madam Speaker, of great concern is the propensity and appetite of local councils to use force accounts to implement capital projects under the Local Government Equalisation Fund (LGEF). While acknowledging that the Government has authorised local councils to utilise 100 per cent of the LGEF on operations, the Committee strongly recommends that the local councils desist from using force accounts, which are usually a conduit for misapplication of funds and implementation of poor-quality capital projects.

 

Failure to Settle Staff Obligations

 

Madam Speaker, to augment the chairperson’s submission on the payment of allowances vis-à-vis being cognisant of the provisions of Article 189 of the Constitution of Zambia, the Committee noted with concern that eighty-one local councils owed former and existing employees K358,097,412 in respect of long service bonuses and leave travel benefits, some of which have been outstanding from as far back as 2009.

 

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

 

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam Speaker, as a starting point, I would like to say that the local government, constitutionally, is an engine of development at the local level. I watched the sessions on the local government accounts with interest when the meetings were held. I think, we are conducting witch hunts with regards to many things that we have not invested in. For instance, the Constitution is clear about how we are supposed to devolve functions, and it further qualifies the process. For instance, Article 147 is about devolution. However, Article 152 takes the domain of influence of the provincial and national structures away from the local authorities, and positions them as implementers of projects at the district level. I know that we come to this House to talk and talk but, as long as we do not follow the law, we will be shooting in the dark.

 

Madam Speaker, when we talk about the local authorities' exclusive functions, I remember the former Minister of Local Government, Hon. Kampyongo’s debate during consideration of another report. He gave details with regard to the Annexe of the Constitution, which tabulates all the factors well. I will give my district as an example of how the issues were attended to. The audit was on the local authority's failure to collect the fish levy and many other obligations. However, if you scrutinise Chilubi, you will see that the avenues of collecting money are limited. It is not supposed to be the responsibility of the local authority. It is supposed to be the responsibility of the Central Government to invest in areas that can facilitate the local authority's capacity to collect revenue. We are struggling with water canals and roads whose works were cancelled with 198 other road works. The local authority uses the same routes, whose road works were cancelled, to check on how people fish and make barriers in the swamps. An access road is needed to reach the swamps.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Business was suspended from 1640 hours until 1700 hours.

 

[MR SECOND DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Dr Kalila: Mr Speaker, before business was suspended, I was about to present a report on the implementation of the SCT programme. I hope the hon. Members read the report.

 

Mr Speaker, I am pleased to report that the implementation of the SCT programme in Zambia has made progress. By 2023, the programme had achieved nationwide coverage, reaching over 1.1 million vulnerable households across all 116 districts. Beyond the audit report, coverage further increased to approximately 1.3 million households in 2024. In addition to that, administrative costs have also declined significantly, from 27.4 per cent in 2020 to 8 per cent in 2025. This is due to improved systems and streamlined operations.

 

Mr Speaker, the Committee also notes that donor contributions previously accounted for the bulk of the SCT programme funding. However, Government funding to the programme has progressively increased, rising from 40 per cent to 62 per cent in 2023. In 2025, Government funding currently exceeds 90 per cent. These achievements are, indeed, commendable. However, Zambia continues to face persistently high levels of poverty and inequality. According to the 2022 Living Conditions Monitoring Survey, over 60 per cent of the population lives below the national poverty line, and rural poverty remains particularly very high. This entails that we need to double our efforts to expand social protection interventions in our country. In this regard, the Committee wishes to highlight key findings and recommendations as follows:

 

Expansion of Programme Coverage

 

Mr Speaker, the Committee acknowledges the impressive scale-up of the SCT programme, from covering over 574,000 households in 2017 to 1.3 million households by 2024. However, today, approximately 1.95 million households are estimated to be living in extreme poverty. This indicates that a significant number of eligible households are yet to be reached by this very good programme. Therefore, the ministry should scale up its efforts to reach all eligible households in extreme poverty.

 

Inclusion and Certification of Persons with Disabilities

 

Mr Speaker, the audit revealed that a substantial proportion of persons with disabilities were excluded from the programme due to a lack of disability certification. Only about 7.5 per cent, equating to 135,876 individuals, out of the 1.8 million persons living with disabilities were registered. In light of this, there is a need to shift from the current medical model of certifying persons with disability to a rights-based disability assessment framework. This approach would facilitate more inclusive and accessible certification processes by building the capacity of local social workers. The Committee also urges the ministry to review and increase the transfer value for persons with disabilities to at least K2,000, given that the current amount is inadequate for their sustenance.

 

Annual Review of the Transfer Amounts

 

Mr Speaker, the audit further revealed that transfer values have not been regularly reviewed. Although the amount was increased from K90 in 2020 to K200 per household, and K400 for persons with disabilities in 2022, the figures remain far below the 2022 poverty datum line of K517. As a result, beneficiaries continue to struggle to meet basic needs. In this regard, the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services is urged to undertake annual reviews for transfer values, using a cost-reflective and inflation-sensitive approach. This will preserve the real value of transfers and enhance the impact of the SCT programme on poverty reduction.

 

Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Committee, I wish to conclude by expressing our sincere gratitude, as always, for the opportunity that you always give us to review such important undertakings. The Committee further extends appreciation to the Office of the Auditor-General, the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services, all co-operating partners and stakeholders, and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for their support throughout the review process.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

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

 

Mr Chibombwe: Now, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker, allow me to sincerely thank you for the opportunity to second this important Motion, which has been ably moved by Dr Kalila, hon. Member of Parliament for Lukulu East and chairperson of the Committee on Health, Community Development and Social Services.

 

Mr Speaker, the mover of the Motion indicated that the purpose of the follow-up performance audit report was to assess whether the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services had taken actions on the findings and recommendations made in 2018, regarding the administration of the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme in Zambia. The 2018 audit report identified a number of weaknesses in the administration of SCT programmes in Zambia. Allow me to highlight the weaknesses that were identified in 2018.

 

Mr Speaker, the first one is the incomplete rollout of the SCT to all districts. The second one was payment to ineligible beneficiaries and the third is inadequate documentation for disability status. The fourth weakness was the delays in disbursement of funds from the headquarters to districts, the fifth one was the failure to review transfer amounts and the sixth was high administrative costs.

 

Mr Speaker, the mover has highlighted notable successes that have been made so far in the administration of the SCT. Among the notable successes is the introduction of the automated payment system known as the Zambia Social Protection Information System. This system has eliminated the use of pay point managers in many of districts.

 

Mr Speaker, at this point, allow me to talk about the weaknesses that still exist in the administration of the SCT in the country. The Ministry of Community Development and Social Services has not finalised and operationalised the Social Protection Bill. That is the first one. The Bill was initially expected to be finalised in November, 2023. Cabinet has approved the Cash Plus Agenda, but the implementation of that agenda has stalled. Those are some of the things that will help the integration of the SCT programmes and other social safety nets and reduce the duplication of beneficiaries.

 

Mr Speaker, the Cash Plus Agenda will help harmonise the SCT programmes with other social initiatives such as the Food Security Pack, Keeping Girls in School Project, Supporting Women’s Livelihoods Initiative, Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), School Feeding Programme, Cash for Work Programme and Constituency Development Fund (CDF) empowerment programmes for vulnerable groups and many other social initiatives.

 

Mr Speaker, the report also highlighted the fact that during the period under review, the ministry paid about K2 million to ineligible beneficiaries. There is no plan to recover the K2 million that was spent. The mover alluded to the fact that the presence of the Zambia Association for Persons with Disabilities (ZAPD) in a number of districts is quite limited. At the time that the report was handed to the Committee, ZAPD had presence only in twenty-one districts out of 116 districts in the country. It is for this reason that the Committee is recommending that the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services should strengthen collaboration between the ministry itself, ZAPD and the office of the hon. Member of Parliament.

 

Mr Speaker, hon. Members of Parliament live with the people, but are not consulted when it comes to scaling up or putting more beneficiaries on the lists for social protection. We have structures in communities such as the Ward Development Committees (WDCs), Ward Councillors, headmen and chiefs. If we were consulted, the issue of limited presence of ZAPD in the country would come to an end. I would like to appeal to the chairperson of the Caucus on Disability Inclusion, Hon. Dr Munsanje …

 

Mr Chibombwe paused and looked at Mr Munsanje.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Chibombwe: … to appeal to all hon. hon. Members to help ZAPD with the registration of all persons with disabilities in all our constituencies. We do not need a lot of money. We can utilise the CDF to register all people with disabilities countrywide. The amount has remained the same because it has not been reviewed. The mover of the Motion spoke to the issue and said that the transfer amount is still at K400 and K800 for people with disabilities. A recommendation has been made by the mover that people living with disabilities should receive a minimum of K2,000 per month. Considering the abundance of natural resources we have, we can afford to pay people living with disabilities a living wage of K2,000 per month or even K4,000 monthly.

 

Mr Speaker, the other weakness that the Committee noted with regard to the SCT Programme is high administrative costs. We still have pay point managers in districts that do not have mobile phone network coverage. I would like to appeal to the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services to collaborate with the Ministry of Technology and Science to enhance telecommunication in areas where we do not have towers.

 

Mr Speaker, digital literacy is one of the things that the Committee recommended. I am sure most of us in here have received text messages like ndalama zangena, meaning that money is in the account and –

 

 Interruptions.

 

Mr Chibombwe: Shut up, you!

 

Mr Speaker, I am being disturbed by the hon. Minister of – I need your protection.

 

The hon. Member’s time expired.

 

Mr Chibombwe: Mr Speaker, we need digital literacy.

 

Mr Speaker, the other –

 

Hon. UPND Members: It is time up!

 

Mr Chibombwe: Mr Speaker, there are so many …

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

 

Your time is up.

 

Mr Chibombwe: … witnesses noted.

 

Mr Speaker, with those few remarks, I thank you and your Committee.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker, we are debating a programme for the poor. The initial intention of the programme was livelihood, empowerment, protection, social assistance and social security. Those issues can also be collapsed into poverty, vulnerability and inequalities. Given that background, I will start with a sample of the audit.

 

Mr Speaker, we know that rolling out of the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme has happened from eighty districts to 116 districts.

 

Hon. Government Member interjected.

 

Mr Fube: Ah! Abanabo ichongo!

 

Mr Speaker, given that situation, it means that a sample that would have picked a lot of challenges only tackled 8.6 per cent. The Committee’s report says that that is due to fiscal challenges.

 

Mr Speaker, on behalf of the people of Chilubi, I would like to appeal that when there is such a sample to be undertaken and an audit of that nature, the Government should put in more effort in terms of financing such an audit because it concerns all the districts. All the constituencies should be tackled. The people of Chilubi expected that since we are talking about poverty, vulnerability and inequalities, there is a need for us to do better in that area.

 

Mr Speaker, I do not want to go into the temptation of projecting an image of being political. I know that when hon. Members on your right are debating, they talk about the Patriotic Front (PF) and so on. The House will agree that I always run away from that temptation. However, I will say the facts that I have even presented to the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services.

 

Sir, it has been mentioned that K2 million has been paid to ineligible beneficiaries. In the district I come from, there is a political heavy hand from the office of the District Commissioner (DC), whereby officers at the Ministry of Community Development and Social Services prepare a template for people to be paid according to the vulnerability scale and those who qualify, but the names change because the DC interferes. This programme has become institutionalised cadreism because people who are not even supposed to benefit are benefiting from the SCT. It has become a way of rewarding people who are not even eligible to be on the programme and do not fall within the vulnerability scale. Those people are getting money that they do not deserve. This is a crisis because orphans, disabled people and old people who are within the vulnerability scale and qualify to be on the programme are being left out.

 

Mr Speaker, another factor that the report has pointed out is that, even though the vulnerability scale exists, institutions or agencies are supposed to help the Government to identify the vulnerable in the 116 districts. I am talking about institutions such as the Zambia Agency for Persons with Disabilities (ZAPD). You will find that some disabled people who really –

 

Mr Mposha: Wind up.

 

Ms Mulenga: Question!

 

Mr Fube: This hon. Minister – this tall hon. Minister from Munali –

 

Mr Speaker, what I am trying to say is that the ZAPD is not spread throughout the country, yet it is one of the institutions that is supposed to help the Government by registering the people who qualify to be on the SCT. We know that one of the factors necessary for a person to qualify to be on the programme is a medical report. However, even if a disabled person has a medical report, for one to qualify to be on the programme, institutions like ZAPD need to register him/her and confirm that he/she is, indeed, disabled. After that, the person can be registered in the system. We need to make the system watertight so that it cannot be manipulated.

 

Mr Speaker, the transfer of the National Social Protection Policy of 2014 –

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, can I be protected from the noise that I am getting from there?

 

Mr Chisopa interjected.

 

Mr Fube: No, it is disturbing.

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Mkushi South!

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, we had the National Social Protection Policy of 2014, and now, we have the National Social Protection Policy of 2025. We need to factor in the inadequacies that we have discovered. If we have discovered some inadequacies in the policy, we need to know that it is not the policy that will make us succeed in achieving deliverables; it is what we put in at the end of the day.

 

Mr Speaker, let me come to the end user or the people who are supposed to receive the money from social programmes. I will not talk about what they receive; I will concentrate on those who manage the funds. We have had a situation whereby an old woman who had been in the system for a long period was told that she would not receive her money because her name was no longer appearing in the system. However, if she wanted to receive the money, she could give the officer disbursing the funds a bit of money, K200 in particular, out of the money she was supposed to receive. However, where would the K200 come from? Is that not petty corruption? The man or woman managing the funds would give the old woman a K200, and the old woman went home a bit happy because she thought that her name was not in the system anymore, but she had just been favoured. Meanwhile, the person managing the funds pocketed the K200. That is what is happening. That scenario –

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member, you are saying that that is the prevailing situation in your constituency?

 

Mr Fube: Yes, in Chilubi, and I can confirm that there are many cases like that.

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Have you reported that to the police?

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, yes, but the problem is that when I report, the police do not pay attention.

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: So, if you know that you do not have anything to back your claims, do not make such assertions.

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, why should we not talk about reality?

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: I have guided you.

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, anyway, you have guided me, but reality remains the same.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Fube: Mr Speaker, this question concerns the poor, and I was elected to represent the poor and different groups of people. When I represent the poor, I should portray the right picture, as it is on the ground. I am just trying to be the voice of all the 115,000 people of Chilubi who cannot be in Parliament. So, they speak through me. I will report these issues to your office because you commissioned the report that I am talking about.

 

Mr Speaker, before I was asked to clarify, I was trying to say that the system is not watertight. There is a need to make the system watertight for the end user. We need to make it watertight so that the District Commissioner (DC) cannot interfere with it or change people’s names and put cadres instead. The Government budgets for social programmes. So, the money needs to reach the people it intends to benefit –

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

The hon. Member’s time expired.

 

Mr Mutelo (Mitete): Mr Speaker, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to debate.

 

Mr Speaker, on page 3, the report talks about an audit report of 2017. The hon. Member who has just debated was the District Commissioner (DC) for Chilubi Constituency at some point. So, he could have been talking about what was happening in 2017 when he was DC. The report says that the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) programme has improved tremendously and the beneficiaries have increased. I thought that he would even say that during the Patriotic Front (PF) Government, a little good happened. The PF Government increased the number of districts where the programme is being implemented from eighty to 116. You know, facts remain facts. Maybe, DCs from the previous Government used to change names of beneficiaries. One of the promises of the United Party for National Development (UPND) was to increase the districts covered by the programme. In Mitete and Lukulu, people used to be told that if they voted for the UPND and President Hakainde Hichilema, the UPND Government would scrap off the SCT programme. Instead of scrapping it off, the UPND Government has increased the number of beneficiaries.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, numbers do not lie. The number of beneficiaries has increased from more than 500,000 to 1.1 million in 2023. The report says that in 2024, the number of beneficiaries increased to 1.23 million. The question in my head is: What will the number be in 2025? The graph is going up. Things are happening.

 

Mr Chisopa: Where?

 

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, in addition, there is also the Emergency Cash Transfer fund. All this is happening in the New Dawn Government. Even when there was a severe drought, social services were increased. In the past, had a drought occurred, it would have been a different story, but the UPND –

 

Mr Charles Mulenga: They even removed meal allowances for students.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mutelo: They even removed the meal allowances.

 

Mr Sing’ombe: Shame!

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mutelo: On top of the SCT, meal allowances for students were increased. However, that is not the topic here, rather the topic is the SCT. I could end at meal allowances for students, but let me also say that the Ministry of Education has scaled up the School Feeding Programme. Today is about the SCT Programme, which was tremendously increased in 2024. Hence, what the stakeholders submitted. That is how matters of social services are supposed to be handled.

 

Mr Speaker, in the past, parents and guardians used to hide their differently-abled children. However, with the increase in the SCT allocation, people are coming forward saying, “Ninani mwanayo. Ninani mwayale, eni, kisi yanga,” meaning, “We have a physically-challenged child in our family.” They are now coming out. That is what a Government with good policies does, and that is how it should have been done in the past.

 

Mr Speaker, I support the adoption of the Committee’s report because severely differently-abled people in Mitete receive K1,200. When one mentions some things that we mention outside, they answer by saying, “K800”, meaning that they receive K800. Some even say that they are wives of President Hakainde Hichilema. Others, ­ if you will allow me to say it­ no longer accept proposals anyhow. That is what we are getting on the ground. Having travelled to Chipata and listened to the hon. Member for Luangeni, such things are also happening there and that is good. They are happening even in Manyinga as well as Kaputa, Shangombo, Chama North and Chama South. The graphs show increases even in Chilubi, Mpika and Mkushi South.

 

Mr Speaker, on that note, I would like to say that I am in total support of the Motion to adopt the Committee’s report. What the United Party for National Development (UPND), New Dawn Government, under the able leadership of President Hakainde Hichilema, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, is doing is the right thing.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you

 

Mr Kapyanga (Mpika): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving this opportunity to the voice of the people of Mpika to contribute to the debate on an important subject.

 

Mr Speaker, I read the report and I would say that I am on firm ground in adding the voice of the people of Mpika. The Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme started in 2003 and it was piloted in Kalomo District. From 2014 to 2015, the Government then decided to roll it out across the country as the national harmonised SCT Programme. It has been a success story. Our people, who are the suffering majority, in Chitulika, Lubambala Ward, Kasenga, Kamwanya, Mtendere and Kamwanya have benefited from that fund. However, it is important to point out some salient issues that must be addressed to continue running the programme smoothly and for the benefit of poor majority.

 

Mr Speaker, the programme exists in line with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which aim at alleviating poverty. Therefore, it must play a critical role in ensuring that SDGs are achieved. One of the challenges at present, and even in the past, is that people who are not even eligible for the programme benefit, leaving out the intended beneficiaries, and that happens because of political involvement. The programme should not have any political hand involved. Political party lines should be detached. It is a sacred fund for poor people. As other debaters have said, one finds that when the Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWAC) structures are formed, politicians are actively involved, particularly the Ruling Party. They actively ensure that their party members get those positions in order to be recommending their fellow cadres for the programme. That is where the problem starts.

 

Mr Speaker, I would like to urge the hon. Minister of Community Development and Social Services to ensure that representatives of the people are involved at every level of the programme, particularly during the formation of SCT structures on the ground, because it is those structures that generate the list of beneficiaries. The real beneficiaries must be identified and put on the programme.

 

Mr Speaker, equally, when there is a by-election, one finds that people are told that if they do not vote for the Ruling Party, they will be removed from the programme.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member, resume your seat.

 

You are trying to mislead yourself. I am also a Member of Parliament. Ward Development Committees (WDCs) and the Community Welfare Assistance Committees (CWACs) are not selected by political party structures, but by the community. You are misleading yourself. That is the Government’s policy. No political party official flags who becomes a WDC member. The community votes for would-be CWAC or WDC members. You have gone further by making another false assertion about elections; things that you do not have proof of. Ensure that you confine your debate to the report that you have. I will have no choice, but to curtail your debate if you continue misleading the House.

 

You may proceed.

 

Mr Kapyanga: Mr Speaker, I should have amplified my voice for my Hon. Speaker to hear me. What I said is that there is political influence during the formation of the structures.

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Hon. Member, I have given you guidance. So, stick to the report.

 

Mr Kapyanga: Mr Speaker, we have seen how the SCT Programme numbers have increased from 2014, but it is not enough. The report states that 635,000 households remain under extreme poverty, and that means that funding must be increased to absorb more beneficiaries, thereby addressing poverty. The Government needs to ensure that a lot of resources are mobilised to attend to those challenges. Further, when the Government tightens tax evasion issues and ensures that the mineral royalty tax is paid, there will be enough money to absorb a good number of people into the programme.

 

Mr Speaker, let me also thank the chairperson of the Committee for stating that there is a need to increase the transfer value for persons with disabilities to K2,000. That is something that must be done almost immediately. Our people, especially those living with disabilities, are going through various challenges.

 

Mr Speaker, as I conclude, I wish to reiterate my earlier position that politics should be completely detached from a Government policy. This programme under discussion is a  Government policy, not a party policy. When something is implemented perfectly well for the benefit of our people, we will be here to say, “This is commendable.” The reason this report is on the Floor of the House is for hon. Members to make submissions to the hon. Minister of Community Development and Social Services so that together with her team, they can work on perfecting the fund. The information we are bringing out adds to what the report says. I am happy, Mr Speaker, that you have stated that you are equally an hon. Member of Parliament.

 

Mr Speaker, the United Party for National Development (UPND) Government should ensure that, whether with a by-election or not, the fund remains for the poor. No one should be threatened with the statement, “You will be removed from the fund if you do not vote for the UPND.” No one!

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member, may you resume your seat.

 

 Mr Kapyanga: Mr Speaker, the UPND Government should also detach corruption from this fund.

 

Mr Second Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

 

May you resume your seat.

 

Mr Kapyanga: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

The Minister of Labour and Social Security (Ms Tambatamba) (on behalf of the Minister of Community Development and Social Services (Ms D. Mwamba)): Mr Speaker, I rise to acknowledge the findings presented in the Auditor-General’s Report on the Implementation of the Social Cash Transfer (SCT) Programme. Right from the beginning, let me stress the fact that the New Dawn Administration of the United Party for National Development (UPND) will respond to such, in a methodical manner, as per what President Hakainde Hichilema has put across. We will fear no challenge. We will take a methodical approach to attend to matters such as this.

 

Mr Speaker, the audit reveals that our objective to expand the programme from fifty districts in 2014 to 104 districts by 2017 was not fully achieved, with only eighty districts reached, representing 77 per cent of the target. Furthermore, we fell short of our target to reach 60 per cent of female beneficiary households, achieving only 53 per cent. Other concerns include payments to ineligible beneficiaries and inclusion of uncertified persons with disability. As a ministry, we acknowledge these findings and take them very seriously. The challenges we faced are attributed to logistical and operational issues that can exacerbate poverty and vulnerability by limiting access to essential services and economic opportunities. We are committed, however, to addressing these issues and improving the programme’s effectiveness, as can be seen in the recent pronouncements. We shall approach social protection measures by presenting a life cycle approach, focused on the details of the lives of our people at different levels and floors.

 

Mr Speaker, in line with the recommendations, the Government, through the ministry, has prioritised broadening the coverage of the SCT programme to combat extreme poverty effectively. Between 2020 and 2022, the number of households benefiting from the SCT programme increased from 616,464 to 1,027,000, representing a 67 per cent increase. Currently, more than 5 million individuals are benefiting from the programme. Additionally, it was recommended that the Government reduce its reliance on donor funding to ensure sustainability. Notably, the Government has been the largest financier of the SCT programme, contributing 62 per cent towards the programme, while co-operating partners contributed 38 per cent.

 

Regarding the target for female-headed households, Mr Speaker, the ministry increased beneficiaries in other target groups, including the chronically ill, persons on palliative care, persons with disabilities, child-headed households, and the elderly. This was done while reducing the number of female-headed households who were perceived to be in the reproductive age and could transition to other empowerment programmes within the life cycle approach.

 

Mr Speaker, to address the inclusion of uncertified persons with disabilities, interventions were implemented. These included sensitisation on the need to acquire disability cards and collaboration with the Ministry of Health to increase the number of persons with disabilities being issued with medical slips and disability cards.

 

Mr Speaker, despite the challenges, we must not lose sight of the broader perspective. The SCT programme has significantly improved the livelihoods of people in our communities and constituencies. By providing direct financial support to vulnerable populations, we help communities meet their basic needs and reduce poverty. This programme acts as a safety net, shielding the poor and vulnerable from economic shocks and crises. Additionally, the SCT programme injects funds directly into the local communities, boosting demand for goods and services and supporting small businesses. By putting more money into people’s pockets, we foster economic growth, especially in rural or disadvantaged areas.

 

Mr Speaker, let us continue to build on the successes of the SCT programme, which we all know, while addressing the challenges and limitations identified. In doing so, we will ensure that the programme continues to make a meaningful difference in the lives of our people.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Kalila: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Committee, I would like to thank all the hon. Members who have debated for their positive contribution to the Motion. Let me end by saying that we applaud the strides the ministry is making in improving the implementation of the SCT programme in Zambia.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

_______

 

BILL

 

THIRD READING

 

The following Bill was read the third time and passed:

 

The Superior Courts (Number of Judges) Bill, 2025

 

_______

 

MOTION

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

The Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security and Acting Leader of Government Business in the House (Mr Mwiimbu, SC.): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

_______

 

The House adjourned at 1752 hours until 0900 hours on Friday, 1^st August, 2025.

 

____________