Thursday, 27th November, 2025

Thursday, 27^th November, 2025

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY MADAM SPEAKER

PUPILS AND TEACHERS FROM LIBALA SECONDARY SCHOOL

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

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

Thank you.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

VISITORS FROM PASTORNET IN CHONGWE DISTRICT

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I wish to recognise the presence, in the Public Gallery, of visitors from Pastornet in Chongwe District. Pastornet is a group of pastors who have come together with the vision of supporting children in Chongwe.

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

Thank you.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

_______

URGENT MATTERS WITHOUT NOTICE

MR ZULU, HON. MEMBER FOR NYIMBA, ON MR MWIIMBU, SC., HON. MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS AND INTERNAL SECURITY, ON THE ISSUANCE OF NATIONAL REGISTRATION CARDS IN NYIMBA

Mr Zulu (Nyimba): Madam Speaker, on an Urgent Matter without Notice.

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

It is daily bread now.

Laughter

Mr Zulu: Madam Speaker, the elephant in the room is the National Registration Cards (NRCs) exercise. Firstly, I would like to acknowledge and thank the Government for the extension of the voter registration period.

Madam Speaker, the Eastern Province’s Nyimba District recorded more than 8,000 new NRCs. The district is sitting at 8,562 new NRCs. People travelled long distances, some moved 40 km or 60 km, thinking that after the extension of the voter registration period, the NRC exercise would be taken to the central business district (CBD). As of today, there is no issuance of NRCs in the district and many people, more than 8,000, have not collected the NRCs.

Madam Speaker, I know the hon. Minister will present a statement on the issue on Tuesday. However, voter registration would have closed on Monday. The question is: Is there any plan by the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security, whom I know is a hardworking man and is able to see to it that people are given NRCs, to provide NRCs between today and the end of the voter registration period?

Madam Speaker: Thank you very much, hon. Member for Nyimba.

The only challenge that I see is that even if we ask the hon. Minister to give an update, he can only do that on Wednesday, next week, which is well after the exercise has closed. So, why do you not engage him? You have said that he is able. So, put more pressure on him.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: So, engage with him. I am sure you can solve the issues by engaging in discussions. Waiting for a Ministerial Statement will not resolve the issue, but I understand why you are raising the issue. The hon. Minister is here, in the House, and he is listening.

Mr Mwiimbu, SC.: We can discuss.

Madam Speaker: Yes. So, please, engage more.

Hon. Members, just engage. There is no magic in Urgent Matters without Notice.

Ms Nakaponda: He can provide an answer.

Madam Speaker: Let us engage. Of course, hon. Ministers are taking note of your concern about the issue. However, let us engage them.

So, the matter is not admitted.

Hon. Member, together with the hon. Member for Isoka, you are urged to engage the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security to have that issue addressed.

MR MWAMBAZI, HON. MEMBER FOR BWANA MKUBWA, ON MR HAIMBE, SC., HON. MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION, ON THE DENIAL OF VISAS TO HON. MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

Mr Mwambazi (Bwana Mkubwa): Madam Speaker, on an Urgent Matter without Notice.

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

Mr Mwambazi: Madam Speaker, I rarely rise on Urgent Matters without Notice. My issue is directed at the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation, in absentia, as he is not in the House.

Madam Speaker, this year in June, I was tasked to travel with your team to Berlin and Türkiye. We applied for Schengen visas through the German Embassy. However, your Members of Parliament were denied the visas, despite having diplomatic passports. In turn, we were asked what I can call very foolish questions by the people at the embassy. They asked why we were travelling eighteen of us and if we had money. We told them that they had no jurisdiction to ask us such questions.

Madam Speaker, I raise this matter because diplomacy is about reciprocity; how you are treated is how you also need to treat others. The diplomatic passport is soon becoming worthless. As I speak, I tried, again, to apply for a visa to attend a World Health Organisation (WHO) meeting in Geneva, yet, even through the fast-track process, your Members of Parliament are still denied visas. Even the bonding requirement by the United States of America (USA) is the same thing. Why does the Government not want to reciprocate the way we are treated? When those people travel to our country, they are issued with visas upon arrival at the airport. Can the Government reciprocate that to ensure that we are all treated fairly, as it were? A diplomatic passport ensures that a person is a high-level person whose behaviour and conduct are honourable.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: To my knowledge, the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security is also Acting hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation since the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation is not around. I have seen something to that effect. We do not know when the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Co-operation will come in, but I think that is a matter that needs to be addressed, because if hon. Members of Parliament, holding diplomatic passports, can be denied visas, then, where are we going? We are going to perform our oversight role; checking on the embassies and how they are performing, yet visas are being denied.

Acting hon. Minister, I think, it is a matter that we need to address.

The Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security (Mr Mwiimbu, SC.): Madam Speaker, visa issues fall under my jurisdiction. I have heard what the hon. Member of Parliament has indicated. We will address it.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Thank you very much.

So, will the Ministerial Statement be presented on Wednesday, next week?

Mr Mwiimbu, SC.: Madam Speaker, we will present it.

Madam Speaker: The Ministerial Statement on that issue to be delivered on Wednesday, next week.

Thank you.

MR MUTELO, HON. MEMBER FOR MITETE, ON THE HON. MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS AND INTERNAL SECURITY AND ACTING LEADER OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS IN THE HOUSE, MR MWIIMBU, SC., ON THE SUBMERGED MAIZE FIELDS IN MITETE AND LIUWA CONSTITUENCIES

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

Madam Speaker: An Urgent Matter without Notice is raised.

Mr Mutelo: Madam Speaker, I am grateful to you and to the hon. Member for Nakonde for switching off his microphone so that I can have a chance to speak.

Madam Speaker, in Mitete, we are grateful to God for the rainfall, but all the maize in the wetland is gone.

Hon. PF Members: Gone where?

Mr Mutelo: It has gone into the waters.

Laughter

Mr Mutelo: Madam Speaker, the maize has been submerged. Mbonyi yalitaka kaufela inwezi.

Mr Simumba: Meaning what?

Mr Mutelo: Madam Speaker, meaning the maize fields are submerged in Mitete and the parts of Liuwa Constituency.

Madam Speaker, this Urgent Matter without Notice is directed at Her Honour the Vice-President and Leader of Government Business in the House.

Mr C. Mulenga: The Acting Leader of Government Business in the House.

Mr Mutelo: Madam Speaker, I am told that it is supposed to be the Acting Leader of Government Business in the House. He is acting on behalf of Her Honour the Vice-President.

Madam Speaker, I have just come back from Mitete, and the situation is serious. The maize fields are gone. Where? In the waters, submerged. That is an emergency in Luambimba, Washishi, Lungwevungu, Lupui, and everywhere in the constituency.

Madam Speaker: I am not sure what intervention the Government can take in that matter. Maybe, the hon. Member can file in a question. It is raining now, and low-lying areas get flooded. So, I do not know how the Government can intervene in this regard. I know that you have directed the issue to the Acting Leader of Government Business in the House, in the absence of Her Honour the Vice-President. I do not know whether you want canals to be dug immediately or food to be delivered because there is hunger. I do not know. It is not clear. So, hon. Member for Mitete, please file in a question.

That concludes Urgent Matters without Notice.

_______

BILL

FIRST READING

THE STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES BILL, 2025

The Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security (Mr Mwiimbu, SC.) (on behalf of the Minister of Finance and National Planning (Dr Musokotwane)): Madam Speaker, I beg to present a Bill titled the National Payment System Bill No. 32 of 2025. The objects of this Bill are to:

provide for licencing, designation, and authorisation of payment service providers; and
provide for the incorporation of standards, principles, and concepts of corporate governance.

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

Madam Speaker: There is an indication for a point in the middle of the presentation of a Government Bill. Hon. Member for Lunte, what is the point of order?

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, I sincerely apologise to the hon. Minister –

Mr Mwiimbu, SC.: Madam Speaker, my apologies, I was given a –

Madam Speaker: Hon. Minister, hold on. The hon. Member for Lunte is on the Floor.

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, I was just apologising to the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security for disturbing his presentation.

Madam Speaker, I rise on a very serious point of order on the hon. Member of Parliament for Bwana Mkubwa from the Copperbelt, Hon. Mwambazi. Based on Standing Order No. 71, it is very important that an hon. Member of Parliament submits information that is factual. Is the hon. Member of Parliament for Bwana Mkubwa in order to insinuate that a diplomatic passport is an important document, which must be respected, when he knows that under the United Party for National Development (UPND) Government, our diplomatic passports have become useless or worthless?

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Mr Kafwaya: Madam Speaker, is he in order to misconduct himself in that manner, misleading all of us?

Madam Speaker, I seek your serious ruling.

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, our rules are very clear. Our Standing Orders clearly state that when hon. Members present something on the Floor of the House, firstly, it must be factual, and secondly, verifiable. The hon. Member is making some assertions, which are not supported by any factual evidence. So, the point of order is not admitted. He is actually out of order himself because we were progressing very well, then suddenly, he raises a point of order.

Hon. Member for Lunte, you can approach the hon. Minister of Home Affairs and Internal Security outside, and settle whatever issues you have with him.

May the Acting hon. Minister of Finance and National Planning continue.

Mr Mwiimbu, SC.: Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to apologise for presenting the wrong Bill. I now proceed.

THE STATE-OWNED ENTERPRISES BILL, 2025

Madam Speaker, I beg to present a Bill titled the State-Owned Enterprises Bill, No. 37 of 2025. The objects of the Bill are to:

establish the Government Investment Department and provide for its functions;
provide for the incorporation, ownership, and governance of State-owned enterprises;
provide for transparency and accountability in the governance of State-owned enterprises;
provide for the undertaking of public interest service obligations by State-owned enterprises;
repeal the Self-Management Enterprises Act, Chapter 408; and
provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: The Bill stands referred to the Committee – Oh sorry, this is because of the hon. Member for Lunte. Now you are confusing all of us.

Laughter

Mr Kafwaya: I am sorry, Madam Speaker.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: It is okay. It is on a lighter note.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: The Bill stands referred to the Committee on Parastatal Bodies. The Committee is required to submit its report on the Bill to the House in due course. Hon. Members who wish to make submissions on the Bill are free to do so within the programme of work of the Committee.

_______

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

ERRATIC WATER SUPPLY IN CHINSALI DISTRICT

109. Mr Mukosa (Chinsali) asked the Minister of Water Development and Sanitation:

whether the Government is aware that for the past two weeks, Chinsali District has been experiencing erratic water supply; and
if so, what urgent measures are being taken to resolve the problem and avert the outbreak of waterborne diseases.

The Minister of Tourism (Mr Sikumba) (on behalf of the Minister of Water Development and Sanitation (Eng. Nzovu)): Madam Speaker, the Government is aware of the recent erratic water supply experienced in Chinsali District over the past two weeks. The problem was caused by a ZESCO Limited fault at the main transformer at Chinsali Boma, which significantly affected the stability of water supply. After the fault was resolved, power was restored and remained a little unstable, with fluctuating voltages that hindered operations at the Chambeshi Water Supply and Sanitation Company (CWSC) Boma water treatment plant.

Madam Speaker, the urgent measures undertaken to ensure continuity of water supply through CWSC were to place a water bowser to facilitate water supply to the affected communities in the district. Further, ZESCO Limited technicians are working diligently to resolve the power fluctuations.

Madam Speaker, additionally, to avert the outbreak of cholera, adequate stocks of chlorine are being maintained by the commercial utility.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mukosa: Madam Speaker, I will start by stating that, actually the substantive hon. Minister of Water Development and Sanitation called me this morning around 0600 hours to say that he arrived in Chinsali to attend to the matter. He gave me assurance that by 15^th December, 2025, the ministry would address the problem in Chinsali. However, is it possible for the Government to consider giving us our own water utility company in Muchinga Province, so that we are separated from Chambeshi Water and Sanitation Company (CWSC)? What causes the water problem is that the water utility is housed in Kasama, which is very far from Chinsali. As a result, when the utility company has faults that require sometimes only K600, it firstly, has to get authorisation from Kasama, and then purchase a spare part to repair the equipment or machinery from Lusaka. By the time the problem is resolved, two weeks would have passed.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the effort that has been made by the substantive hon. Minister of Water Development and Sanitation.

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, I totally agree with my hon. Colleague, Member of Parliament for Chinsali, that more often than not, it is always good to be autonomous. Obviously, that is what his desire is. However, being autonomous also comes with challenges, vis-à-vis costs. Nevertheless, I want to indicate that the major challenge that water utility companies are experiencing is power supply. You may wish to note that water utility companies will be supported by a project under the European Union (EU). We will be implementing what we call the Nexus Energy and Water Programme for Zambia (NEWZA), which is a solar energy project to the tune of €6.3 million, to install a solar facility to the CWSC. Furthermore, I am sure that you may have heard our Government talking about creating more solar grids within respective constituencies. That, in itself, will mitigate some problems like the one being experienced in Chinsali.

Madam Speaker, let me also mention that due to challenges of load management, our Government directed that universities, schools and hospitals should be exempted from load management. That is probably one of the missions that the substantive hon. Minister of Water Development and Sanitation is undertaking. We need to see how best we can have dedicated lines to utilities so that there is no load-shedding.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Chibombwe (Bahati): Madam Speaker, most utility companies, especially those in rural places, are failing to pump and supply water due to grid faults and load-shedding. It is good that the hon. Minister has stated that the ministry is in the process of installing solar systems, and that some utility companies will have dedicated lines. This is not an easy undertaking because some pump stations are connected to main power lines that supply power to people. Water utility companies in Lusaka have installed generators all the way from Kafue to Lusaka. Along the way, you will find that at all pump stations, there are generators. Is the ministry considering buying generators for utility companies in rural places, even those in Mansa, because Mansa is also experiencing the issue of erratic supply of water?

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, definitely, in our quest to find possible solutions for water utility companies, as I mentioned earlier, we are talking about having dedicated lines for these companies. Yes, that might be costly, but obviously it is very effective. I will indicate that the Southern Water and Sanitation Company (SWSC) in Livingstone has a dedicated power line for the water intake as well as the treatment plant. Similarly, Kafubu Water Supply and Sanitation Company (KWSC) has dedicated power lines. So, what we need to do is to do a cost-benefit analysis on whether it will be cheaper to buy a generator or to create dedicated power lines. The ministry will identify the most cost-effective and sustainable solution for most of these places. I agree with the hon. Member of Parliament that, yes, we have to find ways and means of creating a sustainable way of supplying water to our communities.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Chinsali, are you satisfied?

Mr Mukosa indicated assent.

Madam Speaker: Since it is a constituency-based question and the processes are ongoing, let us leave it at that.

We make progress.

MINING LICENCES ISSUED IN SIAVONGA DISTRICT

110. Mr Mulunda (Siavonga) asked the Minister of Mines and Minerals Development:

how many, of the following licences, were issued for mining activities in Siavonga District, as of June, 2025:

artisanal;

exploration; and

mining;

b. of the licences above, how many were issued to the residents of the District;

c. what measures are being taken to ensure that the local community benefits from the mining activities; and

d. how many tonnes of the following minerals were mined in the District and exported through Chirundu Border from 2021 to 2024, year by year:

copper;

coal; and

fluorite.

The Minister of Mines and Minerals Development (Mr Kabuswe): Madam Speaker, as of June 2025, the following licences were issued for mining activities in Siavonga District:

Type of Licence Total Individuals Co-operatives Small-Scale Large Scale

Issued

Artisanal 29 19 10 - -

Mining Rights

Exploration 72 - - 25 47

Licences

Mining 19 - - 10 9

Licences

Madam Speaker, of the licences mentioned above, a total of ten were issued to mining co-operatives which are believed to be composed of residents of Siavonga.

Madam Speaker, the Government is implementing deliberate measures such as developing local content regulations under the Geological and Minerals Development Act of 2025 to ensure that Zambia participates in the mining value chain. Mining right holders are required to prioritise procurement of locally manufactured goods and also required to procure services from locally or citizen-owned or influenced companies, give preference to employing qualified citizens, and provide training to transfer technical and managerial skills. These measures aim to boost economic growth, employment and business benefits for the local communities and citizens.

Madam Speaker, as of today, the only mineral being produced in Siavonga District is fluorite. The table below projects production of fluorite in Siavonga District from 2021 to 2024.

Year 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total

Fluorite Production 1,259 982 1,579 80,000 84,726.3

(tonnes)

The exports of fluorite from Siavonga District from 2021 to 2024 are as follows:

Year 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total

Fluorite Exports 1, 477 7,495.7 10,188 42,693 61,855.4

(tonnes)

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Mulunda: Madam Speaker, I appreciate the investments in Siavonga District through the mining activities that are going on. Whilst I appreciate those investments that have come to the district, in most cases, the working conditions and the adherence to labour laws by the companies are very low. How frequent does the hon. Minister’s office, in collaboration with the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security, visit the mining companies to countercheck their adherence to labour laws?

Mr Kabuswe: Madam Speaker, the issue of adherence to labour laws falls under the jurisdiction of the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security. Of course, we are one Government and we work together. However, the hon. Member should understand that considering the way the capacity of the Ministry of Mines and Mineral Development was before, it was difficult for the ministry to visit all the mines at once. Since the regulator has now been put in place, there will be an improvement.

Madam Speaker, since the hon. Member of Parliament and I interact at whatever point, he can also alert us of what could be happening in his constituency at a particular mine so that we can trigger the Labour Commissioner or the Mines Safety Department to quickly visit the area. However, there could be routine programmes, and since capacity has been enhanced, officers from the Mines Safety Department may have visited Siavonga. So, the hon. Member and I will work together. Probably, we even can exchange notes after the House adjourns and see how we can try to resolve the matter, if at all such things are happening at the mine.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Chibombwe (Bahati): Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister stated in his statement that only fluorite is being mined in Siavonga. However, when one takes a drive down to Siavonga, one will find many people selling crystal-like precious stones. Is the hon. Minister, therefore, confirming that those who are selling the stones along the highway are illegal miners?

Mr Kabuswe: Madam Speaker, I cannot confirm that a mineral sold on the roadside is actually from Siavonga, unless there is a mine where the stones are coming from. It could be that those selling that mineral are getting it from a neighbouring town. The only information the ministry has at the moment –

Madam Speaker, save probably for the exploration taking place in Siavonga, including the mapping being done, the ministry is likely to find something else. However, as it stands in our records, only fluorite is being mined in Siavonga.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Siavonga, have you withdrawn your question so that we can make progress?

Mr Mulunda indicated assent.

Madam Speaker: Okay. Thank you.

SIGNING OF THE BI-CARBON TRADING AGREEMENT

111. Mr E. Tembo (Feira) asked the Minister of Green Economy and Environment:

when the Bi-Carbon Trading (BCT) Agreement was signed between community members in Mburuma and Mphuka Chiefdoms in Feira Parliamentary Constituency;
whether the Government is aware of the dispute between the two parties; and
what benefits, if any, have accrued to the local people, ward by ward, since the signing of the BCT Agreement.

Madam Speaker, before a chiefdom can enter into a partnership agreement with a developer, in this case, BCP, the Forest Act No. 4 of 2015 requires the chiefdom to, firstly, be formally recognised as a community forest management group (CFMG) through the issuance of Form 1. It must then be granted forestry user rights by the Director of Forestry through Form 4. Once these steps are completed, the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment may grant the CFMG additional user rights under Form 7. Only after receiving these rights can a chiefdom legally sign a carbon partnership agreement. These steps ensure transparency and foster integrity in the entire process.

Madam Speaker, the two chiefdoms completed the processes as follows:

Mphuka Chiefdom: Form 1 for recognition as a CFMG, approved on 21^st May, 2021. Form 4 for forest user rights, approved on 12^th October, 2021, and partnership agreement with BCP signed on 26^th March, 2022; and
Mburuma Chiefdom: Form 1 for recognition as a CFMG, approved on 21^st May, 2021. Forest user rights granted on 12^th October, 2021, and partnership agreement with BCP signed on 26^th March, 2022.

That said, Madam Speaker, both Mburuma and Mphuka chiefdoms signed their biocarbon trading agreements on 26^th March, 2022.

Madam Speaker, the Government has not received any formal dispute concerning the BCP agreement between Mburuma and Mphuka chiefdoms, in line with Statutory Instrument (SI) No. 11 of 2018, issued under the Forestry Act No. 5 of 2015. The CFMGs and project developers are required to use an established grievance redress mechanism. The BCP has a rigorous and documented grievance redress mechanism aligned with internationally recognised and verified carbon standards. All grievances must be reported, recorded and resolved within agreed timeframes. Communities are regularly trained on the grievance redress mechanism and records are signed as evidence of awareness and adoption. According to available records, currently, there are no open or unresolved grievances involving either chiefdom. Should there be any problem, the Government will request further details from the community and follow up on the measures to be taken, as outlined in the grievance redress mechanism.

Madam Speaker, following the signing of the partnership agreement in March, 2022, the two chiefdoms received their performance forest carbon fees from the BCP for the 2022 monitoring period. Disbursements were made in 2024, guided by approved benefit sharing mechanisms and administered through the CFMGs.

Madam Speaker, in terms of the 2024 carbon fees disbursement, Mburuma Chiefdom received K2,824,526 for four wards while Mphuka Chiefdom received K1,098,941 for five wards. The total paid to both chiefdoms was K3,923,467. These funds have supported community prioritised projects identified through participatory needs assessment and captured in the community forest management (CFM) annual work plans.

Madam Speaker, allow me to quickly give examples of community projects that have been instituted:

climate smart agriculture;
community forest protection;
beekeeping programmes; and
livelihoods and community development projects.

Madam Speaker, the BCP works closely with the Government, through the Foresty Department and the Department of National Parks and Wildlife (DNPW), to ensure transparency, compliance and community beneficiation.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Tayengwa (Kabwata): Thank you, Madam Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to ask a supplementary question.

Madam Speaker, the challenge that we have seen with the partnership between the BioCarbon Partners (BCP) and the communities is that the communities do not have data on how carbon credits are calculated. The pricing is the challenge. Nobody knows how the calculations are done, for example, for the figure that the hon. Minister has talked about; K3.9 million. When the law was established, the Green Economy and Climate Change Act, we had challenges coming up with the pricing. So, I want to know what the ministry is doing to ensure that it comes up with an effective way of calculating carbon credits for the communities that have either partnered with the BCP or the Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO).

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, I agree with the hon. Member. The Government recognised the need for people to understand what good and bad carbons are. I just want to indicate to the House that for a long time, the buzz phrase ‘carbon trading’ was alien. I call it alien because no known legislation was in place to regulate carbon trading. I am delighted that our Government, through the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment, enacted the Green Economy and Climate Change Act of 2024. That piece of legislation will regulate what my fellow hon. Member of Parliament is requesting for; to understand how best we can monetise the God given natural resource of forests that we have in our country.

Madam Speaker, a third of our country is made up of protected areas. I am talking about being national parks, game management areas (GMAs), forest parks and so on, and, indeed, one of those particular areas that we call protected. That requires us to ascertain the value of these assets. With the Green Economy and Climate Change Act of 2024 in place, we should understand how best we can create value out of them. As I said, the agreements in question were signed in 2022. There was what we call first move advantage, but now the Government has said that it needs to sanction the agreements so that our communities are not batabalidi masuku amutwe.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. PF Members: Meaning?

Madam Speaker: What does that mean, hon. Minister?

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, it simply means baking a cake and not eating it.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Laughter

Mr E. Tembo: Madam Speaker, I would like to appreciate the hon. Minister’s responses to my question.

Madam Speaker, my follow-up question is related to what the hon. Member for Kabwata raised. The carbon trading agreements are left to the chiefs to sign, on behalf of their chiefdoms, and a number of terms are outlined. However, there has been a problem when it comes to implementation, and that is where the disputes are coming from. Our people previously survived on the forests for things like charcoal, timber and many other products, which –

Hon. Member: Which are illegal!

Mr E. Tembo: Well, I must mention that that is how they have survived.

Madam Speaker, does the Government have a strategy to monitor whether or not the Zambian people, or people in Feira, get a fair share from all the carbon trading agreements? I am aware that the Bio-Carbon Partners (BCP) actually realises millions of United States (US) Dollars from those arrangements. Though figures have been mentioned, such as K3 million or K4 million, what is happening on the ground is not as it seems. If things were good, people would not be complaining. Currently, there is a battle between BCP forest officers and the communities because the communities feel that they do not get enough. So, the question is: Have we been monitoring whether those agreements are working because the Government, ultimately, must have an interest in them?

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, if the hon. Member for Feira would possibly take time to acquaint himself with a new Act, it will really equip him to see how best we have couched that piece of legislation to enable us to undertake monitoring.

Madam Speaker, as the Government, our role in these protected areas, which are God-given natural resources, at the core of everything we do, is one of community beneficiation. Therefore, because we have structures in our country, which recognise traditional leadership, we co-opt the traditional leadership with a management, the Community Forest Management Groups (CFMGs), which now identify specific projects where these resources will go. As the Government, we do not want to have a heavy hand in dictating what the communities want, and that is exactly what we are doing with the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). The money should be transferred from Lusaka to the respective polling stations. That is exactly what we have done.

Madam Speaker, a similar exercise is also undertaken in the wildlife subsector, where we have our community resource boards (CRBs), which determine the revenues that they get, as well as where to place them as an investment. I just want to encourage the hon. Member of Parliament to actively get involved in utilising the money. This money is audited by the Auditor-General, and it is in the public domain. So, he has every right to go to the communities and ask where the K3 million has been taken to. He should also be able to enhance the CDF that he is getting in the constituency so that he can develop the area, as we are trying hard to develop the areas through the Ministry of Tourism.

Madam Speaker, the mechanisms have been established in the law, and we want, together with the hon. Member of Parliament, to be able to implement it alongside our traditional leadership.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Chewe (Lubansenshi): Madam Speaker, the Bi-Carbon Trading (BCT) Agreement vis-à-vis the issue of carbon, is being implemented in some provinces like the Eastern Province, where I had the privilege to see what is happening. These initiatives or agreement are benefiting our communities, but the problem we observed, before I could come to the question, is the lack of sensitisation; communication between the chiefs and their subordinates.

Madam Speaker, when it comes to the benefits, how much sensitisation and communication has the Government done to ensure that people embrace the initiative of these agreements, knowing fully that there is the issue of climate change, and the need to preserve the forests? Subsequently, the community should also benefit from the realised resources. How much communication and sensitisation has the Government done to help our people so that we can lessen that tension among them?

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, sensitisation is there. Are we doing much? Maybe not. However, we can do more. For us to do more, it begins with us, the legislators, because we understand the issues better.

Madam Speaker, I will pick the Eastern Province as an example. With respect to carbon trading, the Eastern Province is one province that obviously, was the early bloomer with regard to signing the carbon trading agreements. Subsequently, the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment has gone back to sit with the partners themselves. Definitely, we are the brokers, as a ministry. The two parties involved in this case are Bio-Carbon Partners (BCP) and Community Markets for Conservation (COMACO), and on the other side, we have the traditional leadership. So, we have mechanisms for communicating regarding what is happening out there. Obviously, more can be done to ensure that even the benefits themselves trickle down to the least person in that particular community.

Madam Speaker, I will probably use this opportunity to just indicate that there is a lot of money that goes into these chiefdoms, vis-a-vis the CDF, carbon trading agreements, animal fees and concession fees from wildlife. However, it requires us, as leaders, within our respective constituencies and jurisdictions to go to the ground and tell the people how much money is being spent and for them to decide which projects should be funded. This approach will enable visibility as opposed to what we are seeing, whereby everybody is now looking up to the Government; the Treasury, saying that there is no development in the respective constituency or jurisdiction.

Madam Speaker, I call upon hon. Members of Parliament, as they go on Christmas holiday to enjoy with their communities and tell them the good things that our Government is doing in various sectors.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

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

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Zulu: Madam Speaker, I think that the hon. Minister is trying to be very economical with the truth. He is asking hon. Members of Parliament to go out there and spend Christmas with their constituents and talk about how to spend that money. This is not possible because the law does not allow an hon. Member of Parliament to sit in such a Committee. In the first place, when the Bill was brought to the House, I suggested that hon. Members should be allowed to be part of that Committee because a lot of money is going to waste. I can tell you that Nyimba received close to K30 million from the same money. This year, the hon. Minister knows that since the Government has taken over the agreement between the Bio-Carbon Partners (BCP) and the community, BCP should now pay the Government and the Government in turn pays the community.

Madam Speaker, usually, the community used to receive money between June and July, but to date, they have not received any money. We agreed in this Parliament that the money should go to each jurisdiction, and then, in turn, those people give the community money.

Madam Speaker, is the hon. Minister in order to not tell the truth that an hon. Member of Parliament is not eligible to sit on that Committee? My point of order is pursuant to Standing Order No. 71.

Madam Speaker: Thank you very much, hon. Member for Nyimba. I believe the law was enacted by this House. The best we can do, since you have provided the information, is to move a Motion to amend the law. This would be the best approach, rather than saying that the hon. Minister is not telling the truth that an hon. Member of Parliament has no powers to intervene. Let us move a Motion and amend the law. It was enacted by this House, was it not?

Mr Zulu: Yes.

Madam Speaker: So, why can we not amend it? You can propose that it be amended because now you have seen that the law is not working. That is what we call post-legislation scrutiny. The hon. Member for Nalolo will be able to assist you in that area.

Hon. Member for Feira, you may proceed.

Mr E. Tembo: Madam Speaker, my earlier question was on whether the Government is monitoring to see if communities are receiving a fair share from the agreements, and the hon. Minister responded that there is an Act of Parliament which was passed in 2024. However, having a law in place is not enough. So, I want to find out if the law has been operationalised by the Executive. If not, when does it wish to operationalise it? Having the law is not enough. It must be operationalised.

Mr Sikumba: Madam Speaker, I want to thank my learned area hon. Member for Feira for having brought up that issue, and I agree with him.

Madam Speaker, when we promulgate a law, it becomes an Act, but what moves the Act are the subsequent Statutory Instruments (SIs). Those, indeed, are on their way. The Act was enacted in 2023 or 2024. However, that should not stop us from monitoring the systems that are already running.

Madam Speaker, again, I am following up on my invitation for the hon. Member to come to my office for coffee. I just want him to come for another coffee date in my office so that we can start planning on how we can churn out various SIs, which will drive the agenda of the Ministry of Green Economy and Environment.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Maybe, the hon. Member for Feira should carry his own sugar, just in case, or honey, since he was talking about carbon trading.

Laughter

SAFEGUARDING WHISTLEBLOWERS IN WORKPLACES

112. Mr Chanda (Kanchibiya) asked the Minister of Labour and Social Security:

what measures were being taken to safeguard whistleblowers of unethical behaviour in work places;
whether the Government conducts random compliance inspections to ensure safe working environments, especially in sectors such as mining and transport; and
if so, how many cases of random inspections were carried out from 2020 to 2024, year by year.

The Minister of Labour and Social Security (Ms Tambatamba): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you, and the hon. Member for alerting me on issues of the nation, and to also ensure that we communicate with the nation and indeed, deliver.

Madam Speaker, to safeguard whistle-blowers and monitor compliance, the ministry conducts regular workplace inspections, and has implemented the following measures:

Establishment of a Call Centre with the 7010 Toll-Free Line on all Mobile Networks

The ministry put in place a call centre and a toll-free line accessible to all employees, employers and members of the public. This makes it easy for whistle-blowers to interface with the ministry and share information of interest at their convenience without any interference;

Awareness Creation to both Employers and Employees on the Need Not to Victimise Each Other Based on Unrestricted Information Disclosure

The ministry provides education to employees and employers on labour matters and employment rights during inspections and other interactions. Individuals who report labour matters affecting their employment rights should not be victimised in any way. Employers are strongly advised to take such as positive feedback that would enhance and promote the growth of an undertaking, more so, when the grievance procedure is not working;

Bringing to the Attention of Employers and Employees the Contents of the Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act No.4 of 2010, which Falls Under the Anti-Corruption Commission

The ministry educates employers on the need not to subject employees to any occupational detriment on account, or partially on account, of the employee having made a disclosure as provided for under Section 10 of the Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act of 2010. That said, Section 10 states:

“An employer shall not subject an employee to any occupational detriment on account, or partly on account, of the employee having made a protected disclosure or public interest disclosure.”

Further, the ministry adheres to the requirements of the above-stated Act, which protects whistleblowers from being disclosed. Therefore, they are free to disclose the happenings at their workplaces without the risk of being exposed by anybody, including my ministry;

Capacity Building for Labour Officers through Labour Officers' Conferences

Labour officers are educated on the need to uphold professionalism and confidentiality on the labour-related information provided to them by whistleblowers and use the said information to address the challenges that may be faced at the places of work by providing solutions; and

Establishment of a Government Service Bus (GSB) at the Ministry

The ministry has established an electronic service portal to enhance interactions with members of the public. On this platform, the public may officially lodge a complaint or engage the ministry on any other grievance online.

Madam Speaker, the Government, through the Ministry of Labour and Social Security's Department of Occupational Safety and Health Services, conducts workplace safety and health compliance inspections in all industries except for the mining sector, which is policed by the Mines Safety Department. These inspections aim to enhance the provisions of the Factories Act, Chapter 441 of the Laws of Zambia.

Madam Speaker, the department carries out two types of inspections; the routine workplace safety and health compliance inspections and statutory inspections of plant and equipment. Between 2020 and 2024, a total of 1,357 routine inspections were conducted.

Madam Speaker, the annual breakdown is as follows:

Year Number of Inspections

2020 230

2021 186

2022 351

2023 311

2024 279

Madam Speaker, notably, approximately 90 per cent of the inspections conducted by the department were random, with no advance notice given to the workplaces or factories. Only about 10 per cent of the inspections required advance notice, often due to the presence of critical facilities that necessitated the presence of expert personnel for safe inspection. Based on this statistic, 1,221 safety and health workplace inspections were conducted from 2020 to 2024, and these were random in nature.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Chanda: Madam Speaker, allow me to thank the hon. Minister for her response. True to her preamble, the intention is to make sure that she shines.

Madam Speaker, we are dealing with an Act that was enacted in 2010. It is a fifteen-year-old piece of legislation, and what is clear is that this legislation predominantly focuses on disclosures from the public sector. Fifteen years ago, probably, there was justification for this sort of focus. Would the ministry be averse to having a relook at this piece of legislation, which ought to protect the workers in the workplace, including those in the private sector?

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for that question.

Madam Speaker, as earlier indicated, we make our laws in this House. With time, relevance needs to be assured by ensuring that we look at them, so this Government is not averse.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, the topic before us this afternoon is about whistle-blowers. A whistle-blower is a person who identifies an anomaly within an institution, which may be labour-related or a safety concern, and brings it to the attention of the authority. That is a whistle-blower. When I put the questions together, they are trying to find a way in which to protect workers who report serious concerns and bring out real issues, not those who raise false alarms.

Madam Speaker, from her responses, the hon. Minister has talked about the law, phone calls that can be made and the option where one can raise the matter online through the Government Service Bus (GSB). Have the cases that have been reported to the ministry been responded to based on the whistleblowing procedures that have been made available? Have the workers raised issues that the ministry has been able to deal with so that they can have comfort to continue raising more issues? The challenge is that when as a whistle-blower you raise an issue, and the internal system does not resolve the problem, suddenly you feel like there is no need to continue. I hope the hon. Minister has gotten my follow-up question.

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, yes, we take seriously every phone call or in-person reports from our most valued workers.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Chanda: Madam Speaker, with your indulgence, allow me to ask a question from the people watching the debates. They have asked me to ask the hon. Minister a question related to this topic.

Madam Speaker, can the Minister indicate what specific actions have been taken against employers or managers found violating labour laws or engaging in unethical practices during inspections, and how many prosecutions, penalties or remedial measures were enforced in each year from 2020 to 2024?

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, I may not be able to give the statistics, but these can be provided later. However, every case which comes from the workers is attended to. The ministry has a system from the district level, to the province, all the way to the Labour Commissioner. If the reporter is not satisfied, a provision is also available. Before considering any other processes, such as the Industrial Relations Court, the hon. Minister is available to attend to the cases through a written appeal. So, workers are encouraged to feel free because they are protected. Members of the public who also notice something that the law does not support must report that to the Ministry of Labour and Social Security.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Namwala, be brief. There are many indications, and we have a lot of work. We have one Private Member's Motion and three Bills to be considered at second reading. So, we need to make progress.

Mr Mapani (Namwala): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, are there enough inspectors at the ministry to comprehend the issues raised by the whistle-blowers? If yes, has the ministry attended to farm workers? If not, how many inspectors are needed so that the ministry can be able to attend to the whistle-blowers’ concerns?

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. Member for asking that question but allow me to revisit what the hon. Member for Kanchibiya asked for. He asked for information on whether we have attended to aspects that require sanctioning. We have sanctioned employers administratively, and they paid a fee as prescribed by law. We have also moved in, where necessary, to temporarily stop the train to ensure that the employer resolves the matters as prescribed by law. I just wanted to bring that to his attention.

Madam Speaker, as regards the question asked by the hon. Member seated behind me: Do we have an adequate number of workers? We may not, but immediately we came into office as the New Dawn Administration, we attended to the issue of inadequate staff. The 2022 Budget allowed us to bring in a few more staff. Twenty-five people were employed. That meant a lot because, for a long time, the ministry had not received such a gesture from the Budget. So, it meant that we had already evaluated, reviewed, assessed and realised that we needed more human resource in the inspectorate.

Madam Speaker, on the question as to whether the ministry has attended to the welfare of farm workers in the agricultural sector, yes, I have been part of such inspections.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Ms Sefulo (Mwandi): Thank you very much, Madam Speaker, and I thank the hon. Minister for the responses provided.

Madam Speaker, the House has heard, for example, from the hon. Minister of Education about the pupil-to-teacher ratio, and the desired ratio. I think, my question is very important because people will be able to appreciate the number of labour inspectors and what they do. Is there a desirable ratio between the labour inspectors and the companies they need to inspect? What is the current ratio so that I can appreciate what the labour inspectors have been able to do?

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, the ministry is still undertaking an assessment on the desired ratio. The current ratio is in thousands. That is a red area that this Government is attending to. We are working with the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Finance and National Planning to restructure the ministry, and allocate available human resource in the appropriate positions. Approvals have been given, demonstrating that this Government values human capital, which is fundamental to deliver results to prosper the nation. This issue is being actively attended to. A thousand grievances for one inspector means that the ministry should run faster, and it is running fast.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Mutinta (Itezhi-Tezhi): Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I must mention from the outset that this is a very emotive issue. As the chairperson of the Caucus on Environment and Climate Change, I have to indicate that last week, the caucus went to the Manganese Mine in Serenje and what we saw there is a discussion for another day. However, it is something that needs serious attention. I would also like to inform the hon. Minister that your Members of Parliament have become labour officers in districts where there are no labour officers, like Itezhi-Tezhi.

Mr Mabeta: Correct!

Mr Mutinta: Madam Speaker, we are the acting labour officers in some constituencies. I would like to know whether the ministry is providing the district administrative officers (DAOs), who are acting as labour officers, and the District Commissioners (DCs) any funding on a monthly basis so that they can equally support the ministry, before it sends full time labour officers, because they are the ones who act as labour officers in districts where there are no labour officers.

Ms Sefulo: Use the Constituency Development Fund (CDF)!

Mr Mutinta: Madam Speaker, are they supported in conducting random inspections or sensitisations?

Ms Tambatamba: Madam Speaker, the hon. Member for Itezhi-Tezhi has mentioned Serenje and the ministry is aware of that matter. The ministry has gone through various legislations and attended to the matter with other key stakeholders, like the Mines Safety Department of the Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development.

Madam Speaker, on the question of what is happening in the district, we work as one Government, including the Treasury. We are expected to work together. So, where there are no labour officers, issues that can be attended to by other departments, like the council or council secretaries and, indeed, the District Commissioners’ (DC) office, are brought to our attention. Most of the issues are about counselling, but they should be referred to the provincial offices. Every province has an assistant labour commissioner or principal labour officer. Our teams in the DC’s offices and councils are encouraged to call out the provincial assistant labour commissioners to support their efforts on these matters where we do not have the personnel.

Madam Speaker, as I have mentioned, we are also trying to restructure. Some locations or districts where there is not much industry, but more of public service, have a bit more manpower. So, where we find more labour officers, we are restructuring to ensure that we take some of those officers to places where they are needed. The growth areas are a priority, and then the rest can be attended to at the provincial offices. So, there is no budget to be shared because the budget is shared when we appropriate funds in Parliament. The rest of it is that we continue to work in that manner and encourage our provincial offices to ensure that they liaise with the offices of the DCs every time.

Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the nation that, as we have started injecting more personnel, we are also working on putting up more offices to bring more officers in locations that carry industry. About five are underway in locations like Central Province, the North-Western Province, the Southern Province and Luapula Province. There are one or two in each of those provinces. So, we are constructing and rehabilitating.

Madam Speaker, I would like to encourage hon. Colleagues to continue working as one Government to attend to labour matters, but referring back to the provincial offices because inspections can only be undertaken by authorised officers, as they are given that responsibility by the law. That is why there is a need to liaise with the office of the Assistant Labour Commissioner.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

_______

MOTION

IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO INCREASE THE CROP YIELD PER HECTARE FOR FARMERS UNDER THE FARMER INPUT SUPPORT PROGRAMME

Mr Kang’ombe (Kamfinsa): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that this House urges the Government to implement measures to increase the crop yield per hectare for farmers under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP).

Madam Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Madam Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, I am grateful, once again, for this privilege to move another Motion on an important topic. This is a topic that not only concerns our farmers, but the rest of the country because, at the end of the day, we want to produce enough maize. Through this Motion, if we can produce enough maize, even the conversation around how much maize should be given to the Food Reserve Agency (FRA) or exported will be attended to.

Madam Speaker, currently, the statistics indicate that we are only able to produce 3.6 million metric tonnes to 3.7 million metric tonnes of maize. If we are producing that much maize, it simply means that if we produced more, it would present an opportunity to discuss how much should be for the FRA, food security and export. I am sure that in the period that you have been in this Parliament, you have followed the conversation around the export of maize. There is always sensitivity around exporting of maize. Every time exporting of maize comes up, the concern from stakeholders is why we should export when we do not have enough for local consumption.

Madam Speaker, the Motion states that the Government should implement measures. If there is an action plan somewhere, if the experts in the Ministry of Agriculture say that there are five measures, for example, to produce more maize than we are producing over a hectare of land currently, the Member for Kamfinsa is saying that we should implement that, and quickly do what is necessary to produce more than 3.6 million metric tonnes.

Madam Speaker, we are discussing this simply because there is data. There are statistics. The hon. Minister of Agriculture is on record stating that farmers cannot give us only 2 tonnes of maize per hectare. A hectare is a 100 m x 100 m piece of land, if you have a standard shape of a piece of land. Why should you get 2 tonnes of maize from a hectare of land? We must implement measures that will give us greater output. It is not a matter of saying that the Government is aware of the problem and the measures that we need to implement. It is more about implementing the measures or identifying the problem and asking ourselves, as individuals who are privileged to be in the Government, what measures have to be implemented.

Are we providing the input to farmers under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) at the correct time in the farming season? Are we giving them the right quantities of farming inputs? Are we also providing technical personnel to go into a farming block, such as Kamfinsa, where we have about five farming blocks? The local people have organised themselves and formed groups. There is Misaka A, Misaka B and a place called Katokamema, where all what farmers know is that farming is their livelihood. However, those farmers need to be supported. Someone has to be stationed in those farming blocks to instruct our people on how to prepare the soil and the area where they will plant so that when it is time to harvest, which is what this topic is about, we know what we will be harvesting. What are we harvesting at the moment? On a hectare of land, we are only producing less than 2 metric tonnes of maize.

Madam Speaker, today, my proposal to the Executive Arm of Government is that we implement the proposed measures. Sixty-one years after Independence, the Ministry of Agriculture has the experts. We can ask anyone from the Ministry of Agriculture if there are people who are experts in this field. Or if the ministry consulted the experts in the private sector. Why do other farmers produce more maize than our farmers under the FISP? Clearly, there is some support that they need and things we need to provide them with. When there is a drought, there must be a way in which we can ensure they have access to water to produce more maize. This is what this Motion is all about.

Madam Speaker, I do not need to be an expert in agriculture to urge about what we need to do. I believe that the experts at the ministry will then be able to inform the Executive Arm of Government that the first solution is this one, the second solution, according to science, is this one, and the third solution, according to us as experts, is this one and so on and so forth. That is what this Motion is all about.

Madam Speaker, my submission today is that we should look at what other countries are doing. Why is it that in other countries, the yield for our small-scale farmers is actually more than 2 metric tonnes of maize? What are we not doing correctly? What can we do to correct this problem? I think, I have defined the problem. The problem is that our farmers are not producing enough.

Madam Speaker, let me put it on record that 80 per cent of the 3.6 million metric tonnes of maize, which we are discussing, as our national output for maize, comes from small-scale farmers. The same farmers under FISP, whom we are discussing today, provide us with 80 percent of the maize we produce. What is 80 per cent of 3.6 million metric tonnes of maize? We are looking at 3 million metric tonnes of maize.

Madam Speaker, if farmers can produce 2 metric tonnes of maize per hectare, and they give us 3 million metric tonnes, imagine how much they could produce if they doubled their output on the same land. We would be talking about 6 to 7 million metric tonnes, and that is the conversation we have today.

Madam Speaker, I am confident that every hon. Member of Parliament agrees with me that we need to put these measures in place. We need to help our farmers. When they produce more, then we will have enough food and attain food security. Once we have enough for food security, we will have enough to export. Is the export of maize a good thing? If we have enough maize for local consumption, then it is a good thing, and that is why today, I am confident that everyone will buy into the idea that if our officers are not doing their part, let us push them to do their part. Let us go into every farming block where we have small-scale farmers. We are supporting them under the FISP. Let us now provide the extra things that they require, the technical abilities and the training that they require for us to produce a better yield.

Madam Speaker, the current crop yield is not enough. Let us teach our farmers to do better. Let us provide them with the technical support and ensure that everything they require is provided to them.

Madam Speaker, the people of Kamfinsa, once again, want to thank your office for allowing their Member of Parliament to bring this conversation which affects everyone.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

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

Mr Fube: Now, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, thank you for giving the people of Chilubi the opportunity to speak about this very important Motion.

Madam Speaker, I would be doing myself a disservice if I did not appreciate the mover for ably moving the Motion. Today’s Motion is for everyone. I think, no one would be against production. What the Motion is speaking to is increasing the production of crops under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP). Why are we talking about the FISP? It is because the Government supports it. We have realised that, even though the Government supports FISP, what we are getting out of it is not what we are supposed to get. I think that the Government statistics agree with that effect and the like.

Madam Speaker, to demonstrate, in 2019, we had 1.6 ha cultivated, but the actual yield from those hectares was very low. We need to address such matters. However, before we address those matters, we need to understand what the push factors that influence the yield are. Among the push factors are the climate and the soils. The climate is mainly influenced by the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), which is, of course, influenced by the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) phenomenon. So, by considering this, we are trying to determine whether rainfall influences the yield. For example, if we have nineteen types of soils in Zambia, how do we apply for extension officers to come in and identify the type of soil a particular area has? Is it the Werito, or another type, or a combination of the two? How do our scientists, like extension officers, come in? That is what we are trying to talk about. I think, that is not asking too much of our systems, because there are already systems in place.

Madam Speaker, we are calling for a situation whereby, if the soil in Chilubi is found to be acidic, the Government should distribute fertiliser together with lime, if the lime can neutralise the acidic soil. So, farmers can receive fertiliser as well as lime.

Madam Speaker, we know that Zambia is divided into three agroecological zones. Those zones also offer different rainfall patterns. I know that on average, in the lowest southern part, the valley part, we have around 600 ml of rainfall. In the upper north, the maximum, on average, is 1,300 ml. Our agriculture departments have such information. So, the interface we are calling for is where we apply the knowledge to ensure that the yield is concentrated.

Madam Speaker, what we are calling for today is for extension officers who have been employed under the Ministry of Agriculture be given certain targets. They should not only monitor the distribution of fertiliser. That is not enough. They also have to monitor the proper yield. They have to test the soils. They need to help the farmer understand the seed type to know which seed can germinate properly in a particular area. This one-size-fits-all approach is not going to help Zambia, especially given that the policy of agriculture recognises that one-size-fits-all cannot help us.

Madam Speaker, looking at what we are likely to harvest if we increase production is for the good of everybody. It improves nutrition. The nutritional value at the household level will rise. You will find that the babies, the mothers who are breastfeeding, and the fathers who are here in Parliament, will feed well because we are talking about producing rice, soya beans and maize, which can also be used to make other products.

Madam Speaker, another factor is the economic score. We know that even in the Eighth National Development Plan (8NDP), agriculture is a sector that we are supposed to use to diversify our economy. Why agriculture? Why is it that we are talking about agriculture? Further, within the aspect of agriculture, we also talk about global diversification. This entails that as we increase production of raw materials, we are likely to have better jobs in the agriculture sector through value addition. I think, this is not controversial. I know that at some point, of course, people will say that these policies are already there, but we are trying to supplement what –

Interruptions

Mr Fube: No, no, no!

Madam Speaker, saying that these policies have been implemented has been the standard answer. In a democracy like ours, co-management matters. All voices matter. My voice equally matters when it comes to adding to agriculture policies, legal frameworks and many other things. When we record success, at the end of the day –

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

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Chaatila: Madam Speaker, I raise this Point of Order on the seconder of the Motion. My Point of Order is based on Standing Order No. 71. Is the seconder of the Motion in order to continue debating this Motion when he has admitted that all these measures have already been implemented by the Government? So, on what basis is he debating? In fact, he is seconding a Motion when he has already indicated that the Government has already put these measures in place? Is he in order to continue debating?

Madam Speaker, I seek your serious ruling.

Madam Speaker: I believe that the seconder of the Motion is justifying his case. So, all we can do on the other side is to state our position also, so that we balance, because the Motion has already been admitted. So, if he is stating that, maybe, he is arguing against the Motion. So, let us allow him to debate as he wills.

The hon. Member for Chilubi may continue.

Mr Fube: Madam Speaker, I was not arguing against the Motion. I was qualifying it. It has become a trend– I think, we all know that policies are there, but we still have low yields. The Government is spending so much money on the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), yet we are not getting what we are supposed to get out of the programme.

Madam Speaker, the main object of this Motion is to increase production of crops under FISP. There is nothing wrong with doing so. So far, I have not admitted that the agriculture policies have recorded the success that we want to achieve. In this Motion, we are talking about keywords like yield, FISP and farmers, as you rightly put it.

Madam Speaker, what I want to underscore is that we are knocking on the door of the Executive because the Executive directs policy. Let us continue channelling resources to FISP, but we should also make sure that we apply measures that are going to give our young people employment, boost our food security and nutrition. We can achieve that by increasing production in agriculture. The keywords are “increment per hectare.” That is what we are talking about. We are talking about production. Even yesterday, the word “escalation” brought problems. The baseline is that we are where we are now, but we need to go to where we are supposed to be.

Madam Speaker, on behalf of the people of Chilubi, I am saying that let us move from producing less than 2.1 million metric tonnes and 2.16 million metric tonnes to 3 million metric tonnes or something higher. That is what I want to underscore.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Thank you, hon. Member for Chilubi. By way of guidance, you should also make proposals on how this can be achieved. I did not hear that when you were debating. That is the only way to strengthen your Motion.

Mr Jamba (Mwembezhi): Madam Speaker, I want to thank the mover of the Motion because he has actually shown that he is not a farmer –

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

Madam Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Nkombo: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to raise a point of order. I also thank the mover and the seconder of the Motion, which is supposed to be a very important.

Madam Speaker, I rise on a serious procedural point of order, arising from the immediate past comments from yourselves, which I agree with that this Motion, good as it may be, appears to be very defective. It is too general for us to oppose or even support it. This is because the throughput of this discussion must look at the measures, which the mover has not stated, not even in one breath.

Madam Speaker, following your immediate past comments, would we be in order to continue discussing this matter when it does not contain what he calls “measures” or should we cordially ask the hon. Member of Parliament to go and refine this Motion and come up with a definitive set of measures, so that we can support or oppose this Motion?

Madam Speaker, if I still have an extra second, I put it to the House that when this Government came to office, there were measures that were put in place regarding the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP), which included re-examining the entire database of FISP. That saw many people who did not qualify to be on FISP exposed. That also exposed some fraud in FISP. This Government also introduced the Sustainable Agriculture Financing Facility (SAFF). Those were measures. This is what I expected my brother and friend to define when coming up with such a Motion. I find it difficult to either oppose or support this Motion.

I seek your ruling, Madam Speaker.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

Let us make progress. Let us listen to each other. There is a point of order that has been raised by the hon. Member for Mazabuka. But my ruling is that the Motion is here. It is on the Floor. It is being debated. There are hon. Members who are going to debate against the Motion and those who are going to debate in support of the Motion. What they say in for or against the Motion will determine the final decision of the House on the Motion.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kasenengwa!

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Chilubi!

Apologies, hon. Member for Kasenengwa, if you did not say anything. I saw your mouth open, so –

Laughter

Madam Speaker: You are my new cousin, do not worry, although you are from Eastern Province.

Hon. Member for Chilubi, you are seconding the Motion. Let us listen to the suggestions. As you debate, please, lay some facts for and against the Motion. After that, a decision will be made on whether the Motion is carried or defeated. Right now, we have not even gone halfway. I am sure there are still other hon. Members who are going to debate for the Motion. Maybe, they have some ideas on how these measures can be implemented. So, let us give them an opportunity and allow them to debate, hon. Member for Mazabuka.

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I thank you for the time.

Madam Speaker, I listened to the mover and the seconder of the Motion, urging the Government to take some measures. Of course, they took over seven minutes talking about nothing in terms of the measures.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Mwembezhi!

Mr Kang’ombe: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I wish to put it on record that I did not hear –

Madam Speaker: Order!

Mr Kang’ombe: Did I not say anything?

Mr Jamba: It is me who was hearing.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kamfinsa!

Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, please, withdraw the phrase you used that “they said nothing.” The context is –

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, let me withdraw.

Madam Speaker, I will now speak in proper English. I did not hear the measures which they are asking for. There was no content in the Motion. The essence of the Motion presented –

Mr Kang’ombe: On a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Mr Jamba: You are the mover. So, I was hoping –

Madam Speaker: Order!

Hon. Member for Kamfinsa, this is your Motion. We want to go through it and debate it. Now, if you disrupt the proceedings through points of order, there will be no flow of the debate.

I will allow the last point of order. After that, there will be no more points of order.

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, thank you very much and my point of order is pursuant to Standing Order No.71.

Madam Speaker, in my debate, I highlighted the problem, and I also highlighted specific measures. I stated that there are things that are affecting the output of our farmers. Extension services –

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kamfinsa!

You will be able to wind up the Motion. Do not respond –

Mr Kang’ombe: I want to raise a point of order, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: No, you cannot raise a point of order in order to –

Mr Kang’ombe: I am raising it.

Madam Speaker: Order!

You cannot raise a point of order –

Mr Kang’ombe remained upstanding.

Madam Speaker: Resume your seat.

Mr Kang’ombe: You allowed Hon. –

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kamfinsa!

I am giving guidance here.

Mr Kang’ombe: You should be fair.

Madam Speaker: I am giving guidance. It is your Motion. You have to –

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: You are now attacking me. You know that you are trading on very dangerous waters. Let us control our emotions.

Mr Kang’ombe: You should be fair, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: You are repeating, hon. Member for Kamfinsa.

I was advising and guiding that since you are the mover of the Motion, you cannot raise a point of order to rebut the arguments of other people who are opposing the Motion. When the time comes for you to wind up, you will be able to rebut. The hon. Member for Mazabuka Central raised a point of order, but it was not admitted. So, where is the unfairness there? You like pointing fingers.

Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, you may continue.

Mr Jamba: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, maybe, let me put my point in simple language. If the mover of the Motion said that the Government should enhance the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) to discourage farmers from selling the fertiliser once they receive it, I would have supported the Motion. If he had suggested that more officers be engaged to provide extension services that are needed in our districts, it could have been much better. If he said that the Government should employ more staff to test the soils in the farms in his constituency and Kitwe in particular, I would have supported the Motion. However, he went all over. He is a miner. He is not a farmer like me. In Mwembeshi –

Laughter

Mr Kang’ombe rose.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Mwembezhi!

Laughter

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kang’ombe: You see why I wanted to raise a point of order.

Madam Speaker: Order!

I have already guided, hon. Member for Kamfinsa. I do not know what you want now.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: I have guided.

Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, please, do not compare yourself to miners. You are a farmer.

Mr Jamba: Yes, I am a farmer.

Madam Speaker: So, stick to the Motion.

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, that is why I am speaking as a farmer. In Mwembezhi, there is an agriculture office with extension workers who guide on soil sampling and guide farmers on how to apply fertiliser. I have a tomato field in the backyard and extension officers come to check on what I am doing and also predict the production per hectare.

Madam Speaker, the mover is urging the Government to increase production, but he did not propose any measures the Government should take. Therefore, I find it very difficult to argue because he did not say anything. So, he needs to refine this Motion so that when he comes back, hon. Members will support it because we want production to be increased.

Madam Speaker, I want to give an example concerning the issues affecting FISP. Farmers receive fertiliser, but instead of them applying it in their fields, they sell it to people within the community. Maybe, if the hon. Member mentioned such things, I could have suggested that the Government be policing the distribution of inputs to discourage farmers from selling the fertiliser that they receive from the Government, but instead, he did not say anything. When we say we want to increase production so that –

Mr Kang’ombe: I did not say anything.

Mr Jamba: Yes!

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I did guide.

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I want to say that when someone is talking to you –

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kamfinsa and hon. Member for Mwembezhi!

I guided. Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, stop saying “he said nothing”. The hon. Member for Kamfinsa is not amused by the words you are using. Please, use other words instead of saying he said nothing because he said something, but, maybe, you do not agree with what he said. So, maybe, it is the language.

May you continue.

Mr Jamba: I am sorry, Madam Speaker. I am saying that I did not get anything from what he said.

Laughter

Mr Jamba: Yes, I did not get what he said. So, my advice is that if we are to improve agriculture in the country, we should advise the Government to take specific steps. For example, we can suggest that the four bags of fertiliser that the Government gives to farmers is not enough and that it be increased to eight bags or ten bags. We can also suggest that the seed, which is distributed to different parts of the country such as the Western Province and the Southern Province, be specified and also be increased. It can further be suggested that instead of farmers receiving inputs by redeeming them, they can receive cash for them to employ people to work in the fields. However, none of such things have been suggested in the Motion to improve productivity. That is why I said I did not hear anything. You can pardon me, Madam Speaker. The man spent seven minutes saying nothing.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Mwembezhi!

Mr Kang’ombe: You are allowing him, Madam Speaker, –

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, please, withdraw that.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: He is thinking in Tonga. So, you can forgive him.

Let us make progress.

Hon. Member for Mwembezhi, please, withdraw that statement and apologise.

Mr Jamba: Madam Speaker, I withdraw that statement.

I apologise to you, Sir, that I did not hear anything.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Let us hear from a supporter of the Motion. I believe that is the hon. Member for Kasenengwa.

Interruptions

Mr Kang’ombe: Iwe, ikala. Tapali ifyo ulelanda.

Mr Twasa (Kasenengwa): Madam Speaker, thank you very much for giving me this opportunity, on behalf of the people of Kasenengwa, to add my voice to the debate on this Motion that is progressive, non-political and which will help to improve food security in this country.

Mr Nkandu: Question!

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, that can only happen if such important matters stay free of political debates, like the one presented by the hon. Member who is from speaking. He has politicised everything, which should not be the case.

Madam Speaker, the mover of this Motion is simply asking how we can improve output in maize production in the midst of all the support that farmers receive.

Mr Jamba: Which support?

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, at the moment, while we are celebrating a bumper harvest, most households are starving because people who were helped by this Government, and all the Governments that have been there before, with farming inputs have remained hungry.

Interruptions

Mr Twasa: That is what is happening. Shall we not politicise this thing because it is not only talking about the current Government. It is talking about –

Interruptions

Mr Twasa: Government is a going concern.

Madam Speaker, how can we help improve production or output? There are many measures that we can look at.

Mr Mulunda: What are you saying?

Mr Twasa: What I am saying is that, one, let us pick –

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

Let us allow the supporters of the Motion to debate.

Hon. Member for Kasenengwa, you are free, please, continue. Debate.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: The time is at a standstill. It is not moving.

Let us make progress, hon. Members.

Interruptions

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, may I be protected. I do not want to respond to them (pointed at hon. UPND Members).

May I speak through you, Madam Speaker. Tell them to keep quiet.

Mr Twasa wiped his face.

Ms Sefulo: He is crying!

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Kasenengwa, are you crying or laughing?

Laughter

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, we are simply saying that our farmers are well supported, but their production is not adequate. Their production is not something that you can write home about. These are people who are given enough inputs but, despite all that support, they do not have further support on the ground. I have not seen, at any time, agricultural extension officers going around to check on peasant farmers and how their soils are doing. Applying fertiliser to the same soil for over twenty years is not good. How much support do the farmers on the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) get from agricultural extension officers? That is what we are debating. We give them fertiliser year in and year out, yet their yields are poor. What will we do to help agricultural extension officers so that, in turn, they can also support the farmer on the ground? Those are the things that we should be debating, things that we should be looking at. That is very important.

The other thing, Madam Speaker, is that we have many agriculture trainees who graduate every year. Will they be learning the same curriculum and training year in and year out? You produce agricultural officers, but they end up on Cairo Road selling talk time. The next thing you will hear is that they want to study another course, like teaching or nursing. Why can we not produce agricultural officers or trainees who will go right to the farms and produce food for this country, rather than those who want to be farm managers or supervisors, or work in retail shops, like at the livestock services centre in the Lusaka Showgrounds? So, maybe, we also need to change our curriculum. It should be tailored towards making those people self-reliant and sustaining with hands-on training, not an agricultural officer who will end up on Cairo Road selling talk time, or just sitting at home. Those are the things that we should be talking about in support of his Motion (pointed at Mr Kang’ombe).

Madam Speaker, we also need to look at smart agriculture when supporting the Motion. How can we be helped to know how much we will produce within a lima, hectare or acre? Even now, if the hon. Minister of Agriculture was in this House and I asked him how much yield the ministry has received from the fertiliser that it gave to farmers under FISP, maybe, there may not even be that data. All we know is that each year we distribute fertiliser and that is where things ends. It reminds of my uncle. After getting his pension, he opened up a shop and every time commodities finished in the shop, he would just get money to restock without asking about the money from the sales in the shop. “Amalume, vinthu vasila”. “Yayi viyenda bwino. Gulani”. He was not taking stock. That is what we are doing under this Government. Year in and year out, we just give farmers fertiliser. We do not even follow up on how they use it. The hon. Minister of Agriculture is totally blank on whether the fertiliser gives us meaningful results. He does not know.

Hon. UPND Members: Mmh!

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, it does not just end with him. I am sorry to pick on the hon. Minister of Agriculture. I know he is a forgiving uncle.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member!

Withdraw the statement that you said that the hon. Minister is “blank” and use another word.

Mr Twasa: Madam Speaker, I think that word was too strong. I withdraw it.

Allow me, Madam Speaker, to continue. We may want to politicise what the mover has presented, but the topic is looking at a broad spectrum and the end result is one. How can we improve the output in maize production? That goes directly to the farmer. How can we help peasant farmers with the inputs that they receive; fertiliser and seed under FISP, the Sustainable Agriculture Financing Facility (SAFF) and other loans? That is what we are looking at.

Finally, Madam Speaker, I beg that we keep such programmes away from politics, sometimes, because every time we politicise such things, we end up not yielding results. Already, we are not looking at this issue with the attention that it deserves.

Madam Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1640 hours until 1700 hours.

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

Mr Twasa: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Before business was suspended, I was about to wind up my debate.

Madam Speaker, I want to say that we should not politicise this very important issue. We need to ensure that the Ministry of Agriculture monitors those agriculture extension officers and that they have accommodation in the areas where they are assigned to carry out their duties. We visited Namwala one time during our tour and the agriculture extension officer was not there. The reason that was given was that there was no accommodation for him. So, all these are the factors that we need to look at.

Madam Speaker, we also need to increase the number of bags of fertiliser and other farming inputs, what we call packs, that are given to farmers. We can increase those and monitor the farmers to see where they are managing and where they are failing so that from there, we can make the improvements.

Madam Speaker, with these few remarks, I want to support this Motion.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Madam Speaker: Thank you so much, hon. Member.

Looking at the business on the Order Paper, we still have a lot. So, I will allow one hon. Member to debate for the Motion, one hon. Member to debate against the Motion and then the Acting hon. Minister will respond. Lastly, the mover will wind up and we will make a decision.

So, the next one will be from those who are opposing. The hon. Member for Chikankata, I hope she is opposing. If you are opposing, you can debate.

Mrs Sabao (Chikankata): Madam Speaker, thank you. The mover is looking at me.

Laughter

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, I am opposing. However, allow me to thank the mover and the seconder of the Motion.

Madam Speaker, the Motion is okay, but the Government is already on top of things. Whatever is being asked for in this Motion, the Government is implementing. We have extension officers in the field. Inputs under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) are delivered on time and money is paid to our farmers.

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, we paid according to the 2025 Budget. The farmers were paid, but we had more than what we had planned for, but still, people are being paid. However, it is important for people to understand the genesis of the FISP. They cannot say that something is not being done when they do not understand the genesis of the FISP. The people who came up with the FISP were looking at production in masses to ensure household food security.

Madam Speaker, before I go further, it is important for the mover of this Motion to go on the ground. If we are going to sit at a table and analyse the issue of the FISP, he will not get the correct information. They should go into the field as some of us do. When we are in our constituencies, we are in the field. That is the issue we discuss every day. Hence, we understand and appreciate how the FISP is working.

Madam Speaker, when we came into office, we found many farmers on the FISP. We have many co-operatives. I will give an example. One cooperative will have 100 members, and in Chikankata, we have 14,000 packs. Now, when you look at the members in a cooperative and multiply that by the number of cooperatives in a district, then divide by the number of packs, the numbers are few. The reason is very simple. There was no guidance on how many people should form a cooperative.

Madam Speaker, I know what Hon. Fube is talking about. Where he comes from, farming is not part of him. I come from a farming area.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, his is fish farming, not crop farming. What we found on the ground was that in one cooperative, there were 100 members. What we needed to do from the beginning was to ensure that people were guided –

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order!

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, from the beginning, when the FISP started, people were supposed to be guided on the number of members in a cooperative. If we understand the FISP, we all know that in this country, maize is a political crop, and even the introduction of the FISP was connected to politics. Hence, people were not given the correct information on the number of members to be a cooperative. So, if there are 100 members in a cooperative and they are given 20 packs, what do we expect? Because our farmers want to work together, instead of having six bags of fertiliser each, they share amongst themselves. They end up having two bags each, and the rest of the members do not receive any fertiliser. This is the reason the number of members in a co-operatives does not correspond to the yield that we would like to have. That is why I am saying that they should not use the research approach. They should go on the ground and see what is happening practically, then they will appreciate that the Government is doing the right thing.

Interruptions

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, if they are just calculating figures on the table, they will not get the correct information. The Government is doing practically everything. The only thing that it has to work on is the issue of numbers.

Madam Speaker, I do not support the Motion because it says that the Government should bring more extension workers. We have extension workers, but it was the previous Government that recruited more members in cooperatives without giving them the correct numbers.

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

Let us allow the hon. Member for Chikankata to debate.

Hon. Member for Chikankata, debate through the Chair.

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, the problem is not the Government. The Government has given us everything, but the numbers that were recruited in the cooperatives before we came into office were too high. I said earlier on that one cooperative has 100 members, and then it is given maybe, twenty packs, which is not enough, and it was not enough. This is why under the New Dawn Government, we are trying to restructure, starting from the cooperative.

Interruptions

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, it is very annoying to see people who caused the problem come in through a different door and say that we are failing as the Government, when we are doing our part.

Let us agree and offer solutions. The hon. Member of Parliament for Mwembezhi said that what we expected from this Motion were solutions. We should come up with solutions, not blame games. As a person coming from a rural constituency, I understand and appreciate the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) but I do not support this Motion because it has not given solutions. When hon. Members bring Motions on the Floor of the House, they should offer solutions. The role of the Opposition is to give alternative solutions to the7 Ruling Party, not just accusations. I will not allow that.

Laughter

Mr Twasa handed water to Mrs Sabao.

Laughter

Mrs Sabao: If one wants relevance in this Government, one must offer solutions, not just accusations, because whatever we are doing is coming from the same people who cause these problems.

Madam Speaker, as the hon. Member of Parliament for Chikankata, I do not support this Motion, because it needed to give solutions, not accusations. The Government is doing everything. It is on the path to restructure the number of people in co-operatives so that people can benefit.

Mr Twasa offered water to Mrs Sabao.

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Kasenengwa!

Mrs Sabao: I cannot accept his water. I do not know his interests.

Laughter

Madam Speaker: What is contained in that water?

Laughter

Madam Speaker: Hon. Member for Kasenengwa, please, go back to your seat.

Interruptions

Mr Twasa walked back to his seat.

Mrs Sabao: Madam Speaker, with these few words, I do not support the Motion. It is very difficult to debate because it does not have content.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. UPND Member: Hear, hear!

Mr Mtayachalo (Chama North): Madam Speaker, thank you for this opportunity. I think, my debate will be very brief. I want, first of all, to commend Hon. Kang’ombe for coming up with such a very progressive Motion. I also want to commend my brother, Hon. Fube, for supporting this Motion.

Madam Speaker, what Hon. Kang’ombe is asking the Government to do is very simple. In his Motion, he is urging the Government to implement measures to increase crop yield per hectare for farmers under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP). This Motion resonates very well with the New Dawn Government’s ambition to achieve 10 million metric tonnes of maize by 2027. Now, if yields are poor, how do we expect the country to achieve the 10 million metric tonnes? So, as we look at this Motion, I hope that hon. Members on your right will think twice and support this Motion.

Madam Speaker, I know that we have a good market in the region. We have markets in Mozambique, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Zimbabwe and in many other countries. We have been implementing maize export bans almost every year. Why are we implementing maize export bans? It is because we do not have enough maize. We do not grow enough maize. So, why not help the small-scale farmers who are under FISP to increase production per hectare? For example, when distributing fertiliser, the Government should take into account ecological zones. Currently, fertiliser is distributed across the board without looking at the soil type. So, these are some of the measures that the Government can actually implement in order to increase production per hectare for small-scale farmers.

Madam Speaker, if we look at the farming practices, Zambia has been independent for more than sixty years now, but our people in Kaputa and Chama are still using outdated methods of farming. If they are still using outdated methods of farming, how can they increase the rate of production per hectare? So, these are some of the measures that Hon. Kang’ombe is trying to get the Government to implement in order to improve farming practices. A long time ago, during Kenneth Kaunda's time, we used to have tractors. We used to have tractors in many wards or constituencies. Today, you cannot find tractors in rural areas.

Mr Sing’ombe: Question!

Mr Mtayachalo: Meanwhile, we are saying that we want to achieve 10 million metric tonnes maize production. How are we going to achieve the 10 million metric tonnes if small-scale farmers are not helped? The majority of the people who grow maize are actually small-scale farmers. So, if we help these farmers, we will have national food security and household food security. We will also increase household income and we will be able to eradicate poverty.

Madam Speaker, we also need to increase the number of people to benefit from the Food Security Pack (FSP). One hon. Member was saying that people are sharing fertiliser. They are sharing because by the time the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) Government introduced FISP in 2002, the population of Zambia was about 10 million, but now it is more than 20 million. There are more people in co-operatives because the population has increased. So, it means that the Government must increase the FSP so that our farmers, the small-scale farmers, do not share fertiliser.

Madam Speaker, there are so many measures we can employ to increase production. We can employ more extension officers. Currently, we have inadequate extension officers and therefore, they cannot teach our farmers new methods of farming.

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, this is a progressive Motion. If we have to address the escalating poverty levels in this country, I think, we must do something to ensure that our small-scale farmers are well looked after.

Madam Speaker, with those few remarks, I want to state that I fully support this Motion.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

The Minister of Education (Mr Syakalima) (on behalf of the Minister of Agriculture (Mr Mtolo)): Madam Speaker, I thank you most sincerely for according me an opportunity to make a submission on the debate of the Motion moved by Mr C. Kang’ombe.

Madam Speaker, the Government has been implementing the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) with the aim of improving access to affordable agricultural inputs by small-scale farmers across the country. Without this support from the Government, many of our farmers would not have access to inputs. The FISP itself, is a deliberate measure meant to enhance production per hectare. Therefore, the over 1 million farmers under the programme are benefiting through increased production. During the 2024/2025 Farming Season, the country recorded a maize bumper harvest of 3.7 million metric tonnes. This achievement was made possible mainly through the implementation of the FISP. By providing inputs to over 1 million farmers, the Government facilitated increased production. The transition to the e-voucher system has enabled the Government to provide inputs in good time, and allowed farmers to plant early and increase production.

Madam Speaker, the Government is alive to the fact that more needs to be done to make the farmers more productive. With the targets we have set to increase maize production to 10 million metric tonnes, wheat production to 1 million metric tonnes, and soya bean production to 1 million tonnes by 2031, it is even more imperative that other complementary measures are implemented to improve productivity. In this regard, I wish to inform the House that through implementing interventions designed under the Comprehensive Agricultural Transformation Support Programme (CATSP), we are on course towards improved productivity.

Madam Speaker, allow me to highlight the specific measures under implementation. The Government has continued to link farmers to credit offered under projects supported by co-operating partners and the private sector to scale up their production. Through the different credit facilities, farmers can buy equipment and other inputs to enable them to be more productive. With the increasing impacts of climate change on productivity, as well as the need to promote year-round production, the Government is promoting irrigation development across the country. We have constructed dams, weirs and small irrigation systems to enhance farmer productivity, both during normal rainfall seasons and during low rainfall seasons.

Further, the Government has established mechanisation centres of excellence and mechanisation service centres to improve farmer access to mechanisation services. With access to mechanisation, drudgery is eliminated and productivity is increased.

Madam Speaker, we are living in a world of constant agricultural technological advancements. Therefore, we are investing in research and development, which is delivering new agricultural technologies, to enhance crop yields. For example, through our research institutions, we have been able to develop yield-enhancing and drought-tolerant seed varieties, which are key to increasing productivity. In addition, we are implementing a country-wide soil testing and mapping exercise. Once the soil testing is completed, it will allow us to make region-specific fertiliser recommendations as opposed to the current blanket application of fertiliser. This is key in enhancing productivity among all categories of farmers, but more so for farmers under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP). Further, we have continued to strengthen our national seed certification and compliance machinery. Through capacity building, and improving our seed regulation and inspection system, we are rooting out the practice of selling fake and uncertified seed, which is detrimental to productivity.

Madam Speaker, a conducive policy-legal framework is catalytic to investment and productivity. Currently, the Government is implementing policy reforms aimed at improving agricultural marketing and credit. With the enactment of new legislation on agricultural marketing and agricultural credit, well-functioning agricultural markets and credit systems will be a huge incentive for farmers to be productive. For instance, the agricultural credit law will establish a warehousing licensing system, which will enable farmers to have access to warehousing facilities and utilise their stock positions as collateral for loans. With improved access to storage and finance, farmers can obtain fair prices and be more productive.

Madam Speaker, agriculture, and farming in particular, is increasingly evolving due to climate change and on account of agroeconomic and economic factors. For farmers to adapt to the constant changes, extension service provision becomes essential. Through the Government’s efforts in collaboration with the private sector, we are improving extension services. We have increased the number of farmers accessing training in climate-smart agriculture technologies, business development, and improved modern farm management practices. The Government will continue to implement the measures I have highlighted and many more others to increase crop yield per hectare for not only the farmers under FISP, but for all farmers in the country.

Madam Speaker, based on my submission, it is very clear that the Government is already implementing measures to increase crop yield per hectare for farmers under FISP. The Government will also continue devising other innovative strategies aimed at increasing yields among all small-scale farmers in the country. I also wish to indicate that we are open to working with partner Non-Government Organisations (NGOs), bilateral and multilateral partners, the private sector and, indeed, hon. Members of this august House to implement proven measures to improve farmer productivity across the country.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Kang’ombe: Madam Speaker, allow me, once again, to thank your office for allowing me to bring this very important topic to Parliament today. Like I always state when I am given this rare opportunity, we have three functions to perform, namely to make laws, provide oversight and approve the National Budget.

Madam Speaker, today my role was to provide oversight and to bring this topic to Parliament because it has been identified as a problem. We still have a problem. Despite the catalogued list of interventions that the ministry has implemented, unfortunately, the yield remains low. Unfortunately, that has been identified in literally all the reports. Reports by the Ministry of Agriculture and data from the Zambia Statistics Agency (ZamStats) indicate that the yield remains low.

Madam Speaker, I am sure even the experts at the Ministry of Agriculture acknowledge that despite all the efforts that the Government has been implementing, the statistics show that the data remains the same. Data indicates that despite producing lots of maize, each farmer supported under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) unfortunately, is not producing enough. That is why today, I moved this harmless Motion. The experts should now sit down to review what has been implemented and whether the outcomes are changing. They are supposed to tell us that, “We have tried this intervention, we have provided climate-smart agriculture options, but they are not giving us the output. We have tried employing two extension service officers, but they are not giving us the right output. Let us employ more.”

Madam Speaker, that is why I am suggesting today that despite all the measures the Government has implemented, unfortunately, the official data from the ministry shows that the yields are low, and that we are not producing enough maize per hectare. I am sure, the experts who are listening to this conversation agree with me that despite all the efforts, the statistics show that the country is not producing enough maize per hectare. That was my Motion today.

Madam Speaker, I thank my brother, the hon. Member of Parliament for Chilubi, for seconding the Motion and ensuring that we bring this conversation to Parliament. Parliament is not about 156 hon. Members. It is about the people out there who have sent us to come and speak.

Madam Speaker, I have delivered the message to the Government today. The Government should go and implement measures, not the already implemented measures that have not yielded the outcomes. If five measures have been implemented, but the country is still producing less than two tonnes of maize per hectare, other measures should be identified. That is why experts are employed in the ministry. These are people who are trained and equipped with skills. Our role is to deliver the message.

Madam Speaker, I do not think that this Motion had any connotations attached. The FISP can be a successful programme. It has provided us with huge potential. Three million tonnes of maize is from FISP. We are producing 3.7 million tonnes, but we can produce 6 million tonnes. His Excellency the President sat where you are seated and bemoaned the low productivity of maize. It is in the speech. He mentioned that in the speech when he opened Parliament two months ago. Here I am, reminding the Government that its two-tonne per hectare of maize production is too low; more should be produced. I do not think this Motion had any particular connotations.

I thank you, once again, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kampyongo: Well done.

Madam Speaker: Order!

Hon. PF Members called for a division.

Question that this House urges the Government to implement measures aimed at increasing the crop yield per hectare for farmers under the Farmer Input Support Programme put and the House voted:

Ayes – (16)

Mr Allen Banda

Mr Chala

Mr Chibombwe

Ms Chisenga

Mr Chonde

Mr Fube

Mr Kafwaya

Mr Kampyongo

Mr Kang’ombe

Mr Kasandwe

Rev. Katuta

Mr Mabumba

Mr Mtayachalo

Mr Mumba

Dr Mwanza

Mr Mwila

Noes – (51)

Mr Chaatila

Mr Chikote

Mr Chinkuli

Ms Halwiindi

Mr Hamwaata

Mr Jamba

Mr Kabuswe

Mr Kamboni

Mr Kapema

Ms Kasanda

Mr Kolala

Mr Lubozha

Mr Lufuma

Eng. Mabenga

Mr Mabeta

Mr Malambo

Mr Mandandi

Mr Mapani

Mr Matambo

Mr Mbao

Mr Miyutu

Mr Mubanga

Mr Mulaliki

Mr Charles Mulenga

Mr Mulunda

Mr Mulusa

Mrs Mulyata

Mrs Munashabantu

Mr Mung’andu

Mr Munsanje

Mr Mutati

Mr Mutelo

Mr Mutinta

Mr Mwiimbu, SC.

Mr Ngoma

Mr Ngowani

Mr Nkandu

Mr Nkulukusa

Mrs Sabao

Mr Samakayi

Ms Sefulo

Mr Siachisumo

Mr Simbao

Mr Simunji

Mr Simuzingili

Mr Sing’ombe

Brig-Gen. Sitwala

Mr Syakalima

Ms Tambatamba

Mr Tayengwa

Mr Zulu

Abstention – (01)

Mr Mufunelo

Question accordingly negatived.

_______

BILLS

SECOND READING

THE TEACHING PROFESSION BILL, 2025

The Minister of Education (Mr Syakalima): Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you most sincerely for giving me this opportunity and honour to deliver a policy statement before this august House on the Second Reading of the Teaching Profession Bill, 2025.

Madam Speaker, education is the constitutional backbone of our national development. At the centre of that backbone stands the teacher who is the custodian of values, skills, identity and human capital. When the professional standards of teachers decline, a nation’s future is compromised. The Ministry of Education derives its authority over teacher regulation and service delivery from the Government Gazette Notice No. 1123 of 2021, –

Interruptions

Madam Speaker: Order hon. Members!

Hon. Members who are going out, please, do so quietly. We are in the middle of proceedings.

Hon. Minister, you may continue.

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, those regulations are grounded in the Education Act No. 23 of 2011 and complementary legislation. This mandate is not aspirational, but legal and constitutional. The Teaching Profession Act No. 5 of 2013 was enacted to create a regulatory framework. However, its implementation has proven inadequate with weak enforcement and fragmented disciplinary structures, and the proliferation of unregistered individuals, has allowed systemic breaches to persist. These weaknesses have permitted unqualified persons to enter classrooms, jeopardised learner safety, damaged teacher professionalism and eroded public trust. It is to remedy these deficiencies that the Teaching Profession Bill, 2025, is presented for Second Reading.

Madam Speaker, this Bill repeals and replaces the 2013 Act. It is not a partial amendment or incremental adjustment, it is a comprehensive statutory overhaul designed for modern conditions, contemporary risks and the professionalism expected of those entrusted with teaching.

Madam Speaker, the objects of the Bill are:

continue the existence of the Teaching Council of Zambia and re-define its functions;
re-constitute the board of the Teaching Council of Zambia and redefine its functions;
regulate teachers, their practice and professional conduct;
provide for the administration of licensure examinations;
repeal and replace the Teaching Profession Act, 2013; and
provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

Madam Speaker, collectively, these objectives elevate teaching as a regulated profession governed by enforceable standards of competence, ethics and accountability.

Madam Speaker, this Bill continues the Teaching Council of Zambia (TCZ) as a body corporate, strengthening its governance, independence and powers. The board is re-constituted to enhance competence, professional integrity and operational efficiency. Central to the Bill is licensure. Registration alone will no longer authorise practice. Every teacher must hold a valid practising certificate issued under law. This aligns with standards in regulated professions such as health, engineering and law.

Madam Speaker, to safeguard quality from the outset, the Bill introduces licensure examinations. These tests will ensure that new entrants possess the requisite knowledge, skills and ethical disposition before undertaking instructional duties.

Madam Speaker, the Bill clarifies jurisdiction. Professional misconduct will be adjudicated by the TCZ, while employment matters will remain under the Teaching Service Commission (TSC) or relevant employer. Structured appeal mechanisms guarantee procedural fairness. Inspectors will be empowered to enter educational institutions, verify compliance and enforce regulated standards. These enforcement provisions deter impersonation, protect learners and uphold the integrity and dignity of teaching.

Madam Speaker, transitional provisions ensure continuity, recognise valid certificates, honour existing rights and guide an orderly transfer of functions, assets and liabilities from the current council.

Madam Speaker, the enactment of this Bill will reinforce the rule of law in the education sector through clear and uniform compliance requirements. Learners will be protected and only qualified, registered and licensed individuals will be permitted to teach. Those who violate standards will be held accountable. Teacher dignity will be restored. Competence, ethics and professional development will be incentivised. Teachers will be recognised not as administrative subordinates, but as licensed professionals. The Bill will reduce disputes between regulatory and employment authorities, minimise delays in disciplinary matters and foster predictable and fair decision-making. By strengthening professional standards, Zambia will align teacher competence with the demands of a modern economy, digital transition, innovation and skills-driven growth.

Madam Speaker, this Bill is not unilateral. It is the product of broad consultations. Teacher unions, training institutions, private education providers, school leaders, professional associations and provincial stakeholders were engaged in structured dialogue. Legal, administrative and fiscal consultations were held with the ministries responsible for justice, finance, labour and defence to ensure enforceability and resource realism. The consensus was clear; the current regulatory regime is weak. The profession requires a modern, enforceable and equitable instrument. This Bill responds directly to that consensus.

Madam Speaker, this Bill operationalises Zambia’s commitments under the Eighth National Development Plan (8NDP), Vision 2030 and the Education Skills Sector Plan 2024-2028. It aligns with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation-International Labour Organisation (UNESCO-ILO) recommendation concerning the status of teachers and advances Sustainable Development Goal No. 4, quality, inclusive and equitable education.

Madam Speaker, these instruments recognise that teachers are not merely curriculum deliverers, but core agents of national competitiveness, social progress and human development.

Madam Speaker, the Teaching Profession Bill is a necessary reform. It closes long-standing regulatory gaps, protects learners, restores dignity to the profession and strengthens institutional accountability.

Madam Speaker, the Bill also replaces a weak, outdated regime with a modern, statutory framework capable of meeting present and future demands. I, therefore, commend the Bill to the honourable House and urge that it be read a second time.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kamboni (Kalomo Central): Madam Speaker, the Committee on Education, Science and Technology was tasked to scrutinise the Teaching Profession Bill No. 14 of 2025, pursuant to its mandate as set out in Order No. 207(j) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2024.

Madam Speaker, let me state from the outset that the Committee is in support of the Bill. This, notwithstanding, stakeholders raised a few concerns, which the Committee is in agreement with and makes the following observations and recommendations.

Madam Speaker, the Committee notes with concern that some of the functions of the Teaching Council of Zambia (TCZ) provided for under Clause 4(1)(a) to (p) overlap with those of the Ministry of Education, the Teaching Service Commission (TSC), the Higher Education Authority (HEA) and the Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA). In this regard, the Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to harmonise the mandate of the TCZ with other established institutions in the education sector and, where not possible, remove all the overlapping functions in the Bill.

Madam Speaker, with regard to Clause 17, the Committee notes that the Bill provides for a fine not exceeding 500,000 penalty units or a custodial sentence of up to five years for a person found practising as a teacher without a valid practising licence. Further, the Committee notes that this provision excludes volunteer teachers who often are unqualified, but are relied upon to offer teaching services in most rural community schools, which are recognised under the Education Act No. 23 of 2011. In view of this, the Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to reduce both the fine and the custodial sentences that have been provided for in the Bill.

Madam Speaker, the Committee further recommends that the Bill should provide clarity on how volunteer teachers will be treated under the proposed Bill.

Madam Speaker, the Committee observes with concern the proposal in Clause 19 to change the licence renewal period from three years to annually. The Committee observes that this may raise administrative burdens and will place a huge financial strain on teachers. In light of this, the Committee recommends that the three-year renewal period be maintained and that the renewal fees be reduced so as to lighten the financial burden for the teachers.

Madam Speaker, the Committee observes that Clause 4(h) provides for the registration of student teachers. However, the Bill does not provide clarity with regard to under what circumstances the student teachers will be required to register, for what purposes, and if they will be expected to undertake licensure examinations. Further, the Bill lacks clarity as to how student teachers who are on the teaching practice will be treated in view of the proposed teaching practising certificate. In light of this, the Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to exempt and remove student teachers from any kind of registration.

Madam Speaker, the Committee notes with concern that the Bill has introduced a number of fees and charges in Clauses 8, 10, 19, 23, 31 and 33, among others. The Committee observes with concern that these fees and charges are too many and will result in non-compliance due to financial burdens associated with adherence requirements. This will, in turn, defeat the goal to enhance professionalism and integrity of the teaching profession.

Madam Speaker, in light of this, the Committee recommends that the Bill be amended to provide for streamlined and reduced payment of fees for various services.

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

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Fube (Chilubi): Madam Speaker, I would like to appreciate the chairperson of the Committee for highlighting some of the issues that I was supposed to speak to, but I have some views to express on the proposed Bill.

Madam Speaker, the proposed Bill is talking about professional conduct. Part 13 of the Constitution, which talks about values and principles for public service, also accommodates the conduct which the Bill is supposed to speak to.

Madam Speaker, having said that, I have problems with some clauses, for example, Clause 13(d) which talks about an undischarged bankruptcy. When you look at undischarged bankruptcy in the Bill, you will see that it is one of the reasons a teacher’s licence can be cancelled. When you look at the legal definition of bankruptcy, you will see that most teachers will be considered bankrupt because of loans. When you consider their liabilities and assets, you will find that it is something else. So, on behalf of teachers, I beg the House to attend to this issue.

Madam Speaker, another issue I want to address is the period of renewal of licences. I know that some people will have access to lichenising and they will be able to renew them easily. The validity period of the licence has been reduced from three years. The three-year period was okay. Many teachers may be jailed because the Bill states a penalty for not renewing licences. I am afraid that teachers are likely to be jailed because they are the majority when it comes to professionals in the country. We are likely to have many teachers jailed because of laxity in renewal of licences. They may not renew licences within the period stipulated.

Madam Speaker, I have a bit of a problem with clauses 13 to 27 because some clauses seem to be contradictory. There is a clause on cancellation of certificates and boards. For example, Clause 13 talks about a teacher having been found guilty and sentenced. Another clause talks about a teacher being disciplined through the disciplinary committee, which is not covered by the law. The other clause is covered by the law and the other one is not.

Madam Speaker, I also want to talk about the offences in Clause 27. I know that the Zambia Qualifications Authority (ZAQA) comes in when it is verification of qualifications. I have interacted with recruitment teams as they recruit teachers. The Government has developed a list of colleges it recruits qualified teachers from. The Government has also forbidden the recruitment of teachers from some colleges. I think, the hon. Minister of Education can agree with me on this one.

Madam Speaker, let me go to the issue of offences. I think we cannot talk about offences because about a month ago, in this House, we talked about ZAQA. I think, we also touched on the Higher Education Authority (HEA) in 2023, but we have not attended to the issues that were discussed. We saw the problems that were brought forward when we talked about the audit report concerning the institutions affiliated with HEA. We found that few colleges were affiliated with HEA, compared to what is desired. Only a small percentage of colleges is registered with HEA; 80 per cent of colleges are registered with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA). That is a problem for us. This Bill will be mopping a room with a leaking tap because HEA has not attended to some issues. The HEA is a clearing house. Before this Bill comes to intervene, HEA would have missed certain things. We saw, in the audit report that was presented in this House, that HEA is a skeleton of some sort, as things stand. If that is the case, it means that many teachers are going to be found wanting by this Bill. We will find that the board of HEA did not attend to certain issues. On behalf of the people of Chilubi, let me say that, in as much as we are excited about this Bill, we also need to attend to the problems that have been caused by HEA. It is not the Act that established HEA that needs to be attended to but the implementation of certain things by HEA.

Madam Speaker, I also want to talk about teachers and students. This Bill is highly prohibitive regarding who can go into a classroom to practise as a teacher. We all know that within the teaching course, there is also teaching practice, which has not been taken on board. That is a gap in the Bill. The Bill has talked about professional misconduct, but it has not done so on professional development of teachers. This is a misnomer, because you cannot talk about training, skills and many other factors as requirements for registration certificates in Clause 11 without providing a safety valve for professional development of teachers. That, in itself, leaves the Bill so naked. Teachers will be found wanting because the Government is not addressing certain things concerning professional development of teachers. Teachers, I emphasise, are the majority when it comes to professionals in the nation. This means that they will be the most affected by this Bill. Why can the teaching profession body not operate like other professional bodies for doctors and many others, so that at the end of the day, we may not victimise our professionals? The Higher Education Authority Act is not bearing the fruits that we intended to harvest from it.

Madam Speaker, with those few words, on behalf of the people of Chilubi, I would like to submit that I support certain things that the Bill is promoting. However, there is also a need to attend to the issues I have presented.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kang’ombe (Kamfinsa): Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to make a few comments. I will not utilise the entire eight minutes. I will focus on page 9 of the report of the Committee. I want to thank the chairperson of the Committee for the work.

Madam Speaker, the last item on page 9, second paragraph, Clause 28, reads:

“Other stakeholders questioned the purpose of the proposed licensure examinations and sought clarity whether such exams would lead to a professional qualification.”

Madam Speaker, this is what your report is saying. Your report is saying there are stakeholders who are concerned about coming up with licensure examinations. Let me explain what this particular item is explaining. There are institutions of higher learning in Zambia that offer training for those who want to be teachers. I do not think that we have a problem with the number of training institutions we have in Zambia. We have Kwame Nkrumah University (KNU) and Copperbelt Secondary Teachers College (COSETCO), which is now Mukuba University. Those who complete Grade 12 can pick a learning institution and enrol there. They pay fees and then they are equipped with the skills and knowledge to become teachers.

Madam Speaker, all of us who are seated here and those out there in society have gone through the hands of a teacher. Here we are, we are even able to speak very good English, prepared by the people who have been trained to be teachers.

Madam Speaker, this clause proposes that when one completes Grade 12, one enrols into college, but is not ready to teach. Clause 28 says that those who have a three-year diploma or a four-year degree in teaching are not ready to teach. That is what Clause 28 says. The clause is proposing that they need to be subjected to an examination. That is what this law is proposing, that after one acquires a degree or diploma, one is still not ready to teach. However, for the past sixty-one years, teachers have been giving us knowledge, skills and the ability to solve mathematics, biology, English and geography. That is why we are where we are.

Madam Speaker, the report says the following:

“Other stakeholders questioned the purpose of the proposed examinations and sought clarity whether such examinations would lead to a professional qualification.”

Madam Speaker, my thinking is that there are already institutions of higher learning that train teachers. Let us analyse the problem. Is the problem the fact that there is no other examination that teachers are subjected to, or the problem is that the curriculum that is offered at higher learning institutions is not good enough? Why should people be asked to sit for another examination to become teachers? Teachers have already been doing their work.

Madam Speaker, I commend the teachers who have exercised professionalism. They have trained engineers, doctors, and prepared different types of citizens who are responsible today. Why should such hardworking men and women be subjected to another examination? Unless it is a professional qualification which will serve another purpose, but if it is for the purpose of going to sit in class to teach our children who growing up in the rural and urban parts of Zambia, the current qualification should suffice.

Madam Speaker, when one completes a teaching course at Kwame Nkrumah University, one should be ready to teach. If there is a primary school in Mwense, one should be ready to teach there, but if there is another examination that teachers have to be subjected to, someone has to explain the purpose it will serve unless we are questioning the preparation of our learning institutions.

Madam Speaker, my submission is that, based on the lack of clarity, I do not support the idea that teachers with skills, knowledge and who have trained people for sixty-one years should be subjected to another examination. Unless it is a professional qualification for another purpose, there is no reason to prevent young men and women from becoming teachers. Employment opportunities are available. People want jobs, so, why should they be subjected to another examination.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Ms Chonya (Kafue): Madam Speaker, I will also be very brief. I wish I had done justice in reading the report.

Madam Speaker, based on the highlights made by the chairperson of the Committee, I agree on the aspect of retaining a three-year period for renewal of teachers’ licences. Teachers are already burdened with this particular payment, more especially those in the private sector. However, for Public Service teachers, there is a way that such payments are deducted. It could be monthly, but that is not the case in the private sector. Therefore, it is a challenge.

Madam Speaker, I support this aspect because if the different charges that have already been referred to are added together, they translate into high transaction costs of doing business in the education sector, especially in the private sector, but that is not the aim of the Government. The Government always finds a way to reduce the cost of doing business. So, additional payments should not be introduced just to make it easier.

Madam Speaker, I could not have spoken any better than the hon. Member for Kamfinsa has done on the issue of licentiate examinations. Firstly, I questioned the practicality of administering the examinations given that the teaching profession probably has the highest number of personnel in this country. So, why would we subject the teachers in their huge numbers to these examinations? In the past, there used to be particular examinations especially for private sector workers. They could not be sustained because of the issue of practicality in terms of administering the examinations from time to time. What more if we introduce this requirement to the huge number of teachers. Clearly, it means that it may not be a success.

Madam Speaker, there was the aspect of overlapping roles between different departments within the education sector. Yes, it would be good to eliminate the overlaps because, clearly, they would translate into conflicting roles. At the same time, I was thinking about the procedure through which co-operatives or organised groups are registered, although there has not been a problem in that area. We have had institutions registering with the Registrar of Societies while others have been registering with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), but at the end of the day, they end up with an unidentified certificate from an issuing institution.

Madam Speaker, given the number of disciplinary cases, will it really be a problem if some of the roles can actually be shared among different players within the education sector? For instance, sometimes, it is not even possible to see a matter of a disciplinary nature concluded to its logical end. A teacher would have committed an offence some time back, and in the meantime, the disciplinary process will go on and on, and will not be concluded until it is retirement time. So, if there are areas that will not cause harm with division of labour, it is worth considering so that there is more efficiency in the education sector.

Madam Speaker, those are a few thoughts that I thought I should add to the debate.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Kampyongo (Shiwang’andu): Madam Speaker, thank you so much for allowing me to make a few comments on the Bill, which has come for second reading.

Madam Speaker, indeed, the Bill is progressive, but we must pay attention to some of the concerns the stakeholders have raised. One of the concerns is under Part III, Clause 9, which addresses the registration of teachers and issuance of practising certificates. Under Clause 9, there is a suggestion of imposing punitive measures to those found to be practicing, but are unregistered, which could be due to a number of reasons. The clause even proposes custodial punitive measures.

Madam Speaker, the House may wish to note that sometimes a teacher may have a practising certificate, but during time of renewal, he or she may be constrained financially. So, there is always a gap that causes a delay. If such a person is found, he/she is liable to be sanctioned. The proposed punitive measures, which include custodial sentences, must be discouraged because the delay could just be as a result of the teacher genuinely being strained financially. So, there must be exemptions. I agree with the Committee, which has recommended administrative sanctions on this matter.

Madam Speaker, the other issue is the administration of licensure examinations. The stakeholders supported the undertaking of licensure examinations before the registration of teachers, as that, obviously, would encourage teacher training colleges to provide high-quality education. However, they expressed concerns with respect to how the Teaching Council of Zambia (TCZ) would treat volunteer teachers who lack the requisite qualifications, but are relied on to offer teaching services in most rural communities. Most of my hon. Colleagues in this House who represent rural areas will attest to the fact that volunteer teachers who help their fellow citizens, the young learners, do it out of passion for education. Volunteer teachers are not paid. In some cases, they depend on the community to give them a few food handouts, but they are committed to teaching. I know my hon. Colleagues agree with me. Most community schools in rural areas are supported by non-qualified teachers who are volunteers. So, we need to ensure that they are supported. Whilst we want to ensure quality, we may create a big challenge, especially for those in rural areas.

Madam Speaker, the other matter is the proposed disciplinary matters. Under Clause 38, on code of ethics, the Bill proposes to introduce code of ethics when there was an already existing code of ethics superintended over by the Teaching Service Commission (TSC). The proposal is that this Clause should be harmonised with the TSC Code of Ethics. Let us not throw away what is already in practice. As they say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. If it means enhancement, certainly, you need to find a way of harmonising so that the TSC, which has been doing a commendable job, is not overshadowed.

Madam Speaker, there is also a concern with regards to Clause 41, on the disciplinary committee. Stakeholders expressed concern that the removal of teacher union representatives and professional associations’ representatives from the disciplinary committee weakens the legitimacy of the decisions of the committee. They further submitted that this would lead to perceptions of unfairness due to lack of a peer voice. Teacher unions know their members well. They are the best to appreciate the parameters of how people should be disciplined. Therefore, their voice on this committee is critical. If you bring people who are strangers to teaching conditions, it will be difficult to make fair decisions so far as discipline is concerned.

Madam Speaker, there is also a concern regarding Clause 44, which is speaking to the powers of the disciplinary committee. The concern is that there is a contradiction between Clause 44(2)(c), which compels persons summoned by the committee to answer to questions, and Clause 44(4), which provides that a person shall not be compelled to answer a question. When you are invited to appear before a disciplinary committee, there must be clarity on what liberties you have, even as an accused person. So, there is a need to harmonise those two provisions. If a person is to not answer questions, which may end up implicating that person, they may be at liberty. So, there is a need to be clear on what it is that we are suggesting.

Lastly, Madam Speaker, is the issue of registering student teachers. The Bill does not provide for that. It is standard practice that student teachers have to undertake attachments for teaching practice. Whilst performing that duty, there is a need for the law to provide for them. The concern is that this is not provided for. The Committee observed that teacher training institutions, under which student teachers belong, are also regulated by the Higher Education Authority (HEA). So, again, there are other pieces of legislation. Our role, as legislators, is to ensure that –

Madam Speaker: Kindly wind up, hon. Member.

Mr Kampyongo: Madam Speaker, in winding up, I would like to appeal to the hon. Minister who has brought this Bill to ensure that our role in this House, which is to ensure that the pieces of legislation that we pass are not in conflict at any given time, is not ignored. So, there is a need to ensure that the existing pieces of legislation or legal frameworks are harmonised.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Syakalima: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the chairperson of the Committee for the comments he has made on the Bill. I would also like to thank the people who have debated on the provisions of the Bill.

Madam Speaker, let me say a few things so that we are in consonant with what is happening. I know the hon. Member for Kamfinsa said that we have been doing this from 1964. This is the 21^st Century and 1964 was in the 20^th Century. We are evolving with time so that, and it might not be seen today, we can safeguard the future of our profession. That is the reason we are moving this Bill. It may not be seen today, but our grandchildren will appreciate that we enacted a law that safeguards the teacher.

Madam Speaker, all the other professions that we can talk about come from a teacher. So, there must be an ethical person or professional standing, not a person just getting a certificate. Anybody can obtain a certificate, but the question is whether they are grounded in ethical issues. The hon. Member gave an example of the essays our teachers have been teaching us. Even professors teach lawyers. Before a lawyer is admitted to the bar, he or she enrols at the Zambia Institute of Advanced Legal Education (ZIALE). There can be 600 lawyers at the institution, but only twenty-three will get licences for admission at the Bar. So, we are saying that if the people who teach those people –

Madam Speaker, it is not about questioning them. It is about how they will practice at the Bar, for example. It is only that we are probably late in enforcement, but better late than never. That is how we are trying to put our country on that level.

Madam Speaker, when we talk about licensure examinations, the Seychelles recruits teachers from this country. That is an international arrangement. We are becoming, if you like, an attraction because of our teachers. When recruiters come, they do not just pick the teachers. With this law, for example, it means that recruiters will not examine those teachers who are already in the establishment. That was not there before. So, the law cannot be in retrospect. We want to start with whoever is coming on board now. When the Seychelles recruits teachers in this country, even those who are already in the teaching service are subjected to an examination. You cannot teach in the Seychelles if you do not have a licensure certificate. So, we are trying to prepare our people to be, if you like, competitive in the world.

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, it may not be now, but the future would have actually sold it out. So, this is simply about protecting the future. Like the example I gave, do we question the professors from the University of Zambia (UNZA) who teach law, if they had to go to ZIALE and fail the examination? So, what were the professors doing? So, it is a different issue altogether. Therefore, people should not be afraid. Certain things are done to protect the future. For me, we are actually protecting the future.

Madam Speaker, if we lost it ourselves, we should not make the future generation lose it. One day, the future generation will be told that we enacted this law. They will hear, “Your father or your grandfather was in Parliament at that time, thank you very much for your grandfather, called Mr Kang’ombe, for enacting this law, because we have benefited from it after twenty years.” That is what this Bill is all about.

Madam Speaker, we are not increasing anything by changing the licence renewal period from three years to annually. It remains three years. We recently reduced the amount that teachers are required to pay for renewal. The President had directed that we reduce the amount because it was too much, and we reduced it by 15 per cent. We are envisaging that the same amount will be divided by three. So, if a teacher pays K3 over the three years, he/she will pay K1 every year. By the end of three years, he/she would have paid K3. It will even strain them if they are asked to pay K3 for the next three years. We are the same people who say that they do not have enough money. So, instead of charging everything at once, then waiting for another three years, we have reduced it so that they can pay K1 every year.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

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

Committee stage, later.

THE INDEPENDENT BROADCASTING AUTHORITY BILL, 2025

The Minister of Technology and Science (Mr Mutati) (on behalf of the Minister of Information and Media (Mr Mweetwa)): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Madam Speaker, I want to thank you for according me this opportunity to submit an input on this very important Bill, the Independent Broadcasting Authority Bill No. 27 of 2025. The Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) was established under Act No. 17 of 2002. The Act has been amended twice. The 2010 Amendment Act No.26 removed public broadcasting service licences and the Ad hoc Committee on board appointments. The 2017 Amendment Act No.18 empowered IBA to collect and administer the television levy. Since then, several technological and legal developments have emerged, making the current law inadequate.

Madam Speaker, the present Bill does not sufficiently address online broadcasting, technological convergence, or changes in the Information and Communications Technology (ICT) ecosystem.

Madam Speaker, at its 20^th Meeting on 29^th October, 2025, the Cabinet approved in principle the publication and introduction of the Independent Broadcasting Authority Bill of 2025. The Bill aimed to:

strengthen IBA’s capacity to regulate the broadcasting industry;
enhance corporate governance, accountability and professionalism; and
aligns Zambia’s broadcasting regulation with international best practices and standards.

Madam Speaker, the objects of the Bill are to:

continue the existence of IBA and refine its functions;
reconstitute the IBA board and its function;
regulate the broadcasting industry in Zambia;
promote pluralism and diversity in broadcasting;

Mr Mung’andu stood to leave the Assembly Chamber.

Madam Speaker: Order!

Sorry, hon. Minister.

Hon. Member for Chama South, the quorum will collapse shortly. Please, if you can, just wait until another hon. Member enters the Assembly Chamber, unless it is urgent.

May the hon. Minister continue.

Mr Mutati: Madam Speaker,

e. repeal and replace the Independent Broadcasting Authority Act, 2002; and

f. address all matters incidental or related to these objectives.

Madam Speaker, the rationale for repealing and replacing the Bill are among others –

Madam Speaker: Order, hon. Minister!

I have been advised that the quorum has collapsed.

Business was suspended from 1826 hours until 1834 hours.

Madam Speaker: Order!

Unfortunately, we have to adjourn.

(Debate adjourned)

_______

The House adjourned at 1834 hours until 0900 hours on Friday, 28^th December, 2025.

___________

Search form

You are here

Order Paper

parliament.gov.zm