DAILY PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES FOR THE FIFTH SESSION OF THE TENTH ASSEMBLY

Tuesday, 22nd March, 2011

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

________

ANNOUNCEMENT BY MR SPEAKER

ACTING LEADER OF GOVERNMENT BUSINESS IN THE HOUSE

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, I have received communication to the effect that, in the absence of His Honour the Vice-President and Learned Minister of Justice, who is attending to other national duties, Hon. Kalombo T. Mwansa, MP, Minister of Defence, has been appointed Acting Leader of Government Business in the House from today, Tuesday, 22nd to Wednesday, 23rd March, 2011.

Thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

__________

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

COUNTRY’S DAILY CONSUMPTION OF FUELS
373. Mr Ntundu (Gwembe) asked the Minister of Energy and Water Development:

(a) what the country’s daily consumption of the following fuel products was:

(i) diesel;

(ii) petrol;

(iii) jet A-1; and

(iv) kerosene; and

(b) what the total cost of the above products on a daily basis was.

The Deputy Minister of Energy and Water Development (Mr Imasiku): Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the average daily national consumption for diesel, petrol, jet A-1 and kerosene is as follows:

Type of Fuel   Litres per Day

Diesel    1,600,000

Petrol  650,000

Jet A-1  150,000

Kerosene 50,000

Mr Speaker, I also wish to inform the House that the cost of the daily petroleum consumption as at February, 2011 retail value for diesel, petrol and kerosene was as follows:

Type of Fuel   Amount per Day (K)

Diesel    11.4 billion

Petrol    8.4 billion

Kerosene       250 million

Sir, the cost of the daily consumption of Jet A-1 as at February, 2011 wholesale value was K554 million.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, this is the first time the hon. Minister is giving a very good answer in the House. Could the hon. Minister, who is my friend, let us know …

Mr Speaker: Order!

You will withdraw the phrase, “my friend”.

Laughter

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I withdraw the word, “my friend”. Could the hon. Minister tell this House how the Government arrives at putting the cost per litre looking at the cost of fuel in neighbouring countries such as Botswana.

The Minister of Energy and Water Development (Mr Konga): Mr Speaker, the price of fuel on the Zambian market is primarily determined by two factors and these are the cost of the product on the international market on the day of purchase as well as the prevailing exchange rate at the time that the product is purchased. So, those are the two parameters which are used to arrive at what price the product will be sold, of course, taking into account other factors.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Beene (Itezhi-tezhi): Mr Speaker, due to the …

Ms Kapata: On a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Ms Kapata: Mr Speaker, thank you for according me this opportunity to raise my point of order. Before I do that, I would like to apologise to the hon. Member who was on the Floor.

Mr Speaker, I stand here as a very sad person. I have been injured. As a woman, my rights have been violated. I am a mother and I have thirteen orphans in my custody. I am a wife to Mr Edu, I am a daughter of Mrs Kapata and I am also a sister to my siblings. I am a Catholic and I am an hon. Member of Parliament for Mandevu whose people are shocked with what the Government media has reported today.

Mr Speaker, acting on hearsay is not good. I want the Leader of Government Business in the House, today, to caution the hon. Minister of Information and Broadcasting Services who seems to be misleading the nation with the information that he just hears. At no given time was I personally told to go and undress at the Intercity Bus Terminus. The Intercity Bus Terminus does not fall under Mandevu Constituency, but under Hon. Scott. Maybe, he meant that Hon. Scott was told to go and undress at the Intercity Bus Terminus and not myself.

Mr Speaker, I need your serious ruling on this matter because I have been injured by the wrong information that has been given by the hon. Minister of Information and Broadcasting Service through all the Government controlled media, namely: Zambia National Broadcasting Corporation (ZNBC), the Zambia Daily Mail and the Times of Zambia. This was also reported in all vernacular languages yesterday.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Regarding the point of order which has been raised by the hon. Member for Mandevu, my ruling is that the whole idea of suggesting that an hon. Member of Parliament or anyone should go and undress in public in or against any cause whatsoever, is in bad taste.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: I am aware that, historically, this happened, but only once. This mode of protest is no longer fashionable. As regards any further redress on this matter, I am aware that the media have their own watchdog organisation called the Press Association of Zambia (PAZA).

I would encourage the hon. Member to lodge her complaint against the media she alleges to have spread this false information. This House would be interested to hear the outcome of that complaint because the media, to this day, argue for self-regulation outside the law. This would be my ruling on that very point of order which is in bad taste.

The hon. Member for Itezhi-tezhi was asking a follow-up question.

Mr Beene: Mr Speaker, currently, the political situation in the Middle East, where crude oil is produced, is so bad that the price of this product has been shooting up, forcing countries like the United States of America to start using its reserves. I would like to find out from the hon. Minister of Energy and Water Development what measures this Government is taking to cushion the price of fuel, which is already high, for the Zambian people.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, indeed, the situation obtaining in the Middle East, particularly Libya, is of great concern to the international community and, in particular, Zambia. As the hon. Member may be aware, Zambia is wholly dependent on imported petroleum products. Therefore, instances such as what might be obtaining now pose a great threat to the security of supply of petroleum products. The Government has, therefore, put in place measures to stock up on strategic reserves to avert any incidence that might negatively affect the normal flow of petroleum products.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mukanga (Kantanshi): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister what the Government is doing to ensure that unnecessary taxes and mark ups on the fuel price are removed for us to have a fuel pump price comparable to that obtaining in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) region.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, in 2008, the Government reduced the duties and some of the taxes on petroleum products. At the moment, the Energy Regulation Board (ERB) has not indicated yet that there are other surcharges which the public is complaining about. If there are any submissions, we are willing to receive them and discuss with the Treasury so that the price of fuel can be harmonised.

I thank you, Sir. {mospagebreak}

Dr Machungwa (Luapula): Mr Speaker, as the hon. Minister is well aware, diesel, petrol, Jet A-1 and kerosene are the engines that drive industry. Therefore, they contribute a considerable amount to the cost of the products. This results in Zambia being competitive or uncompetitive with regard to the goods it produces.

Notwithstanding this fact, a lot of prices are determined outside the country due to importation. What other proposals does the Government want to make to try and reduce the cost of fuel so that our products can be competitive in the region?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, as I indicated earlier, the Government is definitely aware that petroleum products contribute significantly to the cost of goods and services that obtain in the country. Pertaining to this fact, the Government has endeavoured to remove and reduce taxes where it is feasible. If the hon. Member for Luapula has any proposals on any further reduction, he is welcome to the ministry to discuss with us and we can consider those proposals as we consider the budget.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mwamba (Kasama Central): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister what the freight on board (FOB) price for diesel, petrol, Jet A-1 and kerosene is.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, probably, I have missed the question. Is the hon. Member referring to the freight on board (FOB) prices for the various petroleum products?

Mr Mwamba: Yes.

Mr Konga: I did not prepare an answer to that question.

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Mr Konga: However, I can provide an answer right here. Actually, the price which obtains in the country is influenced by what is obtaining on the international market on the day of purchase. The transportation costs of that product up to the Port of Dar-es-Salaam are also taken into account when determining the price of the petroleum products. Pumping charges to Ndola are also included. The profit margins for TAZAMA and the port charges at Dar-es-Salaam are also factored into the price. I can get these figures and submit them to the House at an appropriate time.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Simuusa (Nchanga): Mr Speaker, diesel and petrol sold at a cost 260 and 290 Malawian Kwacha per litre, respectively, is significantly lower than the figures that have been presented by the hon. Minister regarding the cost of petroleum in Zambia. Why is there such a difference, and yet Malawi has a shortage of foreign exchange unlike our country?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, while it could be true that the price of fuel in Malawi might be cheaper than in Zambia, I do not really know the dollar conversion rate which the hon. Member of Parliament for Nchanga has used. However, in my earlier response, I indicated that in coming up with a pump price in Zambia, the Energy Regulation Board (ERB) primarily looks at two factors: the cost of that product on the international market and the obtaining exchange rate. The exchange rate in Zambia might be different from the one obtaining in Malawi and that could be attributed to the variation in the pump prices.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Nsanda (Chimwemwe): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister inform this House how many middle men are involved in the purchase of fuel from where it is bought up to here and how much percentage in increment terms the middlemen contribute to the price of petroleum products.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, I am not aware of any middle men involved in the purchase of petroleum products which are supplied to the country. What is obtaining is that the Government floats an international competitive tender to which prospective suppliers respond. Through the Zambia Public Procurement Authority (ZPPA), one of these prospective suppliers is chosen on merit to supply the petroleum products. These are the people who buy the products at the obtaining pallet price on the international market. The pallet price is equally submitted to the Government of the Republic of Zambia. Therefore, I am not aware of any middle men in these transactions and, as such, I do not know of any other money paid to them.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Imenda (Lukulu East): Mr Speaker, the price of fuel has a negative or positive multiplier effect on the economy. That being the case, Sir, will it not have an effect on our attainment of the middle income status since we do not control the price?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, that is a very important question. Indeed, the cost of petroleum products plays a significant role in the cost of goods and services that are produced in the country. Therefore, the Government tries as much as possible to ensure that the prices are such that they do not negatively impact on economic development. I can, therefore, assure the hon. Member that the Government’s aspiration of the country attaining middle income status will not in any way be compromised by the cost of petroleum products obtaining in the country.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mushili (Ndola Central): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister inform the nation the total taxes which the Government imposes on the petroleum products before they are picked up by the oil marketing companies (OMCs) from INDENI? What is the total tax, in terms of percentage, in relation to the total cost that the Government imposes on fuel before the OMCs pick up their fuel?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, the taxes that are obtaining on the petroleum products before and from the refinery stage are excise duty and value added tax (VAT). These are the ones that I am aware of. VAT is a tax which all of us in this House are aware of. Excise duty is a tax which has been reduced on products like diesel. Therefore, 30 per cent of this tax is what obtains on petrol. There are very few taxes that the Government has imposed on petroleum products. As I indicated in my earlier response, we have removed duty on diesel. So, the only excise duty remaining is on petrol. VAT is a tax that all of us have to pay.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Chazangwe (Choma Central): Mr Speaker, there are boys who sell fuel illegally. This fuel is called changanya because it is fuel mixed with other substances. What is the ministry doing to curb this vice in order to help motorists who buy this fuel as they may end up damaging the engines of their vehicles?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, the only legal and authorised institutions to sell petroleum products are those licensed by the Energy Regulation Board (ERB), following the Energy Regulation Act. Therefore, anybody else trading in petroleum products without a licence from the ERB is committing an offence. If there are any persons that are selling this fuel whom he is aware of, I would encourage the hon. Member to report them to the ERB so that they can be stopped from doing so. The ministry has instructed the ERB to apprehend the people we see selling fuel along the roads, using the law enforcement agencies because they are breaking the law.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

MINING INDUSTRY TRADE UNIONS

374. Mr D. Mwila (Chipili) asked the Minister of Labour and Social Security:

(a) what the total membership of trade unions in the mining industry were as of September, 2010; and

(b) what the composition of the bargaining units of the trade unions above were in 2010.

The Minister of Labour and Social Security (Mr Liato): Mr Speaker, the total membership of trade unions as at September, 2010 in the mining sector was Mineworkers Union of Zambia (MUZ) at 18,300; National Union of Miners and Allied Workers (NUMAW) at 11,662 and Gemstones and Allied Workers Union of Zambia (GAWUZ) at 
1,946.

Mr Speaker, the bargaining units vary from one mining company to the other. For example, at Mopani and Konkola Copper Mines (KCM), there are three officials from MUZ, three from NUMAW and the other three from their respective branches bringing the total number of officials from the unions to twelve during the bargaining process. Mines like Kansanshi and other smaller mining companies have only one official from the head office, one from MUZ, one from NUMAW and three from the branch. In Luanshya, we have two officials from MUZ, two from NUMAW and three from the branches. In short, the compositions of the bargaining teams differ from one mining company to the other.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr D. Mwila: Mr Speaker, the number of people involved in the bargaining process in the mining industry is going up because trade unions are being registered continuously. Does the Government have intentions of controlling the number of people participating in the bargaining process because a big number is costly?

Mr Liato: Mr Speaker, the issue of the number of people to belong to a bargaining unit is not the responsibility of the ministry and neither is it of the Government. The composition of a bargaining unit is determined by the parties involved in the process. That is how it has been and continues to be.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out what the membership is for the new union at Mopani Copper Mine Plc in Mufulira which was formed a few months ago.

Mr Liato: Mr Speaker, the ministry is responsible for registering the unions if they meet the criteria prescribed under the law. We are not responsible for monitoring the number of members by which the union grows as days go by. At the time of registration, the union qualified for it. The question which has been asked by the hon. Member is a new one which requires further inquiries.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chanda (Kankoyo): Mr Speaker, previously, there was just one union in the mining industry, but now we have about three unions or so. May I know if this state of affairs has added value to the industry or it has just brought confusion?

Mr Liato: Mr Speaker, there are freedoms under the Constitution which people must enjoy. One of the freedoms is to associate with groups of their choice and that includes freedom in the working environment which is to join or form trade unions of their choice. It is one of the conventions of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). Conventions 87 and 98 of the ILO give workers rights to form unions or join trade unions of their choice as well as to organise trade union activities. This is an added value in terms of promoting democracy and the freedoms of individuals. However, these rights have their own negative effects if not properly guided. The observation of such rights could be counter productive in that you could spend all the time at work places negotiating with different unions at different times. This would make management fail to focus on the core business of the institution.

Mr Speaker, we can look at how best the observation of such rights can be guided. That is why, as a Government through the ministry, we are focusing on supporting the most representative group as a way of ensuring that no confusion is created during the observation of these kinds of freedoms.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Simuusa: Mr Speaker, the last bargaining process at Konkola Copper Mine (KCM) which was done last year, I believe, resulted in a riot which caused a lot of property damage and the ministry was involved in that process. I would like to find out from the hon. Minister what went wrong and what the Government is doing to prevent any such occurrences in future.

Mr Liato: Mr Speaker, I would like to inform the hon. Member that the last bargaining process at KCM was not conducted last year. There is a recent bargaining process which ended last month which took place in a very peaceful manner. I must commend the management and the unions in that sector for having adopted a peaceful way of handling the bargaining process. If there was anything near a riot during the period being referred to by the hon. Member, it could have been caused by something related to the out sourcing business which was, at that time, not well explained to the union leadership. I am aware that management and the union leadership have put in place a process which promotes effective communication so as to ensure that everyone takes ownership of the processes at the workplace.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kapeya (Mpika Central): Mr Speaker, what is the Government’s position regarding casual workers who do not belong to any union who have been utilised in major companies like the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) for such a long time and, sometimes, as long as seven years?

Mr Speaker: Order! That question is not relevant to what is currently being debated on the Floor of this House. What is at issue is the total membership of trade unions and the composition of the bargaining units in the mining industry.

UNZA GOVERNMENT BURSARIES

375. Mr Chitonge (Mwansabombwe) (on behalf of Mr Chisala) (Chilubi) asked the Minister of Education how many students were granted Government bursaries to study at the University of Zambia at undergraduate and postgraduate levels between 2004 and 2010, year by year.

The Deputy Minister of Education (Mr Sinyinda): Mr Speaker, the Government of the Republic of Zambia awarded bursaries and student loans to the University of Zambia from 2004 to 2010, broken down by year, as follows:

Year Male Female Total

2004 3,168 1,627 4,795

2005 3,163 1,585 4,748

2006 3,536 1,822 5,358

2007 3,655 2,052 5,707

2008 3,573 2,348 5,921

2009 3,533 2,524 6,057

2010 3,080 2,456 5,536

However, in the case of postgraduate students, these are sponsored to the university by their respective employers according to the employees’ conditions of service and the need, in the institution, for further training of employees.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Chitonge: Mr Speaker, may I know how many students were from rural constituencies like Sinjembela, Mwansabombwe and Vubwi out of the figures given by the hon. Minister and why it is so difficult for rural students to access this facility.

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, the Government and, indeed, the Ministry of Education, is very much aware that there is a need to avail equal education opportunities to our children and we are doing exactly that. In fact, the Bursaries Committee goes around the country to sensitise our children so that they know that we have vacancies in terms of sponsorships and scholarships.

Mr Speaker, for the information of this august House, today, I was chairing a meeting of the Bursaries Committee at which we were looking at sponsorship for students at the Copperbelt University (CBU) and all the students that are eligible for these sponsorships have been taken on.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Member: Hear, hear!

Mr D. Mwila: Mr Speaker, may I find out from the hon. Deputy Minister of Education what criteria are used for an undergraduate student to be given a Government bursary.

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, there are a number of criteria that we use as the Ministry of Education. First of all, the child must be admitted by the respective university. Secondly, the child must apply to the Bursaries Committee and the third consideration is that the student must be within the stipulated age group. For example, this year, we are considering those that wrote their Grade 12 examinations in 2008 and 2009. Another consideration, which is the most important, is the vulnerability of a child. As you may know, we usually look at those that are most vulnerable, especially those that come from the rural set up, so that they are not disadvantaged.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Simuusa: Mr Speaker, in his answer, the hon. Minister has stated that, between 2005 and 2010, the number of female students sponsored almost doubled, and yet that of male students reduced. I wish to find out whether this is due to a deliberate policy by the Government and, therefore, has nothing to do with the performance of students or can we conclude that the male students are performing worse than female students?

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, it is the policy of this Government to provide equal education opportunities for both boys and girls. As a result of this, we are, actually, very aggressive in sensitising our girl children about the importance of doing well in examinations so that they can catch up with their colleagues, who are the boys. So, the increase in the number of female students being sponsored is not because the boys are doing badly, but because of the deliberate policy of this Government to give equal opportunities to our children.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Dr Machungwa: Mr Speaker, there is a steady increase in the number of students given bursaries from 2004 up to 2009, but, then, there is a drop of about 500 students from 2009 to 2010. Why is there this drop in the number of students being sponsored?

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, this has not been deliberate. As hon. Members are aware, Zambia was not an exception when it came to the economic crunch that affected the whole world. As a result of this, our sponsorship was badly affected.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mrs Phiri (Munali): Mr Speaker, in his earlier answer, the hon. Deputy Minister said that people from the ministry go around the country to identify students who are supposed to access these bursaries. May I find out why it is mostly students from rural areas who are affected whenever there is deregistration.

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, first of all, I would like to correct the hon. Member. The Bursaries Committee does not go around identifying the students who qualify for Government bursaries. The committee goes around sensitising the students that are still in high school so that they know that we, actually, offer bursaries at the Ministry of Education. That is what happens.

As for her question, I am not aware of that. In fact, we are glad to inform this House that our students from the rural areas, despite the fact that they may even have lower marks at entry into university in comparison to students from urban areas, are doing very well because when they go to the University of Zambia (UNZA), they find good facilities and, therefore, catch up with the performance of the rest of the students.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwamba (Kasama Central): Mr Speaker, why is it that the majority of those who benefit from the Government bursaries are only those that are related to the so-called hon. Ministers?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Sinyinda: Mr Speaker, that allegation is not true. As you may know, we, actually, publish the names of all the students who are offered sponsorship by the Government. This has not been a secret. Even when we ask the students to apply for bursaries, it is published in all the newspapers. Therefore, I can assure the hon. Member that what he is saying is not true.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, from 2004 to 2007, there were massive protests at the bursaries office citing corruption. I want to find out what measures the Government has put in place to ensure that there is a reduction in corrupt practices as well as increased transparency in the way bursaries are awarded to the would-be candidates in various universities and schools.

The Minister of Education (Ms Siliya): Mr Speaker, while we appreciate the question that has been asked, I think, it is very important that when we use the word ‘corruption’, we actually have evidence. Now, we do know that we have had a lot of challenges in the Ministry of Education at the Bursaries Committee. As you can see, at the moment, we have 13,000 students at UNZA. Just under 7,000 of these are on bursary. This means that there are those who do not have access to bursaries and either their families have to sacrifice for their education or, indeed, corporate bodies have to support them.

Interruptions

Ms Siliya: Mr Speaker, everybody would like to have their child supported by the Government. Even at my office, at the moment, we receive hon. Members of Parliament and people who are working and can afford to pay for their children ...

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Ms Siliya: … wanting to have their children supported by the Government. When they are not able to get this support, they accuse the Bursaries Committee of the so-called corruption. The failure to support each child is just because there are not enough resources to go around.

Sir, this is why we keep calling for partnerships with parents and this is what we have started doing at the university. We are offering 100 per cent bursaries to very vulnerable children, but also cost sharing of 50 per cent and 75 per cent with those families that can contribute to the fees of their children so that we, as a Government, can spend resources on infrastructure at universities such as we are going to do with the library and hostel construction.

I thank you, Sir.

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

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, this question keeps on coming to this House and the last time I asked it, the hon. Minister promised to …

Mr Speaker: Order! Which question?

Mr Ntundu: The question at hand concerning bursaries.

Laughter

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, the last time this question was asked, there was speculation that most of the students that are given bursaries are relatives to hon. Ministers and other high-ranking officials like Permanent Secretaries (PS).

Mr Muyanda: Yes!

Mr Ntundu: The hon. Minister had promised that the Government would come to this House and lay, on the Table of the House, the list of names of students who are given bursaries so that this accusation is completely buried. I would like to find out whether the hon. Minister still stands BY that position.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Siliya: Mr Speaker, first of all, we do not recall making such a promise, …

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Ms Siliya: … but to draw inference from the question that the hon. Member of Parliament is asking, since he is not an hon. Minister himself, he is saying that none of his family members has ever been given support by way of a Government bursary to go to the university which, I believe is, actually, not true. There are many citizens in this country who are not related to hon. Ministers. There are only twenty-three Cabinet Ministers and so many Deputy Ministers and I do not believe that each one of them has somebody at the university being supported through Government bursaries.

Interruptions

Ms Siliya: So, I think it is important that we discuss facts. We do take note that there are not enough Government resources to support all the students at the university. That is on one hand, but, on the other, that does not necessarily make reference to the fact that only hon. Ministers’ children are given Government bursaries at university. I believe that is a blatant lie and if we are going to make progress …

Mr Speaker: Order! The hon. Minister will withdraw the phrase “blatant lie”.

Interruptions

Laughter

Ms Siliya: Mr Speaker, the phrase is withdrawn and replaced with “that is blatantly misguiding the House and the nation”. I believe that if we are going to make progress on education, we should be on the same side. We, on this side, are not taking education lightly and that is why we are working very hard to ensure that our children learn properly in schools and at universities.

Interruptions

Ms Siliya: Apart from learning the A, B, C and 1 + 1, we also want them to learn the values of Christianity so that they do not become homosexuals.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Next question!

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Order! There is someone pleading with the Chair here. The hon. Member for Sinazongwe.

Laughter

Mr Muyanda (Sinazongwe): Mr Speaker, thank you so much for hearing my plea and thank God for answering my prayer to ask a question.

Mr Speaker: Go ahead.

Mr Muyanda: Mr Speaker, it is a well-established fact that starting from the late President Mwanawasa, SC., to the present Government’s President, Mr Bwezani Banda …

Hon. UPND Member: Bwezani Rupiah.

Mr Muyanda: … Mr Bwezani Rupiah Banda, corruption is widespread. One of the ministries responsible for bursaries …

Mr Speaker: Order, you are lecturing. After pleading, do you have a question?

Laughter

Mr Muyanda: Mr Speaker, thank you for that guidance. Can the hon. Minister deny that His Excellency, President Bwezani Banda and the late President Mwanawasa, SC., told the nation that, indeed, there is widespread corruption in this Government? May she deny that she has crafted unprecedented, woven and misleading falsehood?

Laughter

Hon. Government Members: Hammer, Minister!

Ms Siliya: Mr Speaker, I sat in this House at one point and listened to the hon. Member of Parliament talk about the many years he has spent in this House and the value that he is adding. I will leave it to the Zambian public, who are listening to him, to establish if, indeed, he has added any value with that question. I categorically, here, wish to deny his assertion. The fact that there are cases of corruption in the Government and the public sector does not necessarily mean that President Banda or the late President Mwanawasa, SC., and so on are a part of it. I think that when we, in this House, make laws, we are making them on behalf of all of us, as Zambians, and it will not do for a party that was being called a small party, just a few weeks ago, …

Hon. UPND Members: Aah!

Ms Siliya: … to believe that you will get into Government by telling untold stories.

I thank you, Sir.

Interruptions

CHIPILI HEALTH CENTRE

376. Mr D. Mwila asked the Minister of Health:

(a) when the construction of Chipili Health Centre in Mwense District would be completed;

(b) how much money had, so far, been spent on the project; and

(c) why the ministry excluded the construction of the children’s wing at the health centre.

The Deputy Minister of Health (Dr Kalila): Mr Speaker, the Government, through the Ministry of Health, entered into a contract with China Geo Corporation towards the completion of Chipili Health Centre in Mwense. The contract was in the sum of K3,907,071,400.00. The completion period is within fifty-two weeks and the works commenced in March, 2010. They are expected to be completed in March, 2011, which is this month.

Mr Speaker, so far, the Government, through the Ministry of Health, has paid China Geo Corporation K616,161,190.00.

Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Health did not exclude the construction of the children’s ward at Chipili Health Centre. The House may wish to note that the standard design for a rural health centre does not have a stand-alone children’s ward. The standard rural health centre has male, female, children’s and maternity wards. The children are admitted in the female/children ward.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr D. Mwila: Mr Speaker, arising from the answer given by the hon. Deputy Minister of Health, may I find out from him when this new health centre will be opened?

The Minister of Health (Mr Simbao): Mr Speaker, at the moment, we are in a hurry to see to it that we commission all the completed clinics and health centres before the next elections. So, I can assure the hon. Member of Parliament that if we complete this rural health centre, this month, by June, we should be able to open it.

In fact, Mr Speaker, I must make it known that, at the moment, we have been made aware that we have in excess of 2,000 vacancies in all the provinces. These we will be, probably, advertising and those employed will go to many places like the rural health centre the hon. Member has asked about.

I thank you, Sir.

Mrs Phiri: Mr Speaker, I would like to learn from the hon. minister if it is all right for someone who is below the age of sixteen to be sleeping with his/her parents, for instance, in the female wards.

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, in fact, in the future, we intend to remove all the cots and replace them with beds so that mothers can be sleeping with their children. There is no need for the mother to be sleeping on the floor while a child is in a cot because children need their mother’s warmth.

I thank you, Sir.

POLITICAL ASYLUM SEEKERS

377. Mr D. Mwila asked the Minister of Home Affairs:

(a) how many foreign nationals were granted political asylum from 2008 to 2010;

(b) which countries the foreign nationals came from; and

(c) how much money the Government spent to look after the foreign nationals at (a) above.

The Deputy Minister of Home Affairs (Mr Taima): I wish to inform the House that a total of 105 foreign nationals were granted political asylum from 2008 to 2010.

The foreign nationals who were granted political asylum came from the following countries:

Country    No. of Nationals

Democratic Republic of Congo   58

Somalia      25 

Burundi      09

Rwanda      05

Zimbabwe     06

Sudan      02

The Government spent a total of K503,073,704.00 to look after the foreign nationals who were granted political asylum from 2008 to 2010.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr D. Mwila: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out whether the former President of Uganda, Dr Milton Obote, has been granted permanent stay in Zambia because he has been …

Interruptions

Mr D. Mwila: No, I am not aware.

Interruptions

Mr Nsanda: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out why the hon. Minister has omitted one country on the number of people who have come here on political asylum, and this is Malawi. We have Mr William Banda here. What type of political asylum has he got to live in this country?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: I shall allow the hon. Minister of Home Affairs to answer.

The Minister of Home Affairs (Mr Lungu): Mr Speaker, it only shows how petty some of these questions are.

Interruptions

Mr Lungu: Mr Speaker, the question talked about political asylum from 2008 to 2010. One fails to understand how Mr William Banda falls into this category. Really, my answer is that that type of question is not worth answering.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Simuusa: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister whether, as a country, we have rejected any application or request for political asylum. If so, why, considering that, as a nation, we have signed the African Union Convention on Internally Displaced Persons and political asylum is under that category although it is man made?

Mr Lungu: Mr Speaker, I am not aware of any rejections. If the hon. Member can give us details of this, we can investigate it.

I thank you, Sir.

_____________
BILLS

SECOND READING

THE FISHERIES BILL, 2011

The Minister of Livestock and Fisheries Development (Mr Machila): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to give a statement on the Fisheries Bill which is before this august House.

Mr Speaker, the enactment of the Fisheries Bill will, among other things, promote the sustainable development of the fisheries industry in Zambia. The specific objectives of this Bill are to:

(i) provide for the appointment of the Director of Fisheries and fisheries officers and provide for their powers and functions;

(ii) promote the sustainable development of fisheries and a precautionary approach in fisheries management, conservation, utilisation and development;

(iii) establish fisheries management areas and fisheries committees;

(iv) provide for the regulation of commercial fishing and aquaculture;

(v) establish the fisheries and aquaculture development fund;

(vi) repeal and replace the Fisheries Act of 1974; and

(vii) provide for matters connected with, or incidental to, the foregoing.

Mr Speaker, it was necessary to repeal and replace the Fisheries Act of 1974 with the Fisheries Bill, which is before this House, so as to provide for aquaculture or fish farming as well as co-management of fisheries resources clause which was missing in the 1974 Principal Act.

Mr Speaker, the fisheries sector plays multiple roles in the country’s economy. Fisheries are particularly valuable to people who live in wetland areas where it is a major means of food security, employment and income. Close to one million people are involved in fishing and fisheries-related activities such as artisanal fish processing, fish trading and boat building. People are also involved in industrial fish processing, fishing equipment trade, fisheries research, extension services and administration. The fisheries subsector contributes about 3.2 per cent to the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).

Mr Speaker, the total annual fish production is estimated to be in the region of 78,000 metric tonnes for the capture fisheries and about 8,000 metric tonnes for aquaculture. This accounts for over 40 per cent of the animal protein production in Zambia. Though total fish production has increased over time, the per capita supply has declined from 12 kg to 7 kg in a year. This is attributed to a high population growth rate estimated at 3.2 per cent per annum. The increase in demand for fish has resulted in increasing the fishing pressure on nearly all important fish stocks. This situation, therefore, calls for improved management of capture fisheries and expansion of aquaculture if the sector is to continue to contribute positively to the economic development of the country.

Mr Speaker, let me state that, if properly managed, the fisheries industry in Zambia can be an effective tool for poverty reduction.

In conclusion, the introduction of the Fisheries Bill is expected to address the challenges that impede the development of the fisheries industry in Zambia. It is in this vein that I am calling this august House to support the Fisheries Bill.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

Mrs Sinyangwe (Matero): Mr Speaker, your Committee considered the Fisheries Bill, 2011 which was referred to it on 3rd March, 2011. I wish to report to this august House that all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the Bill despite some of them raising some concerns on certain provisions in the Bill. The concerns are recorded in your Committee’s report for the consideration of the House. Notable among them was a concern on Clauses 40, 41, 45 and 46 relating to aquaculture as set out hereunder.

Clause 40(1) provides that a person shall not engage in aquaculture except in accordance with this Act and under the authority of a licence issued under this Act. A person who contravenes clause 40(1) commits an offence and is liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding three hundred thousand penalty units or imprisonment for a period not exceeding three years, or to both. The stakeholders argued that the requirement for a licence even from small-scale fish farmers who were being encouraged to venture in fish farming would discourage many small-scale fish farmers and make the sector less attractive in comparison with other sectors like poultry.

In Clause 41(1), an application for a licence to engage in aquaculture should be accompanied by a prescribed fee and an environmental impact assessment report. Clause 45 further provides that a person who intends to engage in aquaculture shall conduct an environmental impact assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Management Act, 2010 and prepare a report thereon for purposes of this Act. Stakeholders argued that preparing an environmental impact assessment was a costly venture and that such provisions were too restrictive and might end up stifling the development and growth of aquaculture in Zambia.

With regard to Clause 46, stakeholders were concerned that a person was required to pay an inspection fee for their aquaculture facility to be inspected by an authorised officer. They argued that this provision increased the cost of engaging in aquaculture and that the imposition of fees would frustrate the development of this sector.

They further contended that restrictions in aquaculture should be confined to farming of exotic fish species, species that are not indigenous to an area where a fish farm is located and the proper regulation of commercial fish farms, among other things.

Mr Speaker, your Committee realises the impact on economic role of fisheries in the national economy. Fish contributes to improving household food security and the nutritional status of communities that depend on it. The sector is a source of employment and, therefore, can contribute to reducing poverty levels.

In view of the foregoing, your Committee commends the Government for seeking to promote the sustainable development of fisheries. The involvement of key stakeholders such as local communities is also commendable. Therefore, your Committee supports the Bill. However, your Committee wishes to make some observations and recommendations on the Bill.

Mr Speaker, your Committee is aware that Zambia, through the Biosafety Act, 2007 regulates activities relating to genetically modified organisms. It observes that the definition of fish and fish product provided in the Bill does not make it clear as to whether or not the fish or fish product is genetically modified. Your Committee, therefore, recommends that, for the sake of clarity and consistency among statutes, the definition of fish and fish product should be rephrased to explicitly state that such fish or fish product should have been derived through natural breeding processes.

Furthermore, your Committee notes that the definition of precautionary approach in the Bill is the same definition that has been assigned to precautionary principle in the Environmental Management Bill, 2010, but phrased differently. Your Committee recommends that, for the sake of consistency, the definition in the Environmental Management Bill, 2010, which is at an advanced stage before Parliament, be adopted in this Bill and that the word “approach” be replaced by the word “principle”.

Sir, the Bill, in Clause 6(1), provides for powers of authorised officers. Further, Clause 6(3) provides that unauthorised officers may be accompanied and assisted by a police officer in the performance of any functions under this Act. Your Committee is of the view that this is a contradiction in that powers given to authorised officers are sufficient and the presence of a police officer may be unnecessary. It, therefore, recommends that Clause 6(3) be deleted.

Sir, the Minister is empowered, under Clause 29(3), to appoint the chairperson and vice-chairperson of the committee from among the members of the committee. Your Committee observes that this is not in line with the spirit of promoting transparency and involvement of local communities in the fisheries management. To this effect, your Committee recommends that the chairperson and vice-chairperson be elected by the members of the committee themselves and be endorsed by the Minister.

Your Committee further observes that the 60 days within which the director is required to respond to an application to engage in aquaculture, which is not successful, is rather long. Your Committee recommends that the period should be reduced to thirty days.

Mr Speaker, the Bill, in Clause 43(h), makes mention of dead fish. Your Committee is of the view that the dead fish being referred to is that for which the cause of death is not known and, therefore, recommends that to remove the ambiguity, Clause 43(h) reads as follows:

“Regulating the disposal of fish found dead from an unknown cause or disease or waste from an aquaculture facility operated by the licensee, including consents and notifications required in respect thereof.”

Sir, your Committee observes that the offence in Clause 48(1) of the Bill is a serious one as it involves chemicals and drugs and the consequences of contravening it can be catastrophic. In this regard, your Committee recommends that a stiffer penalty than the one in Clause 48(2) be provided for to serve as a deterrent.

Mr Speaker, the Bill under paragraph 2 of the schedule provides for financial provisions relating to the fund of a committee. However, it is silent on the disposal of such a committee’s assets in the event that the committee ceases to exist for various reasons. In order to protect Government assets or property, your Committee recommends that a provision be included on disposal of assets.

In conclusion, Mr Speaker, your Committee wishes to express its appreciation to the witnesses who made submissions before it. I further wish to commend the members of your Committee and the Office of the Clerk for their dedication to duty during the consideration of the Bill. Finally, your Committee is grateful to you, Mr Speaker, for granting it the opportunity to study the Bill.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, I wish to support the Bill and, as a member of your Committee, I believe that certain issues that were silent ought to be brought out.

This Bill is good in that it brings together the regulations that will control fish production. It is hoped that, in earnest, fish farming will improve. It is also hoped, that all the farmers who will engage in aquaculture will undertake it taking into account the new trends involved in it.

Mr Speaker, we know that our small-scale farmers have been able to do fish farming through fish ponds despite the country having no proper programmes to encourage people to engage in it. It is correct, as the hon. Minister has said, that in actual fact, although there has been an increase in the actual fish production through fishing and other methods, the consumption has reduced from 12 to 7 kgs per capita. This merely implies that the population of Zambia has increased. We have to find other means to increase the population of our fish.

Mr Speaker, the easiest food to put on our table is kapenta. If we are not able to grow the population of our fish through the use of initiatives such as fish ponds, then, we are going to have no fish in a short while. As I contribute to the debate on this Bill, I am also taking into account what those that come from fishing areas go through. These people have learnt how to balance the banana boats on water because their growth has depended upon them. We should try, by all means, to ensure that these people continue to be able to rear fish. They should support the fishing industry because it is what made them grow. You do not have to run away from fish which you have been eating since childhood. I am looking at my brothers from the west, as I speak.

Laughter{mospagebreak}

Mr Muntanga: They should not forget about fish farming. There is a new method now. You can practise cage farming on the Zambezi River. In cage farming, one cage can hold over 20,000 fish. Now, the regulations have been put together for the purpose of making those who engage in fish farming to take into account environmental issues. The problem before was that we did not connect environmental issues to fish farming. Now, this particular Bill has cross references to the Environment Bill.

Mr Speaker, I want to remind all hon. members, as we support this Bill, that it is time we stopped concentrating on the poultry industry alone. This is because a lot of diseases have come up as a result of what we feed the chickens. At times, you will find that chickens grow big within four weeks and become edible, but when you listen to the noise they make, it is that of small chicks.

Mr Muntanga mimicked the sound of a chick.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Yet such chickens are still big enough to be eaten by somebody. When you hold this chicken in your hands, it cries like a chick, but you are ready to eat it because of its size. For once, let us support fish farming. Let us go into the industry and encourage our friends. We should have programmes that support aquaculture using the Constituency Development Fund (CDF).

Mr Speaker, the concern of your Committee was that certain fees to be paid by those engaging in aquaculture-related activities are high. Charging people high fees may act as a deterrent for them to engage in this type of farming.

I think the hon. Minister has taken note of that. I would like to urge him to reduce the deterrents to fish farming. You do not need to have one thousand penalty units for failure to observe just one regulation. Hon. Minister, come down a bit with the penalty units. We should not scare these farmers. Through the type of regulations we pass, we can encourage or discourage the farmers.

Mr Speaker, encouraging people to do the right thing is a good thing. However, we should bear in mind that threats of charges and imprisonment scare people. The Fisheries Bill has come at the right time. I hope that it will get the full support from this House and encourage people to undertake businesses within this industry.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Chongo (Mwense): Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Fisheries Bill.

Having read the report, I have a few things which I want to look at. In particular, let me refer to page 3 of the report under the subject on the protection of fish. It has been indicated, under that subject, that there has been a prohibition on the use of certain means of fishing such as traps and other fishing methods.

Mr Speaker, the intention could be good, but I hope that the Bill will also address the fact that we have a lot of traditional methods that we use to catch fish, which may not be illegal, such as what we call ulwanga in vernacular, which is a fishing basket, umoono, which is a fishing net and other similar methods.

Hon. Members: Umoono is a fishing trap!

Mr Chongo: Umoono is a fishing trap.

Hon. Members: Yes!

Mr Chongo: I said fishing trap. These should not be deemed illegal because they cannot be used at commercial level even though we use them at the community level traditionally. Using these methods, we basically target the small fish such as kapenta and kasepa. These are very small fish. To me, the fish which is caught using these devices is even smaller that what would be caught using, for instance, a one inch net which is being discouraged by this ministry. Now, if you cannot allow people to use nets of a particular size, as by law indicated, how would you go about ensuring that those who use the traditional method of catching fish are not penalised? That is the question. We must put in place a mechanism through which those who use traditional methods can still be allowed to catch fish.

Mr Speaker, these small fish are not caught in large bodies of water. They are basically caught in dambo areas where nets cannot be used. I think it may not be right to prohibit people to catch fish in those areas. At least, they should be given room to catch fish. After all, the small fishes will never grow bigger than they are, even if they live for a thousand years. Are we not going to catch them? Small as they may be, to us, they are still looked at as fish.

Interruptions

Mr Chongo: Yes, it is mature fish and must be caught.

Mr Speaker, let me now talk about the aquaculture industry. It is indicated in the Bill that for one to get involved in aquaculture, that person must get a licence. We should encourage the vulnerable women and youths, especially in urban areas, to make fish ponds. Can we imagine the kind of trouble that we will be causing if we ask them to come from Mwense to Lusaka to get licences for them to put up fish ponds?

Sir, the hon. Minister should clearly state which level of involvement in the aquaculture industry would warrant a licence. I do not think that the involvement in small-scale fish farming like having a fish pond in a village should require a licence. I do not think that could be a good idea. Otherwise, it is a good Bill and I wish to support it.

I thank you, Sir.

Captain Moono (Chilanga): Mr Speaker, I thank you for allowing me this opportunity to debate the Bill on the Floor of the House.

Sir, fish farming is a business like any other type of farming in Zambia. Just as we grow maize and rear cattle freely, without a licence, so should it be for fish farming. I would like to urge this Government to seriously consider the negative effect that licensing will have on small-scale farmers engaged in fish farming.

Mr Speaker, issues to do with licensing in Zambia are a nightmare regardless of the type of licence involved. Therefore, it will not be in order to impose licences in the fish industry because there are no known adverse effects from fish farming in this country and the world over. In any case, it improves the environment because creatures such as birds drink water from the fish ponds. The surrounding of the fish ponds is always green. I am yet to understand why fish farming should have a clause for a licence when it improves the environment.

Sir, getting an environmental impact assessment report, before making a fish pond, is totally negative and not in line with the development of our country. These regulations we are passing in this House will only encourage the people with money and foreigners to make fish farming a monopoly.

Mr Speaker, I do not support this Bill because it will derail the development of fish farming in Zambia. We cannot expect our mothers in Luapula, Western and Southern provinces to get environmental impact assessment reports before going into fish farming. Why do we not get environmental impact assessment reports before engaging in the growing of tomatoes? In fact, tomatoes and cabbages pollute the environment more than fish does because insecticides and fungicides are used for them to grow. If animals and fish get in contact with these chemicals, they perish.

Mr D. Mwila: Hear, hear!

Captain Moono: What is so special about getting an environmental impact assessment report for fish farming?

Sir, I realise that for sometime, the fish farming industry has failed to produce experts, especially from institutes of higher learning like the University of Zambia and the Natural Resources Development College (NRDC). It is only now that the NRDC has started producing specialised personnel in fish farming. Otherwise, training in fish farming was abolished sometime back. I think there are gaps in terms of knowledge on fish farming in this country.

Mr Speaker, whoever advised the ministry to impose such kind of restrictions was not being helpful, but only encouraging foreigners and those with money to monopolise this industry.

Sir, fishing is an industry which people in Luapula and Western provinces totally depend on. Many times, we have heard that there is a decrease in fish stocks in the rivers. Therefore, fish ponds could supplement the diminishing stocks of fish in these areas. This is the reason I do not support strict and cumbersome methods in terms of fish farming.

Sir, I now want to look at the process through which fish management areas (FMAs) will be declared. I smell a rat regarding the operations of the FMAs.

Mr D. Mwila: Hear, hear!

Captain Moono: There is a clause in the Bill which is talking about FMAs. The peasant farmers will not have access to fish in these areas. Additionally, there is also a provision for a special fishing licence. This means that certain parts of rivers will be reserved for those who will have the special fishing licences. While we shall be busy declaring these FMAs, where one cannot go to fish without permission, …

Mr D. Mwila: Nawishiba efyo ulesosapo mudala.

Captain Moono: … the foreigners will be busy fishing from these areas at the expense of peasant farmers. I would like to urge the hon. Members of Parliament, particularly those who come from fishing areas, …

Mr D Mwila: Luapula! Hear, hear!

Captain Moono: … to take note of such clauses because, tomorrow, they will have serious conflicts with the people who voted them into this House as a result of them.

Mr D Mwila: Hear, hear! Landa mulamu!

Captain Moono: We cannot enact laws that discriminate against our own people. I find the clauses in this Bill very discriminatory.

Mr Speaker, I have gone through the Bill and I hope that certain amendments will come through the hon. Minister because if we leave it in this form, sooner than later, the people will start complaining about the laws that we make in this House.

I thank you, Sir.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order! I wish to guide the hon. Members that if any hon. Member feels strongly regarding a particular clause in a particular Bill, he or she is free to move an amendment, and not necessarily, the hon. Minister, unless you agree with him before hand.

Major Chizhyuka (Namwala): Mr Speaker, I think that it is important that I should add my voice to the debate currently on the Floor of the House.

Sir, in Namwala, we have close to 250km of river line. Some of the largest fisheries in the country include the Kafue Flats, Zambezi, Kariba and Luapula.

Mr Speaker, my main interest, as I support this Bill, is on page 3 of the Committee’s Report which reads:

“Part III further prohibits a person from anchoring a fish processing and storage vessel which does not meet the required sanitary standards in any commercial fishing area and importing, manufacturing or trading in any fishing gear …”

Sir, in paragraph 3, it states:

“In addition, under Part III, a person is prohibited from, among other things, importing any live fish into the Republic and introducing or causing to be introduced into any water any fish which is not native to the waters into which it is introduced without the written permission of the Director.”

Mr Speaker, I think this is the only crack in the matter on this Bill. Most of the matters are quite reasonable and they need to be passed by this House. A while ago, Hon. Muntanga was talking about cage fishing. It is exactly as a result of cage fishing and other forms of fishing that we have foreign fish in our rivers today. We used to debate with my traditional cousins that Senanga fish was not as tasty as Namwala fish. It was a debate that the Lozis and Tongas always got into. However, today, I want to tell them that I have lost that battle because the Namwala fish, which I used to call the tastiest fish, is no more. There is the type of fish which we have nicknamed wamunyima…

Laughter

Major Chizhyuka: … and I am surprised that the hon. Minister of Livestock and Fisheries Development is not aware of it. It is a shell fish that was introduced by a cage fish farmer on the Kafue River. This is a bream which feeds on other breams. Since it is a predator, all those nice and tasty breams have slowly disappeared. At the moment, we only have the wamunyima type of fish which is tasteless.

Laughter

Major Chizhyuka: If you go to Namwala, today, you will not find the nice indigenous tasty fish. I think that this Bill should help us to ensure that what has happened in Namwala, along the Kafue River, does not happen on any other Zambian river. It is important that we, actually, investigate this matter. If I was given an opportunity, I would want to have our tasty fish back.

Mr Speaker, this Bill will also help us deal with the problems of the fish disease we once had in the Western Province where, all of a sudden, the fish was dying. We did not have a statutory instrument (SI) or a legal framework to deal with that problem. Given this Bill, we will now have the legal framework to deal with such matters. I, therefore, want to say that I support this Bill. The hon. Minister should come out with a very good SI to deal with those cage fish farmers. You should also ensure that, if there is a way, our fish should be brought back so that we get rid of this wamunyima fish from our rivers. That way, things will be better.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Dr Machungwa (Luapula): Mr Speaker, I will be brief in my debate on this Bill. As has been indicated by the hon. Minister, fishing is important to the livelihood of a large part of the Zambian population.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

[MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

Dr Machungwa: Madam Speaker, before business was suspended, I had just begun addressing the fact that fishing is extremely important in that a large portion of our population depends on it, especially those communities that live around river valleys, lakes and wetlands. In my constituency, for instance, the main activity is fishing. In this report, on page 1, item 5 (a) says:

“Promote the sustainable development of fisheries and a precautionary approach in fisheries management, conservation, utilisation and development.”

Madam Speaker, I want to emphasise the part: “promote the sustainable development of fisheries.” On item 5 (e) it says:

“Establish the Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Fund.”

Madam Speaker, in my view, those are important objects for people in my constituency because they depend on fishing as that is the main activity there. If measures or laws that criminalise fishing are introduced, they cannot be implemented because it will not be possible for you to go and arrest all the people in the entire constituency. What I mean is that when we make illegal the use of certain fishing methods, for instance, using nets with small meshes, you will find that people will be affected.

Madam, I agree that these measures are important to develop, but at the same time, it is extremely important that the ministry introduces mitigating measures to support the people so that they can adhere to these new measures. Otherwise, you cannot implement a law that people cannot obey because it is impossible to do so. If we criminalise fishing, which is their way of living, it will become difficult for them to live.

I would like to appeal to the hon. Minister to seriously consider putting resources in the Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Fund to ensure that the people living in these areas get enough support to enable them abide by this Bill. There has to be funds to support the community to shift to using fish farming or something else that will be able to assist.

Madam Speaker, the unfortunate history of our country is that we had a lot of fish in our lakes and rivers, in the years past, but we have depleted them. The fishing stocks are getting fewer and it has become very difficult for our communities to survive. We, as a country, have not invested a lot of resources in fisheries development and research to ensure sustainability of the fishing industry. My plea to the hon. Minister, and the Government at large, therefore, is that it is time that we invested a little bit more resources in this area. This is not only important for the people living in fishing areas. The truth of the matter is that fish provides protein which is very necessary for people in this country.

Madam Speaker, we are now spending a lot of money to import fish from other countries when we can sustain ourselves and should be able to even export and earn a lot of money from our fisheries.

In supporting the Bill, therefore, I would like to appeal to the hon. Minister to, perhaps, say something, as he winds up debate, about the programmes that will be put in place to support the communities that depend on fishing so that, when we pass this law, we do not have a situation where we have criminalised an entire population because people cannot do away with the methods that they have been using as a result of lack of resources.

Let us ensure sustainability of the fishing industry. I would like to see a few more resources pumped into this industry. I would also like to caution the hon. Minister not to concentrate on livestock alone in his ministry because fishing is just as important.

Madam Speaker, we have no wamunyimas because our cousins in the Eastern Province do not have fish that eat other fish to send to us …

Laughter

Dr Machungwa: … unlike the case with our Tonga neighbours who had wamunyimas sent to them by Hon. Milupi and others.

Laughter

Dr Machungwa: We can, however, appreciate you sending us some goats and cattle.

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Machila: Madam Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. Members that have contributed to this debate and rendered their support to the initiatives of the Government.

Unfortunately, the hon. Member for Chilanga is not in the House. I wanted to start with him, especially that he is the only one that came out violently in opposition to the Bill. I get the impression he did not bother to read it.

Laughter

Mr Machila: This is considering that the issues that he raised are largely entrenched in the existing legislation and the matters that are fundamentally being changed are not being introduced into legislation for the first time.

That said, Madam Speaker, with respect to the traditional fishing methods that were referred to by the hon. Member for Mwense, Hon. Chongo, obviously notwithstanding the fact that some of these issues may be customarily traditional, the fact remains that the intention of the law is to regulate practices within the sector and there is nothing to prohibit the law from regulating custom as well as tradition. We do recognise that it may pose problems in some areas but, at the same time, we believe that the initiatives that are being introduced, in particular with relation to aquaculture, will help mitigate some of the concerns that have been referred to.

Further, the hon. Member for Luapula spoke about the Fisheries and Aquaculture Development Fund and the intention of the Government to promote the sustainable development of fisheries. This, we believe, will certainly happen following the establishment of this fund. Furthermore, we realise that we cannot expect communities to rely on the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to undertake some these programmes.

Madam Speaker, without taking up too much of the House’s time, I wish to thank the hon. Members for their support of this Bill.

I thank you, Madam.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House. 

Committee on Thursday, 24th March, 2011.

THE IONISING RADIATION PROTECTION (Amendment) BILL, 2011

The Minister of Health (Mr Simbao): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this august House seeks to:

(a) revise the licensing provisions;  and

(b) provide for matters connected with, or incidental, to the foregoing.

Madam Speaker, hon. Members may wish to note that the Government has launched a comprehensive business licensing reform programme whose main objective is to sustainably reduce the number of unnecessary licensing requirements to make the licensing regime simpler, transparent and focused on legitimate regulatory purposes.

Madam Speaker, a committee of experts drawn from both the public and private sector to facilitate business licence reform has recommended a reduction and streamlining of the licensing process and procedures.

The Ionising Radiation Protection Act, No. 16, of 2005, was identified as one of those among the pieces of legislation requiring streamlining of the licensing process and procedures. This led to the proposed Ionising Radiation Protection Amendment Bill, 2011. However, in coming up with this proposed legislation, the Government made sure that, in as far as attainment of the objective of the business licensing reforms is concerned, there was no compromise on issues of public health and safety, environment, national and international security.

Globally, the general issue of the safe use and storage of radioactive material has become a major concern after the September, 11 terrorist attacks. The fear of terror organisations easily getting access to radioactive materials for the manufacture of what are generally called “dirty bombs” is of serious concern to most governments in the world.

In view of this, the Bill seeks only to repeal and replace Part IV of the Ionising Radiation Part V of the Ionising Radiation Act, No. 16 of 2005 and shall be read as one with the same Act once enacted. Part V of the Ionising Radiation Act deals with the licensing of human activities which involve the utilisation of nuclear science and technology in the country.

Madam Speaker, the application of nuclear science and technology is widespread in Zambia in the areas of health, mining, industry, and research. Nuclear science and technology has great many benefits if properly regulated but, if improperly regulated, it could cause great harm to people affected and lead to radioactive contamination of the environment.

Madam, due to the complex nature of nuclear science and technology, …

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! There is too much consultation going on amongst hon. Members and it is not easy to follow what the hon. Minister is reading out to the House and the nation. Could you, please, consult quietly.

The hon. Minister may continue.

Mr Simbao: … the Bill has, to a greater extent, retained most of the key elements that are required in the issuance of licences to applicants. The Radiation Protection Authority is a body corporate established through the Ionising Radiation Protection Act, No. 16 of 2005 and, as retained in the proposed legislation, has powers to issue, reject, suspend and cancel an application for a licence.

Further, the provision for appeal against refusal to issue a licence has been retained in the Bill and the duration for processing a licensing application still remains within sixty days. The responsibilities of the licensee are well stipulated and have also been retained in the Bill. Two definitions have been added in the proposed Bill and few clauses have been proposed which relate to the variation and surrender of the licence.

Madam Speaker, what has been retained in the proposed Bill is necessary for the protection and safety of the public and the environment.

Madam, hon. Members may wish to note that Part IV has been changed from “Licences” to read “Licence”. The Radiation Protection Authority, in this Bill, will issue one licence for any human activity that relates to radioactive material or any other source of harmful ionising radiation. However, the licensing conditions will depend on the complexity of the practice, nature and levels of radiation hazards involved.

Madam Speaker, the Bill before this august House has managed to reduce and streamline the licensing process and procedures without compromising on issues of public health and safety, environment, national and international security.

Madam, in order to ensure that there is no gap created in the implementation of radiation protection and safety measures as stipulated in the Ionising Radiation Protection Act, No. 16 of 2005, the Government shall ensure that regulations are immediately put in place which shall include the prescribed forms which will assist the applicants to provide the vital information that is required for the protection and safety of the public and the environment.

Madam Speaker, the proposed legislation still requires that any person who intends to import, process, mine, export, possess, transport, use, dispose of, or undertake any other activity relating to radioactive material or any other source of harmful ionising radiation, shall apply to the Radiation Protection Authority Board for an ionising radiation licence in a prescribed manner and form upon payment of the prescribed fee.

Madam, this Bill is not controversial. It is progressive and timely. In addition, the Bill has not compromised on issues of protection of public health and safety, environment, national and international security.

I, therefore, urge hon. Members of this august House to support it.

Madam Speaker, I beg to move.{mospagebreak}

Mr Chanda (Kankoyo): Madam Speaker, your Committee was informed that the Government had launched a comprehensive business licensing reform programme whose main objective was to make the licensing regime simpler, transparent and focused on legitimate regulatory purposes. In this regard, the Ionising Radiation Protection Act, No. 16 of 2005 was identified as among the pieces of legislation that required streamlining of the licensing process and procedures. The Ionising Radiation Protection (Amendment) Bill, therefore, reduces the number of licences issued under the Act from four to one. This will not only be in line with the licensing reforms but also reduce the cost of doing business in the area of ionising radiation.

Madam, the objects of the Bill are to:

(i) revise the licensing provisions; and

(ii) provide for matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.

Madam Speaker, the Bill is welcome and supported by the Committee as well as stakeholders who appeared before it.

Madam, your Committee is happy that licensing will be used for regulatory purposes as opposed to primarily being a revenue measure. However, your Committee was dismayed to learn that, currently, there are no regulations governing ionising radiation matters as it was informed that these are being processed by the Ministry of Justice.

Your Committee was further dismayed to hear that, at the Radiation Protection Authority, there are only three experts out of the required thirty plus. These three experts need to cover the entire country in overseeing the serious and highly sensitive issues of radioactive materials in the mining, health and other sectors, including the transit of radioactive material through the country. To compound the situation, there is also a lack of equipment to properly monitor the industry. Madam Speaker, this makes the Bill almost redundant as, without necessary regulations and experts, it will not achieve the purpose of being a regulatory tool.

Madam, your Committee, therefore, urges the Government to expedite the processing of regulations from various sectors using and applying radioactive materials.

Further, the Radiation Protection Authority, which was set up by an Act of Parliament in 2005, with approved structures, needs to be properly established as per proposed structure. In this regard, the necessary authority that is being sought for experts to be employed should be given expeditiously.

Madam, the fact that radioactive materials have the potential to cause irreparable damage if mishandled cannot be over emphasised. With the coming on board of uranium mining, the need for the required number of experts is critical.

Madam Speaker, the Government has no excuse to drag its feet over this issue, as your Committee has been informed that the International Atomic Energy Agency is willing to train these experts at no cost to the country.

Madam, let me emphasise some of the recommendations of your Committee. Clause 23(3) places liability on a non licence holder for any harmful effects arising from the possession, storage, transportation, use, or disposal of radioactive material. Further, Section 38(1) of the Principle Act makes the possession, without a licence, of radioactive materials an offence.

Madam Speaker, Clause 23 (3), which creates an offence and penalty, should be placed in part VI of the Act which deals with these matters. In addition, there should be a provision for liability for licence holders for any harmful effects arising from their use or handling of radioactive materials.

It is your Committee’s hope that the Radiation Protection Authority Board will ensure that all the prescribed forms mentioned in the licensing provisions are put in place and that all licensees appoint a competent person as a radiation safety officer.

In conclusion, your Committee wishes to pay tribute to all stakeholders who appeared before it and tendered both oral and written submissions. Your Committee also wishes to thank you, Madam Speaker, for the opportunity to study the Bill. Your Committee is also indebted to the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the services provided.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Dr Scott (Lusaka Central): Madam Speaker, may I make reference to two current developments which have some relevance to this Act.

The first is that the transportation of uranium oil trucks via Zambia from Malawi to Namibia has either started or is about to start. I am not certain what route they are taking but it is, at least, 1100 km long and entails the whole of the Great East Road and the whole of the road to Livingstone. I know that uranium oil is normally of sufficiently high toxicity to cause a problem but, like all oil, it varies from mine to mine. The content can be higher in one batch than in another and, in the case of uranium, there are questions about the act of radio isotopes in Uranium 235, the element that people want to use to make their nuclear reactors work. I am just wondering where the provision is for the intensive monitoring of such an exercise. After all, trucks loaded with uranium are going to crash in Zambia and this is a certainty unless the Malawian drivers have some vudu which we do not have in Zambia.

Madam Speaker, we also need to know what can happen if that uranium is stolen and taken into villages and so on and so forth. I feel that there does not seem to be very strong emphasis on the actual monitoring of an operation such as this where a neighbouring country is exporting to another via Zambian roads. Never mind the cost to the damage of the roads, but to the actual safety issues that are there. Are they going to be counted or measured at the border posts or are there going to be check points put up along the road? How is this new board going to make sure that it knows what is happening?

Madam Speaker, the other current event, which I want to raise, is the Fukushima Power Station crisis which is still on going in Japan. There are two kinds of problems that are being encountered and one of them is on the reactor meltdown or going critical by over heating and melting down. The other problem is the question of disposal of waste. The fuel loads are kept in pools which dampen down the criticality of interaction between the rods and these, too, are tending to dry up and cause another kind of critical reaction. Both were supposed to be impossible. If you told any nuclear expert one month ago that a general electric designed nuclear power station was going to threaten to both melt down and have a problem of less fuel, they would have said this is impossible, but they have now found out that this is possible.

Madam Speaker, the reference, here, to the International Atomic Energy Authority Agency is the very Act because the guidelines coming from this agency are going to change considerably this year and next year in the light of the experience from Japan. I would like to see some provision in this Act for the dissemination of this information because one can imagine only too well that, in Zambia, there are clinics that still have books of drugs which are five or ten years old and we want to be sure that, as soon as the new regulations for the handling of radio active material come on board, they will be disseminated to the licence holders so that everybody knows what they are doing and what regulations are current in the light of the international experiences at the moment.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister still has some homework to do to get this thing workable. I realise it is only the Ministry of Health, but Fukushima is a big danger to human life, at the moment, through the vegetables which the Japanese are eating.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Mukanga (Kantanshi): Madam Speaker, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to also add my voice to the debate on this important Bill. When you talk about radio activity, you should realise that it is a serious issue if not handled correctly.

Madam Speaker, as we talk about radio activity issues as my vice-president has said, …

Interruptions

Mr Mukanga: He is my vice-president. Madam Speaker, as my vice-president has said, issues of radio activity are real and current in the world today. The issues of Fukushima, Nagasaki and Hiroshima have effects which are there for everyone to see. Without us taking serious measures in trying to handle issues like that, we might just end up with a serious problem in this country.

I am saying this because I know, as a miner, that if you are working in a mine, every year, you are supposed to go to a pneumoconiosis centre to be checked to make sure your health is still alright. If you have tuberculosis, you will be told at the centre and medication will be given to you. We have a problem in this country because there are a lot of deposits of uranium. Some people may say that we do not have that much of these deposits and so they cannot be harmful, but we have a lot of deposits in Sinazongwe and Lumwana. It is for this reason that we need to have a system which will enable the people working in those mines to be checked for contamination. If we do not do that, we are exposing our people so much that they will not survive after their mining life.

Madam Speaker, your Committee brought out a very serious issue when it talked about the Radiation Protective Authority. If there is an authority which is supposed to be regulating this and should have an establishment of thirty people, but just fill a few vacancies out of the thirty, how do you expect that authority to operate? It is important for the ministry to recruit more people to fill all the vacancies. Without a full establishment, they will not be able to carry out their work effectively even if they are super stars. This is a specialised job which you cannot just ask anybody from the streets to do. It is important that the people tasked to do the job are well remunerated so that they do it properly.

It is for this reason that I am requesting the Government to ensure that when we put up authorities of this nature in place, we should fill all the vacancies so that these institutions operate efficiently. Otherwise, we will have the same situation that is happening at the Pharmaceutical Regulation Authority where vacancies have not been filled, but we expect the institution to do a lot of work.

I, therefore, support the Committee’s observation in its report that there is need to ensure that vacancies are filled and our people are protected. These are the only two issues which I am asking the Government to consider because it is important that our people work well and continue to be healthy even after they leave employment.

I thank you, Madam.

Dr Chishya (Pambashe): Madam Speaker, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to add my voice to the debate on the Floor of the House. My concern regarding this matter is that of the condition of storage and disposal facilities for radioactive material. In Zambia, we mainly have two types of ionising radiation. One is from radioactive material while the other is from machines which use electrode acceleration, including the x-ray and neutron accelerator, like the one at the Ministry of Science, Technology and Vocational Training. Ionising radiation which comes from radioactive material in this country is usually dry. The commonly found type are the gamma cells containing caesium or Cobalt 60.

Madam Speaker, the main issue, here, is what happens after the use of radioactive materials. That is where the problems come from. When we talk about the Fukushima and Chernobyl nuclear plants in Japan and Ukraine, respectively, the danger comes in during storage. In Zambia, we are using dry cells, unlike other people who are using pools, but these still pause a great danger. Most gamma cells in Zambia have passed their half-life, sometimes they are at twice their half-life, which makes them more or less unusable, but the problem is how to store them. We do not know where to put them and, in most cases, they are just left lying around. What happens mostly is that whenever new cells are bought, the old ones are just put in a corner and that is dangerous.

Madam Speaker, what I would like to suggest is that we should also include the replenishing of sources, especially caesium or Cobalt 60. We had one radioactive material source up to the strength of 100 curies. That is a big machine and I am sure it has now gone twice past its half-life. That means it is more or less obsolete, but the material is still there and its gray pencils are still there. The only way to make it usable is to replenish the gray pencils because we do not have anywhere to store it.

Madam Speaker, therefore, whoever becomes a licensee in this field must look at the storage of the radioactive materials. Otherwise, we shall be piling up these radioactive materials until we have mountains of them. What do we do with the spent fuel which is a great danger? My worry, therefore, is how to tackle the problem of storage, especially that of spent fuel. Replenishing of old machines is one alternative. Otherwise, we shall run into danger like nations such as Japan.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Major Chizhyuka (Namwala): Madam Speaker, some time in the early 1970s, while I was doing a telecommunications course in India, we were given an opportunity to see a nuclear facility that was being developed that side of Asia. In the later years, problems associated with some of the questions we are raising today occurred in Ukraine at Chernobyl.

Therefore, I want to say that I do not support this Bill. I am a very independent thinker and when I do not think something is right, I say it. If we went out of this House and switched on any of the main television networks, we will find that people all over the world are asking themselves the question whether the development of nuclear power should be abandoned. The French, Japanese and English, whose experts are at the zenith of nuclear development, are considering this option. After what has happened in Japan and the lessons learnt from Chernobyl, they are asking themselves whether it makes any sense at all to go along the nuclear path in the creation of power for their countries. While these questions are being asked, it should be noted that France’s power resources are made up of 75 per cent uranium.

Madam Speaker, now, when I look at an area like Sinazongwe, which has already been hit by one disaster associated with the Kariba Dam, I feel we have all sorts of problems in gauging the extent to which our people are technically competent, not only to mine, but to also manage radioactive materials. Are we sure that as a nation we are really ready for uranium mining? I was checking all the minerals that are available in our country with one organisation and found out that leaders in the past have known that we have uranium in this country.

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! The hon. Member may continue.

Major Chizhyuka: Madam Speaker, the dangers associated with uranium mining, for me, raise a lot of contemplation and I fear for our country and particularly for those areas that will be involved in these activities. I also know that there is uranium west of Namwala. I also know that there is a lot of uranium in Lumwana. We have to be careful because if Japan, where technology is at its highest, is struggling to put down a disaster like the one that has taken place at Fukushima Nuclear Plant, what would happen for a country like Zambia? I, therefore, repeat that I do not support this Bill because we are not competent enough to handle the development of nuclear energy. We should ask ourselves how much money we shall raise as a country from the mining of uranium.

Is this money so much that it can outweigh the dangers that are inherent in this process? Does it not raise fear in our minds even as we manage the affairs of our country that the Europeans, who have been at it for so long a time, are doubting their capacity and ability to handle such materials?

Madam Speaker, last week, Hon. Guy Scott said that if you had asked the Europeans the question whether it was possible for us to engage in uranium mining, they would have told you that it was not. Now, how is it possible today? We could face a lot of dangers if we were to engage in uranium mining as a country. We do not have the necessary technical expertise in Zambia. Adequate technical expertise is also not available in Japan and France. People from both countries have said so publicly. Should we not be guarding against some of these things until a time when we will think that we have the necessary framework in place? Is it our desire to develop our country through the money which we shall realise through such ventures? Can we risk the future of our people and the areas in which they live?

Madam Speaker, in Chernobyl, for instance, animals only started existing a few years ago. I do not support this Bill myself and I want to state that it should go on record that my fears are well placed because these are the fears that are in the minds of the international community for the time being. I also have other fears which I have not yet mentioned. The other fear is that we are going into an election this year which has the potential to create a situation in which the uranium resources can fall into the hands of a person who the country cannot trust.

Laughter

Major Chizhyuka: These are possibilities you must think about. What can become of our country if we were to have, at the helm of the management of our nation, people who cannot be trusted to manage these strategic national resources?

Madam Speaker, you may recall that, in fact, Saddam Hussein used similar resources to deal with the Kurds. I think that even at the time that the others were taking over that country, some of its areas were lifeless. Saddam Hussein was a leader of a country. I fear to think of what will happen to my country should these strategic resources we are trying to exhume from the bowels of the earth of our motherland land into the hands of a Head of State whom we cannot trust after an election.

After considering the technical aspects and the concerns of our people who give us the power and the legitimacy to speak on their behalf, for me, I think we are not ready for the activities being looked at in the Bill. I think that this is a dangerous Bill. It is a Bill which we should shelve. I think we need to analyse issues critically as a country so that we can understand whether we should go along that path. I think the doubts which the British, Japanese and French are raising, regarding the issues which are included in this Bill, should be enough to make us realise that we are treading along a dangerous path.

Madam Speaker, may I conclude by saying that I do not support this Bill.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, I thank all the hon. Members that have contributed to the debate regarding this Bill even though it seems as if they were not talking about it.

Hon. Government Members: Yes!

Mr Simbao: They are speaking on things that have nothing to do with the Bill which is before the House.

Mrs Masebo: Tipunzise!

Mr Simbao: The Bill before the House is to reduce the number of licences from the many that already exist to one and not to tackle the technical issues which have been raised. We are members of the International Energy Atomic Agency and these people give us guidance because they know our situation and they know that they need to help us as far the use of  radioactive materials is concerned. So, we have not been abandoned or left alone. Besides we are not supposed to be talking about such issues during the debate which is currently on the Floor of the House. We are discussing the reduction in the number of licences that are given to people to handle different types of harmful materials, to one so that we make it easy for anyone who wants to operate in this line of business. Instead of going to get forty or sixty licences, he or she can just get one. That is the issue we are discussing here.

Interruptions

Mr Simbao: We are not supposed to be discussing those technical issues which you have been raising. Please, read the amendments to the Bill before you come to discuss it.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear! Guy Scott.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 24th March, 2011.

___________{mospagebreak}

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITEES in the 
Chair]

THE TRADITIONAL BEER (Repeal) BILL, 2011

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

Title agreed to.

THE LIQUOR LICENSING BILL, 2011

CLAUSE 2 – (Interpretation)

The Minister of Livestock and Fisheries Development (Mr Machila) (on behalf of the Minister of Local Government and Housing) (Dr Chituwo): Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 2;

(a) on page 6, 
(i) in lines 7 to 9 
 by the deletion of the definition of “authorised officer” and the substitution therefor of the following new definition:
“authorised officer” means a principal officer, a health inspector or a police officer; and

(ii)  in lines 10 to 13

 by the deletion of the definition of “bar” and the substitution therefore of the following definition:
 “bar”, in relation to any licensed premises, means any open drinking bar or any part of such premises exclusively or mainly used for the sale and consumption of intoxicating liquor; and

(iii)  after line 19
by the insertion of the following new definition:
“health facility” has the meaning assigned to it in the Health Professionals Act, 2009; and

(b)  on page 7, after line 19
By the insertion of the following new definition:
“police officer” means a police officer above the rank of sergeant.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 3 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 4 – (Application for licence)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment on page 9, lines 30 and 32 by the deletion of paragraph (iii) and the substitution therefor of the following paragraph:

(iii) the need to avoid the establishment of licence premises within three hundred metres of an educational institution, health facility or a church.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 4, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 5 – (Notice of intention to object)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 5, on page 10, in line 37 by the deletion, immediately after the word “section”, of the word “five” and the substitution therefor of the word “four”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 6 – (Grant of licence)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 6, on page 10, in line 42 by the deletion of the word “authority” and the substitution therefor of the word “committee”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 7 – (Restrictions relating to grant of license)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 7, on page 11, after line 23 by the insertion of the following subsection:

“(2) A bar shall not be established within three hundred metres of an educational institution, health facility or church:

Provide that this subsection shall not apply to premises that were license before the coming into operation of this Act.”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 7, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 16 – (Renewal of license)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 16, on page 15

(a) in lines 35 to 38 by the deletion of subsection (3); and

(b) in line 39 by the re-numbering of subsection (4) as subsection (3).

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 16, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CALSUE 30 – (Liquor of kind not authority by license not to be kept on premises)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 30, on page 22, in lines 25 to 26 by the deletion of subsection (1) and the substitution therefor of the following subsection:

“(1) A licensee shall not, without reasonable excuse, have in the licensee’s possession on the licensed premises any liquor of a kind not authorised by the license.”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 30, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 31 – (Supply of liquor to employees)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 31, on page 22

(a) in line 24 by the insertion of the figure “(1)” between the number “31” and the word “A” ; and

(b) after line 36 by the insertion of the following new subsection:

“(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand penalty units or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding one year, or to both.”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 31, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 32 – (Consumption of liquor in public place)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move and an amendment in clause 32, on page 23:

(a) in line 1 by the insertion of the figure “(1)” between the number “32” and the word “A” ; and

(b) after line 2 by the insertion of the following new subsection:

“(2) A person who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and is liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand penalty units or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or to both.”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 32, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 33 and 34 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 35 – (Child not to be employed in licensed premises)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in clause 35, on page 31, after line 2 by the insertion immediately after the word “child” of the word “or certain persons.”

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 35, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 53 – (Regulations)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 53, on page 31, after line 2, by the insertion of the following new subsection:

(3) The matters referred to in paragraph (b) of Subsection (2) shall be prescribed in consultation with the Ministers responsible for health and commerce.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 53, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 54 – (Repeal of Cap. 167)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 54, on page 31, in line 6, by the deletion of the words “for a period of six months” and the substitution therefor of the words “up to 31st December, 2011”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 54, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

TITLE – (On Page 6)

Mr Machila: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in the long title, on page 6, by the insertion, immediately after the words “regulate the” of the words “manufacture, possession”.

Amendment agreed to. Title amended accordingly.

Title, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

_________

HOUSE RESUMED

[MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

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

The Traditional Beer (Repeal) Bill, 2011

Third Reading on 23rd March, 2011.

The following Bill was reported to the House as having passed through Committee with amendments:

The Liquor Licensing Bill, 2011

Report Stage on 23rd March, 2011.

REPORT STAGE

The Registration of Business Names Bill, 2011

Report adopted.

Third Reading on 23rd March, 2011.

THIRD READING

The following Bills were read the third time and passed:

The Public Procurement (Amendment) Bill, 2011

The Trades Licensing (Repeal) Bill, 2011

The Education Bill, 2011

_________

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The Minister of Defence and Acting Leader of Government Business in the House (Dr Mwansa): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

_____________

The House adjourned at 1745 hours until 1430 hours on Wednesday, 23rd March, 2011.