Debates- Tuesday, 23rd March, 2010

Printer Friendly and PDF

DAILY PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES FOR THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE TENTH ASSEMBLY

Tuesday, 23rd March, 2010

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______________

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

BRITISH PETROLEUM’S DECISION TO SELL ITS SHARES IN BRITISH PETROLEUM ZAMBIA LIMITED 

The Minister of Energy and Water Development (Mr Konga): Mr Speaker, it is always an honour and, indeed, a privilege to be allowed to address this august House on the developments in the country’s energy sector. My statement, in particular, today, is aimed at providing a brief to the nation, through this House, on the British Petroleum (BP) Africa’s intended sale of its shares in BP Zambia Limited. This is in the light of the various concerns that have been raised by the key stakeholders on the potential and negative impact of this development.

From the onset, I wish to inform the nation, through this House, that the decision by BP Africa to dispose of its shares in BP Zambia Limited is purely a business one and is based on the due diligence the company has undertaken regarding its operations in Zambia. The nation may wish to note that this decision has not only affected the BP operations in Zambia, but also other Southern African countries such as Botswana, Malawi, Namibia and Tanzania. 

Mr Speaker, as a Government, we are aware that BP Zambia Limited is an important and critical player in the Zambian petroleum sub-sector and, therefore, any decision the company makes regarding its operations in the country has to be closely monitored to prevent potential negative impacts on the industry. It is in this regard that the Government engaged the BP management in order to have an in-depth understanding of the reasons for the pending pull-out and to ensure that the transition process is done smoothly and without any adverse effects.

Mr Speaker, during a meeting held at the Ministry of Water and Energy Development between the Government and representatives of BP Africa Limited, the former informed the latter that BP Plc had recently conducted a global portfolio review of its assets and marketing positions across the world. The purpose of the review was to identify those downstream operations that naturally lend themselves to greater synergies with BP’s supply portfolio.

Sir, BP Africa Limited’s assets had formed part of this global review that concluded that a number of Southern African markets lack the intrinsic synergies with BP Africa Limited’s portfolio that certain other markets have. As a result of this review, BP Plc has taken a decision to market its shareholding of 75 per cent plus one in BP Zambia Limited.

Mr Speaker, it is important to note that the Southern African Region, generally, and Zambia, in particular, has not been singled out of this portfolio review. Recently, BP Plc made a significant downstream disposal in Greece and it is in the process of making a significant downstream disposal in France as well.

Mr Speaker, considering what has been happening in the oil industry, globally, in the last few years, the decision by BP Plc has been long expected. Other major oil marketing companies (OMCs) such as Chevron and Shell are heading in the same direction although at different paces, depending on their portfolios in various geographical locations in the world. All of them, without exception, have suffered significant declines in their downstream markets, especially those located in Africa, Europe and South America. 

In the last few years, the contribution of the downstream business to the overall company earnings of these big OMCs has declined from an average of 10 per cent to less than 2 per cent with the rest of the profits coming from the upstream businesses, that is, from gas and crude oil exploration and extraction. 

Shell recently announced that it was downsizing by as much as 15 per cent, mostly in the downstream business. Chevron, in the last few years, has sold off its downstream business assets in Western Europe, South America, India, West Africa and East Africa. However, without exception, all these majors OMCs have remained in the Niger Delta Region in the upstream business despite the many attacks on their installations as well as kidnappings of their members of staff.

Mr Speaker, it would be recalled that a few years ago, Mobil exited from twelve African countries, including Zambia, where it sold its assets to a French company, Total. Much earlier, Azienda Generale Italiana Petroli (Agip) had sold its assets to Mobil. This is the same route most of the major OMCs are taking. For them, it makes more business sense to concentrate their investments in upstream business which contributes over 95 per cent of the earnings rather than focus on the less profitable downstream businesses.

Mr Speaker, BP Africa Limited has made a purely business decision to sell its marketing businesses in Botswana, Malawi, Namibia, Tanzania and Zambia. This notwithstanding, there already exists adequate laws and regulations in place in the country that OMCs must follow when undertaking such transactions. The Government will ensure that these requirements are met to the full. I, therefore, wish to lay to rest the fears that may be in the minds of the Zambian public regarding this matter. Senior executives from BP Africa Limited have further assured the Ministry of Energy and Water Development that they will work closely with the Government to ensure a smooth and seamless transition. Although BP Zambia Limited holds a significant market share, the Zambian petroleum sub-sector is currently served by not less than twenty OMCs. This, in itself, is testimony of the robustness and capacity of the sub-sector to attract new players in the energy sector. The Government is convinced that this process will culminate in a more competitive petroleum sub-sector in Zambia. 

Mr Speaker, BP Africa Limited’s exit from the Zambian market must also be seen as an empowerment opportunity by those Zambians wishing to invest in the sector. The top management composition of the Zambian operations in BP, Chevron and Total shows that the Zambians who are managing these operations have been producing good results for a number of years. The Government is expecting that the local management team at BP Zambia Limited will team up with other local partners and put up a competitive bid to buy some of the shares and assets of BP Zambia Limited. 

It is the intention of this Government to support local investors, through institutions such as the Energy Regulation Board (ERB), Zambia Competition Commission (ZCC), Citizens’ Economic Empowerment Commission (CEEC) as well as the Zambia Development Agency (ZDA) and empower those Zambians, with capacity, to buy some of the shares and assets being disposed of and ensure that some ownership of the sold company remains in Zambia.

Mr Speaker, through this august House, I also wish to assure the public that the Government views this transaction as a business and strategic development by one industrial player. I further wish to reiterate that the Government, through the Ministry of Energy and Water Development, stands ready and committed to work with BP for a smooth transition.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members may now ask questions on points of clarification on the statement that has been made by the hon. Minister of Energy and Water Development.

Mr Mukanga (Kantanshi): Mr Speaker, since BP is one of the major OMCs, what has the Government put in place to ensure that the pull-out does not affect the flow of fuel and, late alone, the pricing of this commodity per litre in Zambia?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, I would like to reiterate that the whole statement I have given, in the House, was exactly about that aspect. The Government intends to ensure a smooth and seamless transition to ensure that there is no disruption of petroleum supply on the market as BP Africa Limited pulls out of the market. We are working and looking forward, as I have indicated in my statement, to see if we can get some credible proposals from Zambians who might wish to participate in and join the energy sector. In that way, we will contribute to the smooth provision of petroleum products on the market.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister indicated that there were adequate laws to provide for this transition. Arising from the acquisition of a similar type of business that was owned by Total where we saw it plucking out its installations and closing them down, can the hon. Minister assure this House that we will not see a monopolistic purchase that will shut down the existing installations?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, indeed, the Government intends to ensure that the laws of this country are followed and complied with in the process of the sale of the shares and assets of BP Africa Limited. To this effect, institutions such as ZCC will be engaged to ensure that monopolistic tendencies do not arise.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Beene (Itezhi-tezhi): Mr Speaker, it has been on record that the Zambian Government has had a problem in the acquisition of oil stocks due to improper handling of issues. Can the hon. Minister confirm that this is not one of the problems that have made BP Africa Limited to pull out? Can he also assure this House and the Government that the companies that may be formed, after BP Africa Limited, will not also pull out?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, I would like to urge the hon. Member to pay more benefit when a statement is being given. I categorically indicated, in my statement, the reason for BP Africa Limited’s pulling out of Zambia, among other countries. The inadequate supply of petroleum products is not the reason BP Africa Limited is pulling out. 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Konga: I indicated, in my statement, but I will repeat myself for the hon. Member’s attention. I stated that BP Plc. had taken a global review of its portfolio of assets. After the review, it was determined that its assets in some parts of Africa were not synergising with its businesses. It is for this reason that it decided not to continue to invest in the downstream business. 

I thank you, Sir. 

Mr Kapeya (Mpika Central): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister stated that the pull-out of BP Africa Limited will enable Zambians and, indeed, former workers of BP Africa (Z) Limited to team up and run the assets left by BP Africa Limited. Are there any plans by the Government to assist the interested Zambians? 

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, as BP Africa Limited disposes of its shares and assets, it is not handing down its assets to the Government. The intention of the Government is to see a smooth carry-over of the operations of this company. The Government would like to see Zambians, who have been managing BP Zambia Limited, team up with other investors and submit a credible proposal to buy part of the assets and it will give them support. It must, however, be a purely business plan. The Government will not just support the hand-over of assets to Zambians for the sake of empowerment. It must be based on business merit.

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Nsanda (Chimwemwe): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister said that BP Africa (Z) Limited had been getting fuel from Indeni Oil Refinery to supply to its customers. What mark-up has it set between Indeni Oil Refinery and its customers who sell petroleum products at its filling stations? What profit were they making from one litre of fuel? 

Interruptions

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, I did not make any reference to what the hon. Member has indicated. Suffice to say, I will respond to some of the statements he has made. 

Mr Speaker, generally, the profit margins of businesses, especially for companies like BP Africa (Z) Limited, are determined by various factors among which is the cost of the product as well as factors such as transportation and dealer margins that are determined by the Energy Regulation Board (ERB). The computation of all these factors will result in its profit margin. This would be a statistical question which we can give to ERB to compute what the dealer and OMCs’ margins are. All these, together with the cost of the product from the Indeni Oil Refinery, will constitute the difference between what OMCs and dealers make at the pump price. 

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Machungwa (Luapula): Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister confirm that the pull-out of BP Africa Limited from Zambia will not affect the Government’s plans to introduce uniform pricing of fuel in the country that should make rural areas also enjoy the same prices as the urban areas? 

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, the intention of the Government is to ensure that the price of petroleum products in rural areas is comparable to the prices obtaining in the urban areas. The Government is, therefore, interested in the disposal of the BP Africa Limited assets. As hon. Members of the House may be aware, BP Africa Limited controls quite a significant market share of the oil market in Zambia with dealers in far-flung areas. I would like to assure the House that the Government’s programme is to ensure the price of petroleum products is uniform for the country, irrespective of which players are on the market. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Hachipuka (Mbabala): Mr Speaker, a few years ago, we were faced with the sale of the Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines (ZCCM). This Government had a choice of breaking up ZCCM with a view to making it easier for the investors to acquire different mines. Now we are faced with the issue of BP Africa Limited which controls a very sizeable market, according to the hon. Minister. To enable Zambians acquire some of these assets, has the Government thought about getting involved and dialoguing with BP Africa Limited so that they can break it up and make the assets affordable to Zambians rather than offloading a single company on the market?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, the Government is looking at the various options on how the sale of the BP Africa Limited shares and assets can be handled. We are aware, as a Government, that BP Africa Limited controls a significant market share. It is for this reason that institutions such as ZCC are being engaged to ensure that monopolistic tendencies that have existed, in the past, do not recur this time around. 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Lumba (Solwezi Central): Mr Speaker, the share price of BP Africa Limited, in the last two or three years, has fallen from about K900 per share to about K200 plus, showing that the people are going to suffer more with the shares falling …

Mr Speaker: Order! 

Ask your question. 

Mr Lumba: I thank you, Sir. I wanted to put across a fact that …

Mr Speaker: Order! 

Ask your question. 

Mr Lumba: Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister confirm that the Government has failed to create an enabling environment for BP Africa Limited to perform and increase its share price? Can he further confirm that BP Africa Limited is not pulling out of other Southern African countries such as Mozambique and South Africa, showing that the two countries have a better environment?     

Mr Speaker: We went through how to ask a follow-up question yesterday during the seminar. Please, do not make a statement. Simply ask your question. 

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, indeed, the hon. Member for Solwezi Central needs extra lessons. We appreciate that he is new in the House.

Laughter

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, probably, it is for that reason that he did not understand what I said in the statement.

Laughter

Mr Konga: For his benefit, I will repeat that BP Africa Limited is not pulling out of Zambia only, but also other African countries. They want to focus more on the upstream business as compared to the downstream business. Really, this has nothing to do with the price of shares on the Zambian market.

 Mr Spekaer, I thank you.

Mr Speaker: Order! 

I just want to guide the hon. Minister not to use technical terms. You should use the kind of language that everybody will understand. Upstream and downstream are technical economics terms and very few will understand that you mean production and the final product of that production.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, I am most obliged.

Mr Kakoma (Zambezi West): Mr Speaker, this is slightly different from what Hon. Hachipuka asked. The hon. Minister is encouraging management to put up a good proposal to buy BP Africa (Z) Limited. Would the hon. Minister also try to persuade BP Africa (Z) Limited to offload more of its shares on the Lusaka Stock Exchange (LuSe) so that more people are able to buy the shares and empower more Zambians?

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, the sale of BP’s shares is going to take place on LuSe because that is where it is listed. The intention of BP Africa Limited was to sell the shares as a going asset to one investor. We are trying to encourage Zambians to team up because BP Africa Limited must be sold as a business and a business that must run. Therefore, there must be an institution formed by the investors or people who are going to buy the shares of BP Africa Limited to carry on with its business or whatever will follow thereafter. Therefore, while, as a Government, we are encouraging that some shares be sold on the LuSe, we are also encouraging some of the assets of BP Africa Limited to be bought so that it still runs as a business.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Chimbaka (Bahati): Mr Speaker, I would like to know from the hon. Minister whether, besides the ministerial statement the hon. Minster has given on the Floor of the House this afternoon, the Government has plans to engage the Zambians managing BP Africa (Z) Limited and would-be interested Zambians to dialogue on the future of BP Africa (Z) Limited.

Mr Konga: Mr Speaker, indeed, the Government has been talking to some local prospective investors who want to buy some of the BP Africa (Z) Limited shares. Therefore, we are encouraging that and we are talking to those who are coming forward.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

_____{mospagebreak}

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

REHABILITATION OF ROADS IN MWINILUNGA EAST CONSTITUENCY

416. Mr Katuka (Mwinilunga East) asked the Minister of Works and Supply when the following roads in Mwinilunga East Parliamentary Constituency would be repaired:

(i)    Luakela-Kakoma;

(ii)    Mwinilunga-Kanyama;

(iii)    Ntambu-Makanu; and

(iv)    Chibwika-Kamapanda.

The Deputy Minister of Works and Supply (Dr Kalila): Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the Ministry of Works and Supply, through the Rural Roads Rehabilitation Unit (RRRU) of the North-Western Province, intends to carry out the maintenance of the Luakela-Kakoma Road in 2010. The road has been surveyed and it was estimated that K2,697,531,408 was needed to rehabilitate the road. Commencement of the works will purely depend on the availability of funds.

Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Works and Supply has no immediate plans to carry out the maintenance of the Mwinilunga-Kanyama Road. The road might be considered for inclusion in the 2011 Annual Work Plan of RRRU, subject to the availability of funds.

Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Works and Supply has no immediate plans to carry out the maintenance of the Ntambu-Makanu Road. In 2008, the Regional Engineer for the North-Western Province carried out a survey and design for the rehabilitation of the road. The estimated cost for rehabilitating the road was K15 billion. Due to budgetary constraints, the project was not included in both the 2009 and 2010 Annual Work Plan. However, the ministry is still committed to carrying out the works on this important road.

Mr Speaker, in late 2009, reshaping and grading was carried out on the twenty-nine-kilometre Chibwika-Kamapanda Road. However, the works were discontinued due to unfavourable weather. The works are to continue in 2010 utilising the plant and equipment of RRRU.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Katuka: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister if the ministry receives any reports on the effectiveness of this unit. If it does, according to the reports, is it having any impact on the ground?

The Minister of Works and Supply (Mr Mulongoti): Mr Speaker, we are doing that through our normal administrative channels. It is expected that the hon. Member could help to inform us about the performance of the equipment. After all, it is intended to service his constituency.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Kakoma (Zambezi West): Mr Speaker, there a lot of mining companies, especially Chinese companies in Mwinilunga. Could I find out from the hon. Minister whether the mining companies operating in Mwinilunga can be persuaded by his ministry to work on some of the roads, for which he has no money, and complete them as part of these companies’ corporate social responsibility?

Mr Mulongoti: Mr Speaker, all development projects are undertaken with the concurrence of the local authorities and the traditional leadership in the province. As an hon. Councillor, he is supposed to be part of those who are supposed to persuade investors to have some social responsibility.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 Mr Shawa: Hear, hear!

______

BILLS

FIRST READING

The following Bill was read the first time:

The Supplementary Appropriation (2008) Bill 

Second Reading on Wednesday, 24th March, 2010

SECOND READING

THE PATENTS AND COMPANIES REGISTRATION AGENCY BILL, 2010

The Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry (Mr Mutati): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, first of all, I would like to acknowledge the good work of your Committee and thank them for their report regarding the proposed Bill. The Patents and Companies Registration Office (PACRO), as hon. Members may be aware, is a semi-autonomous and self-financing executive agency of the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry. It was a department under the ministry until it was hived-off from the mainstream Civil Service and commercialised under the Public Service Reform Programme (PSRP) in 1997. It was established by Treasury Authority No. 4 of 1997 after a Cabinet directive in November, 1995.

Mr Speaker, PACRO was granted administrative autonomy and mandated to administer and attend to the functions performed in relation to the registration of companies, business names, trademarks and industrial designs and the grant of patents. These functions were enshrined in the companies Act Cap 388; the Companies (Certificates Validation) Act Cap 414; the Registration of Business Names Act Cap 389; the Patents Act Cap 400, the Trade Marks Act Cap 401 and the Registered Designs Act Cap 402. PACRO, therefore, serves as a regulator and a depository of business-related information.

It should be emphasised that PACRO was only granted administrative as opposed to legal autonomy. Statutes were carried over to the new entity without any amendment to reflect, at the very least, the new administrative structure or harmonise the statutes under an umbrella administration. The lack of a legal or statutory instrument establishing it meant that, legally, PACRO remained a department of the ministry although semi-autonomous. It was only granted the autonomy sufficient to enhance service delivery in accordance with the objectives of PSRP. Nonetheless, the Government’s intention, from inception, was to establish it as an autonomous entity.

The lack of a legal instrument meant that an umbrella body to superintend over the various statues of the various pieces of legislation governing business and patents registration was lacking. Although, in practice, the registrar has been the chief executive officer and, therefore, supervises the administration of all the statutes, legally, each of the statutes has its own registrar. These statues do not make reference to PACRO.

The Bill, therefore, seeks to constitute PACRO as a legal entity and, thereby confer on it the capacity, rights, powers and privileges incidental to such a status.

Mr Speaker, the Bill provides for a statutory body, the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA). PACRA is to be fully financed from its own revenue and, like any other statutory board, it will remain under the supervisory umbrella of this House. The Bill also provides for a chief executive officer with responsibility for the management and administration of the affairs of the agency and, in particular, the various statues, under the supervision of a board of directors.

Mr Speaker, let me now turn my attention to the specific recommendations of your Committee on this Bill.

With regard to the recommendation on the determination of fees and levies, while we agree that these be done with the approval of the hon. Minister, it is not necessary that we introduce additional text in the Bill. This is a standard clause and the hon. Minister, either by policy directives or by statutory instrument, approves any fees proposed by an agency. The House may also wish to note that PACRO submits dividends to the Treasury at the end of each financial year. We are, therefore, of the view that the Bill, as it is written, is sufficient and there is no need for further text regarding the utilisation of funds. We will, however, provide for the conditions of service to be subject to the approval of the hon. Minister so as to ensure that the funds raised by the agency are utilised for appropriate purposes and not just for salaries and conditions of service.

On the concerns over the appointment of board members without consultation, we have taken note and wish to indicate that a person can only be a representative of an organisation if nominated by that organisation. The concerns of the Committee are, therefore, already catered for. We also wish to maintain that the hon. Minister appoints the board chairperson and vice-chairperson. This House may wish to note that there are several institutions in which the hon. Minister appoints the board chairperson and vice-chairperson and it is our position that this does not lead to abuse of ministerial powers. This is also consistent with the current Government policy on the constitution of boards. It is within the hon. Ministers’ interest that the institution performs its mandate to expectation. The choice of a board chairperson is critical to the effective performance of the board which, in turn, affects the institution’s performance.

Hon. Members may wish to note that other boards like the Zambia Development Agency (ZDA) have similar arrangements. The caveat to the hon. Members’ concerns is that the hon. Minister appoints, from amongst the members of the board whose appointment is based on recommendations from representative institutions, as outlined in the Bill. The proposed composition is consistent with current Government policy. The two members to be appointed by the hon. Minister will be persons who will add value to the board. They can be lawyers, engineers or any other professions critical to the value addition initiatives to the board and the agency as a whole.

Similarly, we maintain that the hon. Minister should have the power to remove a member from the board, if satisfied that the continuation of that member is prejudicial to the interests of the agency. Let me assure the hon. Members that these powers cannot be abused except to the detriment of the agency and ultimately to that hon. Minister’s failure which would not be in his or her best interest. As indicated earlier, there is sufficient precedence in laws governing various agencies on such provisions and I am sure hon. Members will agree that such powers have not been abused. It is also important that ‘Minister’ is seen as an institution or an office rather than an individual. Due consultations would, therefore, take place before such decisions are affected.

On the recommendations of your Committee to increase the number required for a quorum to four and the appointment of the registrar by the board rather than the agency, we are in agreement. With regard to the qualifications of the registrar, hon. Members should appreciate that the registrar administers seven pieces of legislation and knowledge of the law is essential in the effective interpretation and discharge of the functions and duties enshrined therein. It is, therefore, important that this person be a legal practitioner.

Mr Speaker, with regard to the call for the agency to have presence in all provinces, hon. Members may wish to note that the process has already started and PACRO has offices in Ndola and Livingstone. It is the Government intention to expand the reach of the agency to all the provinces and the enactment of this Bill will provide a strong impetus for this to be achieved as there will now be a board to direct the affairs of the agency.

Mr Speaker, this Bill will result in consequential amendments of legislation which are intended to amend the statutes currently administered by PACRO in the light of administrative and other changes to be introduced by the PACRA Bill. The amendments in the consequential legislation will not affect the substance of the statutes they seek to amend.

In conclusion, I wish to implore the hon. Members of Parliament to support this important legislation. It is essential that we strengthen PACRO in promoting the development of a vibrant private sector.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kakoma (Zambezi West): I thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to debate on this Bill. 

Mr Speaker, your Committee considered the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010 whose objects are to:

(a)    establish the patents and companies registration agency;

(b)    provide for the functions of the agency; and 

(c)    transfer from the Government to the agency, the functions and the powers of the offices of the registrar of companies, registrar of registered business names, registrar of patents, registrar of trademarks and registrar of registered designs.

Mr Speaker, all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the establishment of PACRA. Your Committee also support the Bill. However, your Committee wish to make some observations and recommendations.

Mr Speaker, the Bill proposes that the agency will be able to determine and levy fees that it considers necessary to finance its activities under the Bill. Your Committee are uncomfortable with this provision because it might be abused and lead to an increase in the cost of doing business. They are aware of quasi-Government agencies and boards where fees paid to these institutions were used to cover up their inefficiencies and pay members of staff handsomely. In order to prevent this situation, your Committee recommend that the fees be proposed by the agency, subject to approval by the hon.  Minister. A statutory instrument should then be issued subject to parliamentary oversight.

Your Committee note that there is no provision to allow the excess funds collected by the agency to be returned to the Treasury. This will create an institution with excess funds that cannot be used to develop the country. Your Committee recommend that excess funds be returned to the Treasury.

Mr Speaker, your Committee observe that the Bill gives the hon. Minister the power to appoint members of the board without consultation. It also grants him the power to appoint the chairperson and the vice-chairperson of the board. They are concerned with these provisions because they are open to abuse. In this regard, your Committee recommend that appointment to the board be on recommendation by the relevant organisations nominating people to the board. Further, the chairperson and the vice-chairperson of the board should be elected from amongst their number. This will be in line with good corporate governance. It will also remove the suspicion by the private sector on the Government’s motive for appointing the chairperson and vice-chairperson, in an agency and economy that is supposed to be private-sector led.

Mr Speaker, your Committee also observe that the hon. Minister is given unfettered power to remove a member from the board without consulting the institution that nominated the member. This is prone to abuse and does not give confidence to the private sector. Many distinguished business people, who want to maintain their reputation and integrity, would shy away from serving on a board where they can be embarrassingly removed without any reason. Your Committee, therefore, recommend that a member be removed on recommendation by his or her respective organisation.

Mr Speaker, your Committee are concerned about the composition of the board. The board should have representation from the major stakeholders such as engineers, accountants, economists, lawyers and business associations. In addition, the provision requiring the hon. Minister to appoint two other persons without specifying their qualifications, experience and the organisations such persons will come from was not right. They wonder what criteria the hon. Minister will use to appoint such people. They, therefore, recommend that the Bill specify clearly the institutions to be represented by such people. Your Committee recommend that the composition be as follows:

(i)    a representative of the ministry responsible for commerce;

(ii)    a representative of the Attorney-General;

(iii)    an accountant representing the institute of chartered accountants registered in Zambia;

(iv)    a business person representing a private sector business association registered in Zambia;

(v)    a lawyer representing the Law Association of Zambia (LAZ);

(vi)    one person with expertise in matters of intellectual property; and

(vii)    one person representing the association of engineers registered in Zambia.

Mr Speaker, your Committee observe that one of the requirements for one to be a registrar is to be a legal practitioner. They are uncomfortable with the limiting of the qualifications to one profession only. They are aware that accountants in certain jurisdictions hold such positions. In addition, the position of registrar, like any other chief executive, requires management skills. They recommend that the Bill be amended to provide for other relevant qualifications and that law only be an added advantage.

Mr Speaker, your Committee are concerned that the Bill seeks to put in place a minority quorum of the board which could lead to minority decisions. The Bill is seeking to have a quorum of three out of a board of seven. Your Committee recommend that the quorum be four to give legitimacy to a board decision that will be considered as a majority decision.

Mr Speaker, your Committee are concerned about the high cost of doing business. Under the proposed legislation, many people who are far away from Lusaka will incur huge travel costs to travel and register their businesses as well as provide annual returns to the agency. In order to reduce the cost of doing business, they recommend that the agency decentralise its services to all provinces. This can be done by either establishing new offices or appointing agents, such as local government authorities, to carry out the registration of business names and accept annual returns. Your Committee also recommend that the new agency embrace e-commerce and facilitates businesses to register online as well as file annual returns online.

Mr Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to all witnesses who appeared before your Committee and tendered both oral and written submissions. I also wish to thank you, Mr Speaker, for affording your Committee an opportunity to study the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I wish to thank the Chairperson of your Committee and the whole House for the overwhelming support.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE COMPANIES (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Sir, the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2010 seeks to repeal the provisions relating to the Office of the Registrar of Companies and repeal the provisions relating to the requirements for minimum capital for a public or private company before it can be operational and for matters connected with or incidental to the foregoing.

The Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010. I, therefore, urge the House to support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, I thank you. 

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee were mandated to scrutinise the Companies (Amendment) Bill, 2010 referred to them by the House. The Bill seeks to repeal the provisions relating to the Office of the Registrar of Companies and repeal the provisions relating to the requirement for minimum capital for a public or private company before it can be operational.

Mr Speaker, all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the amendment Bill. After various presentations from stakeholders, your Committee were convinced that this Bill had no adverse effects because it is merely being aligned with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010.

In addition, your Committee have no objection to the proposal to remove the minimum capital requirement for a public or private company before it can be operational. The minimum capital requirement was not being enforced by PACRO. This provision served no purpose because companies were operating with or without minimum capital. The provision, therefore, only frustrated some small businesses.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I thank the House for the overwhelming support.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE PATENTS (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Mr Speaker, the Patents (Amendment) Bill, 2010 seeks to amend the Patents Act in order to provide for the registration of patents by PACRA. The Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010. I urge the House to support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.{mospagebreak}

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee were privileged to consider the Patents (Amendment) Bill, 2010. The Bill seeks to amend the Patents Act in order to provide for the registration of patents by PACRA proposed to be established under the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010. It is envisaged that the agency will replace PACRO once the Bill is enacted into law.

Mr Speaker, all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the amendment Bill. Your Committee also support the Bill. They have no objection since the Bill is non-controversial and is intended to amend the law currently administered by PACRO in the light of administrative and other changes to be introduced by the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010.

In supporting the Bill, your Committee wish to observe that the issue of patents registration is a very serious one. Many Zambian entrepreneurs have not registered their innovations and secured their intellectual property rights. Many of the innovations have ended up being taken away by foreigners and registered outside the country thereby depriving the local investors in Zambia of their rights. The new agency should create awareness among Zambian investors on their intellectual property rights and assist to patent their products locally.

With these few remarks, I wish to pay tribute to all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee and tendered both oral and written submissions. I also wish to thank you, Mr Speaker, for affording your Committee an opportunity to study the Bill.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I thank the House for the support.

I thank you, Sir.

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

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order! It is only yesterday that we were talking about these procedures.

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE TRADE MARKS (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Mr Speaker, the Trade Marks (Amendment) Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 4 of 2010 seeks to amend the Trade Marks Act, Cap 401 of the Laws of Zambia by providing for the registration of Trade Marks by PACRA.

The Bill, among others, seeks to ensure that the definition of ‘Registrar’ is in conformity with the PACRA Bill. This Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with PACRA Bill No. 5 of 2010. 

I urge the House to support the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee considered the Trade Marks (Amendments) Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 4 of 2010. The Bill seeks to amend the Trade Marks Act, Cap 401 of the Laws of Zambia by providing for the registration marks by PACRA.

Mr Speaker, you may be aware that, currently, the Registrar of Trademarks registers at PACRO. There is a proposal in the PACRA Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 5 of 2010, that the registration of Trade Marks should be undertaken by the Registrar of the agency. It is, therefore, necessary to amend the Act to provide for such registration by the Registrar of the agency.

Mr Speaker, all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the Trade Marks (Amendment) Bill, 2010. In supporting your Bill, your Committee wish to urge the proposed agency to seriously and quickly attend to issues of trade marks by Zambian entrepreneurs. Many companies and entrepreneurs are producing local products that have no registered trademarks. This makes it difficult to identify these products and market them effectively. The new agency should help create awareness and assist Zambian businesses to register their trademarks. 

With these few remarks, your Committee wish to urge the House to support the amendment Bill.

May I, again, thank you, Sir, for affording your Committee an opportunity to study the Bill. Your Committee are also indebted to the witnesses who appeared before them and tendered both oral and written submissions.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I thank the House for the overwhelming support.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE REGISTRATION OF BUSINESS NAMES (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Mr Speaker, the Registration of Business Names (Amendment) Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 15 of 2010, seeks to amend the Registration of Business Names Act in order to provide for the registration of business names by PACRA.

The Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with the PACRA Bill No. 5 of 2010. I urge the House to support it.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee were tasked to scrutinise the Registration of Business Names (Amendment) Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 15 of 2010 referred to them by the House on Thursday, 25th February, 2010. The object of the Bill is to amend the Registration of Business Names Act so as to provide for the Registration of Business Names by PACRA.

All the witnesses who appeared before your Committee supported the amendment Bill. Your Committee also support the Bill since it is only a consequential amendment. However, your Committee wish to implore the Government to reduce the cost of doing business in Zambia. They are aware that the proposed amendment may not solve the problem of the long procedures of licensing because it is merely intended to amend the law in the light of administrative and other changes to be introduced by the PACRA Bill, National Assembly Bill No. 5 of 2010. They, therefore, recommend that the Government harmonise the various pieces of legislation to cut down on the long and tedious licensing procedure contributing to the high cost of doing business in Zambia. This will make Zambia an attractive investment destination.

Mr Speaker, your Committee observe that in addition to the long and tedious licensing procedures, there are various factors affecting the high cost of doing business in Zambia. They, therefore, urge the Government to come up with a holistic approach in reducing the cost of doing business. This should include addressing other factors such as limited access to credit, poor transport system, high cost of communication, prohibitive lending rates and poor tax structure.

Mr Speaker, your Committee have noted the strides made by the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry to reduce the cost of doing business through the harmonisation of licensing procedures. Your Committee wish to urge the ministry to bring to Parliament various pieces of legislation to harmonise the licensing and regulatory procedures.

Mr Speaker, small-scale businesses should be facilitated to register on-line. This will cut travel costs, especially for businesses of people living in areas far from Lusaka. Small-scale businesses should also be assisted to file their annual returns either online or through local government authorities who can be appointed as agents by the agency.

I wish to conclude by thanking all the witnesses who appeared before your Committee for their valuable input. I also wish to thank you, Sir, for affording your Committee an opportunity to consider the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I wish to thank the House for the overwhelming support.

I thank you, Sir.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE REGISTERED DESIGNS (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Mr Speaker, the Registered Designs (Amendment), National Assembly Bill No. 16 of 2010, seeks to amend the Registered Designs Act, Cap 402 of the Laws of Zambia.

This Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with the PACRA Bill No. 5 of 2010. I, therefore, urge the House to support the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee considered the Registered Designs (Amendment) Bill, 2010. The Bill seeks to amend the Registered Designs Act, Cap. 402 of the Laws of Zambia so as to provide for the registration of designs by PACRA in conformity with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010.

All the witnesses that appeared before your Committee supported the Bill just as your committee also does. The Bill intends to amend the law currently administered by the Patents and Companies Registration Office (PACRO) in the light of administrative and other changes to be introduced by the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010. Your Committee, therefore, urge the House to support the Bill because it is straightforward and non-controversial.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I thank the House for the support.

Thank you, Sir.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE COMPANIES (Certificates Validation) (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

Mr Speaker, the Companies (Certificates Validation) (Amendment) Bill, 2010 seeks to amend the Companies (Certificates Validation) Act, Cap. 414 of the Laws of Zambia so as to provide for the validation of certificates by PACRA. 

This Bill is non-controversial as it is intended to align with the PACRA Bill, 2010. I, therefore, urge the House to support the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kakoma: Mr Speaker, your Committee were entrusted to scrutinise the Companies (Certificates Validation) (Amendment) Bill, 2010. This Bill seeks to amend the Companies (Certificates Validation) Act, Cap. 414 of the Laws of Zambia so as to provide for the validation of certificates by PACRA in conformity with the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010.

Mr Speaker, this Bill is merely intended to amend the law currently administered by PACRO in the light of administrative and other changes to be introduced by the Patents and Companies Registration Agency Bill, 2010.

All the witnesses that appeared before your Committee supported the amendment Bill. Therefore, your Committee also support the Bill and urge the House to pass it.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I thank the House for the support.

Thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 25th March, 2010.

THE NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL CONFERENCE (Amendment) BILL, 2010

The Vice-President and Minister of Justice (Mr Kunda, SC.): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, the National Constitutional Conference (NCC) (Amendment) Bill, 2010 seeks to amend the NCC Act No. 19 of 2007, by revising the period for the dissemination and adoption of the initial report and Draft Constitution in an effort to conclude the process before the preparation of the 2011 National Budget. It also seeks to ensure that constitutional provisions with financial implications are taken into account in the preparation of the National Budget.

Currently, the NCC Act provides that the conference prepare an initial report and, on the basis of the report, prepare an initial Draft Bill to alter the Constitution or any part of it, but it does not specify the timeframe within which this should be done.

By virtue of this amendment Bill, the period within which the initial report and the Draft Bill are to be prepared, after the conference concludes consideration of the reports of the Committees, has been specified. The law currently provides for the incorporation of the public’s views, which the conference considers appropriate, into the draft report and the Draft Constitution, without specifying a timeframe. However, the proposed amendment seeks to limit this period so that any representations from the public will be incorporated into the draft report and the Draft Bill within thirty days.

Mr Speaker, the current law also makes provision for the compilation of the final report and the drafting and adoption of a Bill to alter the Constitution or a part thereof. However, there is no specified time period within which this should be done. The proposed amendment, therefore, seeks to provide that the compilation of the report and the adoption of the final report and the Draft Bill should all be done within fourteen days of incorporating the public’s views, which are considered appropriate, into the draft report.

Sir, the proposed amendment, further seeks to specify the period within which the chairperson of the conference should submit the final Draft Bill to the hon. Minister of Justice after its adoption by the conference. Currently, there is no time limit for this. However, the proposed amendment provides for a seven-day period within which the chairperson should submit the final draft.

Mr Speaker, last year’s amendment to the Constitution changed the Budget Cycle. As a result of this amendment, the Government is now obliged to present a Budget to Parliament by October, every year, for the next financial year. It is for this reason that the Bill contains provisions specifying that the conference will stand dissolved on 31st August, 2010 and the term of office of the members will thereupon expire. This deadline is necessary so that the Government can budget for the subsequent activities relating to the Constitution-making process that have financial implications.

Mr Speaker, this Bill is non-controversial. It is timely and progressive. I, therefore, urge hon. Members of this august House to support it. I have read the report of the Committee and we shall take some of their suggestions into account.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu (Monze Central): Mr Speaker, I thank you most sincerely for giving me an opportunity to brief this august House on the NCC (Amendment) Bill, 2010, which was referred to your Committee on Legal Affairs, Governance, Human Rights and Gender Matters on 24th February, 2010 for scrutiny.

Mr Speaker, the proposed Bill seeks to amend the NCC Act No. 19 of 2007, so as to revise the period for the dissemination and adoption of the initial report and Draft Constitution by the conference so that the Constitution-making process is concluded before the preparation of the 2011 National Budget. This will ensure that the constitutional provisions with financial implications are taken into account in the preparation of the 2011 National Budget.

Sir, your Committee consulted various stakeholders, who made both written and oral submissions. We are glad to report that all the stakeholders registered support for the Bill, notwithstanding the several concerns and observations which they raised. The concerns and observations raised are adequately covered in your Committee’s report for the consideration of the hon. Members of this House. I trust that hon. Members will find the report useful as they debate the Bill.

Mr Speaker, allow me to highlight some of the common concerns raised by the stakeholders during their interaction with your Committee. The stakeholders who appeared before your Committee were unanimous on the need to amend Clause 3 of the Bill so that the period prescribed for public discussion and debate of the draft report is extended.

Mr Speaker, it was also the concern of the stakeholders that since the process of public consultation was critical to the Constitution-making process, the following measures should be taken into consideration:

(i)    the initial report and Draft Bill should be advertised in the print and electronic media for easy dissemination;

(ii)    there is a need for the two documents to be translated into the seven main local languages and be advertised accordingly;

(iii)    the documents should also be published in a booklet format and be sent to all the seventy-two districts of Zambia for free distribution; and

(iv)    the documents must be made accessible to all political parties, non-governmental organisation (NGOs), the Church, traditional leaders and local authorities. Women and youth organisations and the public, in general, must also be given an opportunity to access the documents. 

Sir, your Committee were privileged to interact with the Solicitor-General of the Republic of Zambia, who provided valuable counsel to your Committee. Resulting from that interaction, the Solicitor-General acceded to the stakeholders’ concern with respect to Clause 3 of the Bill. Therefore, Clause 3 of the Bill will be amended so that the public consultative period is extended from thirty days to forty days.

Mr Speaker, in the light of the anticipated amendment to the Bill and based on some observations made by the stakeholders, your Committee recommend that the process of public discussion and debate be inclusive and be extended to all the corners of the country.

Sir, the preamble of our current Constitution, in part, reads:

“We, the people of Zambia, by our representatives, assembled in our Parliament, having solemnly resolved to maintain Zambia as a sovereign democratic Republic resolve to uphold the values of democracy, transparency, accountability and good governance …”

Sir, the same Constitution, in Article 1 (2) provides as follows: 

“All power resides in the people, who shall exercise their sovereignty through the democratic institutions of the State, in accordance with this Constitution.”

Mr Speaker, based on the foregoing, your Committee recognise that all power resides in the people. Therefore, they recommend that the outcome of the public discussions and debates be adequately captured by NCC so that the people’s aspirations are realised in the final report.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, your Committee wish to record and express their appreciation to the witnesses who made submissions before them on the Bill. Finally, I wish to commend members of your Committee and the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support rendered to them throughout their deliberations during the consideration of the NCC (Amendment) Bill, 2010.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mrs Masebo (Chongwe): Mr Speaker, from the onset, I just want to say that I was a member of this Committee and would like to support the Bill. In doing so, I thought I should just raise one issue.

Sir, although this Bill is non-controversial, it is a very important amendment because it is a response to the cries of the Zambian people who have felt that the Constitution-making process has taken long. To that effect, it is good in that people now know exactly that by 31st August, this whole process would have come to an end. Whilst that is appreciated, there is an issue, within this period, which is cardinal for us, as hon. Members of Parliament, and the public out there.  This is the thirty-day period that has been given for public debate. 

The Chairperson of the Committee has alluded to the fact that many stakeholders who appeared before us were worried about the thirty days because they thought it was too short, taking into account the issue of publication and translation. Obviously, it was felt that the time may not be enough, especially for constituencies that will be visited by the commissioners earlier as they will not have had enough time to deliberate on the draft report.  

Mr Speaker, it is important that hon. Members of Parliament and other stakeholders go out there and get the people ready. It is necessary that we begin to educate people on contentious issues such as the 50 per cent plus one majority vote, qualifications of councillors, which have been pegged at Grade 12, although it is very difficult to find any in some very remote areas, issues of the presidential candidates having a degree as minimum qualification and human rights before the initial Draft Constitution Report is published. 

We need to go out there and start educating our people and assist them to understand some of the issues instead of them waiting for the document to be published. The thirty days in the amendment, even if it were increased to forty days may not be enough. Even ninety days would not be enough unless, as leaders, we become proactive and go out to our constituencies and help our people to understand that the Draft Constitution Bill is out.  

Mr Speaker, the other point that was clear from the submissions of the stakeholders who appeared before us was that this is an opportunity even for those who may not have participated actively, from the beginning of the process, to express their views. It is an opportunity for them to do so and state their position on these contentious issues regardless of whether their views will be taken on board or not.  

In the past, we have seen that, on many issues, there have been boycotts …

Mr Lubinda: On a point of order, Sir. 

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised. 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I seek your ruling on this matter. The Bill before the House is very clear. The mover of the Bill and the Chairperson of the Committee that was entrusted to investigate this Bill debated its merits. I wonder whether the hon. Member for Chongwe, my good princess, is in order to talk about matters that were discussed at NCC and matters that should be discussed outside, when this Bill seeks a clear mandate from this House. Is she in order to misdirect herself and, therefore, this House as well?

Mr Speaker: The hon. Member for Chongwe is still on the Floor debating. However, as she continues, she should, please, take that point of order into account. 

Mrs Masebo: Mr Speaker, I would like to state that the thirty days cited in the amendment Bill is short. It is important that, as leaders, we ensure that we become proactive. Even if the time is extended to fifty or sixty days, the point I am raising is that time will never be enough. Unless we remain proactive, we will achieve very little. 

Furthermore, Mr Speaker, I wanted to add that this amendment is timely. It gives people, those who have not participated actively, were not members of NCC and may have boycotted or may have wanted to be part of it, but could not be, an opportunity to state their position. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mrs Masebo: Boycotts have always been there but, at the end of the day, the train leaves. 

Laughter 

Mrs Masebo: I think that it is better that history records exonerate us for, at least, having wanted to do this, but the Parliamentarians or NCC disappointed us, or the Government of the day disappointed the people of Zambia.  At least, you will go down in history as having participated rather than keeping away. 

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours. {mospagebreak}

[MADAM DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

Mrs Masebo: Madam Speaker, before business was suspended, I was about to conclude to allow other hon. Members to debate, considering that I was a member of this Committee. 

Madam Speaker, just to recap, I was saying that this amendment is important because it is in response to the cries of our people that the Constitution-making process has taken too long. At least, everybody now knows when NCC will conclude its business. 

I also said that the thirty days that have been allocated are not enough as most stakeholders, who appeared before the Committee, said. Even if the number of days were increased to forty or fifty, they would still not be sufficient. It is incumbent upon us, as leaders, to go out there and start informing our people about this road map. 

The other important point I raised was that it is necessary for the NCC Secretariat to come up with a clear road map of the process so that people do not guess about what will be happening even if we know that NCC business will conclude on 31st August, 2010. This is because it is not clear what will happen or how the debate and other activities will be conducted. It would be helpful if the secretariat came up with a very detailed road map of this whole process by 31st August, 2010. 

Madam Speaker, with these few remarks, I thank you.

Mr Sejani (Mapatizya): Madam Speaker, I have very brief comments to make on this amendment Bill. 

Madam Speaker, I have absolutely nothing against any amendment that is designed to expedite the Constitution-making process. We all desire that it ends quickly. However, I have issues to raise regarding the fate of the consultations and the result of those consultations. What becomes of the people’s submissions? 

Madam Speaker, as a country and a nation, we are not doing too badly in terms of consulting, but the issue is what happens to the product of those consultations. How will what people said be incorporated? 

Madam Speaker, I pick the angle of the concerns of the stakeholders who, in the Committee’s report on Page 5, indicate as follows: 

“The stakeholders also noted that the proposed amendment to Section 23 Sub-section 1 (b) seems to fly in the teeth of the spirit of democracy where the people are the supreme law givers. The proposed amendment neglects the importance of the public making comments on the draft report as it limits public input to what members of NCC may consider appropriate to be incorporated into the final report”.

Madam Speaker, furthermore, the stakeholders state:

“The stakeholders propose that the public should be given the latitude to state whether their aspirations are adequately reflected in the NCC Draft Report and conversely be given the opportunity to highlight their misgivings in the Draft Report and propose new provisions if necessary.”

Madam Speaker, people will be given this opportunity and then, they are going to submit, but what will be the fate of those submissions? How different is this consultation from the previous consultations? I want to pose this question to the Government that the mere constitution of the Mung’omba Constitution Review Commission (CRC) was actually necessary with consultations. We consulted the people of Zambia and they made submissions. What happened to the core submissions of the people of Zambia? 

Madam Speaker, I would like to state that many of the core submissions and critical contents of what would have been a people’s Constitution were consumed by Article 13 of the principal Act of NCC. I would like to quote it in reminding ourselves of our duties, not only as hon. Members of Parliament, but also participants in NCC. 

Madam Speaker, Article 13 talks about the functions and powers of NCC. It says:

“Subject to other provisions of this Act, the functions of the conference shall be:

(a)    to consider and deliberate the provisions of the report of the Commission and the Draft Constitution;”

Madam Speaker, I will read other parts. Subsection 3 states:

‘The members may, in considering and deliberating the Draft Constitution under Subsection (1) vary, confirm, add or remove any provisions of the Draft Constitutions as the members consider appropriate”.

Mr Chilembo: On a point of order, Madam.

Madam Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Chilembo: Madam Speaker, I rise on a very serious point of order. Is the hon. Member for Mapatizya in order to quote the provisions in the manner that he is whereby he is questioning a law that was, in fact, passed by this House? Is he in order to do that because that law that he is questioning was passed by this Parliament? I seek your serious ruling.

 Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! At this moment, it is a little difficult in the sense that we are considering the law, itself, in the form of amending it. Therefore, the law is being subjected to some kind of scrutiny. Guidance has been given by the proposals of the amendment.

May the hon. Member for Mapatizya, please, continue.

 Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Sejani: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank you for your wise counsel.

Madam Speaker, indeed, we are considering amendments and the mere act of amendment questions this …

Madam Deputy Speaker: You may continue, hon. Member.

Mr Sejani: Madam Speaker, we are, further, reminded that in the exercise of the functions or the powers conferred by this Act, the conference shall be accountable to the people of Zambia, so it states. We shall also recognise the importance of confidence building engendering trust and developing national consensus for the adoption process.

Finally and for the purpose of my debate, we are told to ensure that a final outcome of the adoption process faithfully reflects the wishes of the people of Zambia. The question is: what became of the wishes of the people of Zambia, as was reflected in the first consultation in the form of CRC? What guarantee is there that, this time round, we consulted the people and that what they submitted will be taken on board? When His Honour the Vice-President stands up to wind up debate, I expect him to tell this House and assure the nation that, this time round, the people of Zambia will be heard. I also expect His Honour the Vice-President to assure this nation that, unlike the previous consultations, this time round, what the people say will be taken on board. 

Madam Speaker, if he does not do that, then the Government process, as it is appearing here, is not protecting the critical contents of what is supposed to be a people’s Constitution. The major issues which define what is supposed to be a people’s Constitution must be brought back on board. As already indicated, issues of fifty plus one per cent, running mate, independence of the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ), Human Rights and press freedom are the contents that the people of Zambia want to see in the Constitution. However, as long as Article 30(d) remains in the statutes, I can assure you that this exercise in consultation will end up in a similar manner the previous constitutions ended, that is, a mere waste of people ‘s time and resources. 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Sejani: I would like His Honour the Vice-President to assure this House and the country that we will listen to the people. If we do not listen to the people, the controversy will continue. The controversy surrounding the Constitution-making process will continue. I am expecting that, this time round, somebody will listen to the Zambians and that the issues that the people have been talking about all these years will be brought on board.

Therefore, to ensure that we all mean what we say, I will propose to move a further amendment on Section III of the amendment Bill and also on the principal Act. Those who will oppose that amendment will show the Zambians that they do not mean it.

 Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!  

The Deputy Speaker: Order! Order!  I think we have to debate within the amendment Bill. Nobody, here, should threaten another hon. Member for the way that person chooses to debate. Therefore, the hon. Member on the Floor will not threaten others with how they may be perceived. They have their freedom to debate in the manner that they feel.

The hon. Member for Mapatizya may continue.

Mr Sejani: Madam Speaker, I expect the Government to support the amendment which I will be moving on Section III of the amendment Bill and principal Act to ensure that we accept what the people of Zambia want.

 Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!  

Hon. Government Members: What do you want?

Mr Sejani: We want a fifty per cent plus one majority.

 Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! That is not an issue for debate. You are debating the amendment Bill. The issues that are debated elsewhere should not be brought here. The fifty per cent plus one majority is not in question and neither are all those issues. Debate the Bill, hon. Member.

Mr Sejani: Madam Speaker, the issues are very clear on how to amend this Bill further and that is to ensure that what the people submit is taken on board. 

Secondly and lastly, when His Honour the Vice-President stands up to wind up this debate, I would like him to give us some idea of the form this consultation will take. We also want to know how it will be organised and shaped so that we can start organising ourselves appropriately. In the meantime, it is just consultations that are provided. The style, fashion and shape these consultations will take are not indicated. I, therefore, hope that as His Honour the Vice-President comes to wind up this debate, he will indicate something on this matter.

Madam Speaker, with those two points, the people’s voice and how it will be incorporated, I thank you.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!   

Mr Hamududu (Bweengwa): Madam Speaker, it is a great privilege for me to stand after one of the most outstanding Parliamentarians post-1990, the hon. Member for Mapatizya (Mr Sejani), has spoken. I am one of his students.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Hamududu: Madam Speaker, as I stand to contribute to the debate on the amendment Bill, I would like to say that I am hesitant to support the amendment because it has not captured the concerns of the people on the Constitution-making process. The people were expectant and anxious to know a very definitive road map to the Constitution-making process. In this amendment, the Executive has only specified the dissolution of NCC. We do not know what will happen next. 

Madam Speaker, the Zambian people demand a very clear road map. They want to know what will happen and when. It should not be a secret to the people when the Constitution will be ready because they are funding this process. The Government has been elusive with regard to the demand from the people, but we should have taken advantage of this amendment to specify a road map with a clear milestone on what will happen and when. That has not happened, and yet Zambians are not very sure on when this constitution will be ready. Therefore, I am hesitant to support this amendment because it does not capture the concerns of the people of my constituency.

With these few remarks, I thank you.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Ngoma (Sinda): Madam Speaker, a few days ago, in the United States of America (USA), there was a very important debate on Health Reforms and the President of America, quoting Abraham Lincoln, said, “He was not bound to win, but was bound to the truth”. 

Madam Speaker, the issue of constitution making is very important. However, we, the politicians, look at this process, mostly, from a political angle.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Ngoma: Madam Speaker, first of all, I would like to state that I fully support the amendment.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Ngoma: Madam Speaker, much as we want the Constitution to be amended the soonest, it is wrong to rush the Constitution-making process for the sake of the 2011 Elections because we might end up regretting. There are many things in the Constitution which need to be looked at and not just the 50 per cent plus one majority and other issues related to the elections, but a lot of other issues which have to do with the well-being of the Zambian people.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Ngoma: Madam Speaker, in the same vein, I am mindful of the fact that when the Constitution comes before the Floor of this House, it requires a two-thirds majority to be passed. In this House, the Ruling Party does not have the two thirds majority and neither does the Opposition. Therefore, there is a need for thorough discussion before the Constitution is brought to this House and I want to believe that there will be a give-and-take situation for the benefit of the Zambian people. 

I support this amendment, but I would like to say that the Constitution-making process should not be tied to the 2011 Elections. It is important that we bear that in mind. 

I would like to say what one great President of Zambia said when he was asked what the greatest mistakes he had ever made on one of the television stations and the answer was that he boycotted the elections in 1996 and, today, a particular party has almost gone into oblivion because of this boycott. For the development of this country, it is important that all parties be involved in the discussion of this issue. 

With those few concerns, I am waiting eagerly for all parties to spend time, here, to discuss the issue, bearing in mind that there is no single grouping that can have the two-thirds majority in this House.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Kambwili (Roan): Madam Speaker, I thank you for according me this opportunity to say a few words on this amendment.

Madam Speaker, I wish to state that when there is a boycott of anything, the cardinal object is for people to realise and analyse why that is so. This Bill brings an opportunity for this Government to show the people of Zambia that, indeed, they are a listening Government. You have another opportunity and do not lose it the way you lost the opportunity to have every Zambian participate in the Constitution-making process.

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order!

Hon. Member, speak through the Chair.

Mr Kambwili: You have an opportunity, through the Chair, to make sure that the consultations of the people you intend to bring are not at the mercy of the people in NCC.

Mr V. Mwale: Just come to NCC.

Mr Kambwili: If you can only accept that the submissions that the people will make will be included and will not be at the mercy of the people who rejected the major issues that the Zambian people submitted to the Mung’omba Draft Constitution, you will have an opportunity to redeem yourselves. You should not, again, reject the submissions of the people, like I have read in the amendment where you are saying, “It will be up to NCC to decide which of the submissions made by the general public to be included and not …”. That should not be the case.

Interruptions

Mr Kambwili: It should depend on how many people are going to submit on a particular issue.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Interruptions

Mr Kambwili: That way, you have another opportunity to make the Zambian people understand that you mean well. It is extremely difficult to believe and entrust the inclusion of people’s submissions in the Constitution to the same people who rejected the issues that the Zambians raised.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! 

The Chair would like to guide. 

Mr Kambwili still standing.

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! 

Hon. Kambwili, you may take your seat. You may refer to the Act, but do not mislead the people out there that the Bill is dealing with how those amendments will be dealt with. The issue is on the principal Act. You should refer to the amendment and if you want to refer to the Act, you should be specific and not raise issues that are not in the Bill. There is nothing to suggest how those proposals from the public will be dealt with in the Bill.

Mr Kambwili: It is there.

Madam Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

You have not read, and yet you want to argue.

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Chairperson: Hon. Member, can you continue, bearing in mind that guidance.

Mr Kambwili: Hon. Sejani just quoted a section of this Act.

Madam Deputy Chairperson: Order! 

You may take your seat, hon. Member. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Chishya (Pambashe): Madam Speaker, I stand here to support the amendments which have been proposed.

Hon. Government Members: Hears, hear!

Dr Chishya: Madam Speaker, we talk about democracy in Zambia and democracy means participation in making a choice.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Chishya: Boycotting participation is really and truly undemocratic.

Mr Lubinda: Is that in the Bill?

Dr Chishya: Madam Speaker, my main concern has to do with the amendment which deals with the consultation of the people of Zambia. 

Mr Kambwili: Tabafwaya ifishinka.

Dr Chishya: In fact, the period which has been proposed is not even enough. I support the previous debater who said that we should not tie the Constitution-making process to the 2011 Elections. 

Mr Kambwili: Mulefwaya mulyefye ulupiya.

Dr Chishya: In the report of CRC, only less than 800 people participated and out of those, maybe, only five or six raised what are being referred to as contentious issues. What about the rest of Zambia? If the process is consultative, it means consulting the remaining 12 million people of the Republic of Zambia and this will clearly give the picture of what the people of Zambia want and not what those who are talking want.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Chishya: Madam Speaker, I support the amendment and it must go without any objection.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Major Chizhyuka (Namwala): Madam Speaker, I stand to support the amendment and mainly to show concern that the thirty days may be insufficient for the consultative process. It takes me thirty-one days to go round my constituency, which is Namwala, and do a good job. I know the exact number of days because that is how I get my landslide victory.

Laughter 

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

Interruptions

Mr Shakafuswa: How many landslide victories have you had?

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order!

Major Chizhyuka: From the vibrations that I am getting …

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! 

You are not here to cause vibrations. Can you debate, please?

Laughter 

Major Chizhyuka: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. The contest at that time was not one of popularity, but of principles.

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Major Chizhyuka: Aha, principles. Thus, you will understand why I am saying thirty-one days will not be sufficient because a consultative process which requires forward and backward linkages might not completely be exhuasted in that period of time. I also want you to understand that a process associated with the popular view can be manipulated at times. I will give you an example. 

Hon. Government Member: Yes.

Major Chizhyuka: There is a very popular women’s organisation in this country, but for the sake of this debate, today, I will not mention it. It went into Namwala during the CRC process with a lot of money, obviously, from overseas, to push for a certain view. They got our people to express their views on their behalf because they did not have the credibility to say it.

Hon. Government Member: Hear, hear!

Major Chizhyuka: Madam Speaker, a certain headman was asked to foster that view. This is in the Bill because we are talking about sending the Bill to the people.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Lubinda: The disciples.

Laughter 

Major Chizhyuka: When I went to see that headman, I gave him a copy of The Post Newspaper where his name was written. I asked him in English whether he had seen his name in the paper. Then he answered in Ila, “Anu waamba achani?” I asked him whether it was him who had said what was in the paper and he answered, “What did you say?” This headman had no idea about what he was purported to have said, and yet the whole country read that the headman and other influential people in Namwala were for this view. Therefore, be careful with the consultative process in as far as the popular view is concerned. People will go out to the countryside with foreign money …

Hon. Government Members: Yes.

Major Chizhyuka: … because they have a foreign agenda to try and give people an idea and, later on, it will come out as though it is the popular view. On that one, we have to be very careful. 

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

Major Chizhyuka: Madam Speaker, having said that, as you can see that this Bill is not very controversial, I just want to state that when I was a young man, there was a book in Tonga called Zyaano zya ku India. I want to tag on to what my colleague, the hon. Member for Sinda …

Hon. Opposition Member: Interpret.

Major Chizhyuka: This means stories from India and it is in Tonga, not Ila. In this story, which is so pertinent to this matter we are discussing today, there were two geese and a tortoise who was the king in that area. When the land where they used to live in was getting dry, the geese went to the king, who was the tortoise, and told him that the land was getting dry …

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

Major Chizhyuka: … and there would be no water …

Mr Kambwili: On a point of order, Madam Speaker!

Major Chizhyuka: … and, in the absence of water, they would not be able to live in that area. The two geese told the tortoise who was the king repeatedly that it was necessary for them to move out of that area, but because the tortoise was the king, he decided that they should not move. However, because the geese could fly to distant lands and were able to see that there was a drought, they left the king in this small lake which was drying. When the king realised …

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! Can the hon. Member shorten this story and give us the gist of the matter?

Laughter

Interruptions

Major Chizhyuka: Madam Speaker, I was looking at the time. When it was getting dry and there was death all around as a result of the drought, the geese came back and asked the king if he wanted to go with them. The king agreed …

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! You are story telling, hon. Member. Make your point out of your long story so that you are not curtailed.

Major Chizhyuka: Madam Speaker, I am now ending this story about the king and the geese. So, the geese picked the king up and, as they were going, …

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! Can the hon. Member make a point or stop telling the story?

Major Chizhyuka: Madam, I just want to support the remarks of the hon. Member for Sinda by stating that it is important not to target certain colleagues in a constitution-making process. If everyone else thinks that a given way is the best to go about making a constitution, but you remain behind and decide not to participate, you could easily turn out to be like the tortoise who was, finally, picked up when the geese came back … 

Laughter

Major Chizhyuka: …  and his subjects started laughing at him while he was in the air and the tortoise got annoyed …

Madam Deputy Speaker: That story is over, hon. Member.
 
Laughter 

Madam Deputy Speaker: Can we move on?

Laughter 

Mr Shakafuswa (Katuba): Madam Speaker, from the outset, let me say that I support the amendments to this Act. However, in so doing, I also want to take into consideration other sentiments that have been expressed in this House and by people out there.

Madam Speaker, these amendments are going to give an opportunity to people out there to participate in the making of a new constitution. Yesterday, we were told about a social contract and the Speaker said that, in our case, a social contract is signed at the time the people elect us. According to Adam Smith, the people who are governed decide how they want to be governed by the rulers in a social contract. A modern social contract is the Constitution. A constitution is not meant to benefit the rulers. Actually, a constitution is supposed to be owned by the people and should spell out how the people want to be ruled. Therefore, rulers should rise to the challenge and rule the people according to their will. Hence, when we talk about our Constitution, it should not just be in the interest of leaders or politicians, but a social contract with all Zambians. 

Sometimes, we say things in here which do not make sense. CRC went around the country from 2001 to 2005 and some, in here, were not hon. Members of Parliament then. Most of the people who have talked about this review in this House have expressed opinions that are very different from those of the people on the ground. 

To say the people out there are illiterate and did not know what they were talking about, is to insult the people of Zambia and we should not do that. As leaders who are literate, we had an obligation to teach the people the implications of changing the Constitution. A leader worth any salt cannot come here and say his or her people did not know what they were talking about. Why then did we make CRC if we knew that it was not going to reach out and get submissions from 9 million Zambians?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Lubinda: Balwite.

Mr Shakafuswa: When we made the law to allow CRC to collect submissions from around the country, we knew only a few people were going to make these submissions. As it has been stated, the process had some difficulties and only a few people were able to make submissions to CRC. If that is the case, why did we go ahead and make the CRC submissions the basis upon which to make a new constitution? 

A constitution should be a matter of give-and-take. We are all aware that there is going to be a thirty-day period in which people are to air their views on the recommendations of NCC. As the hon. Member of Parliament for Katuba, I feel that the thirty-day period starts now. I should go to my people and sensitise them about this period in which their sentiments or views are going to be heard. If there are some complications which we feel our people might not understand, this is the time we should start explaining these complications to them. 

Madam Speaker, it has been said that we should not use political standings or connotations in the Constitution-making process. However, this is a political matter because it is about a contract between the people and those who rule them. Therefore, the common denominator is politics. On the other hand, we should not use shortcuts to gain or retain power. We should go out there and explain what we are doing for the people so that they appreciate what we are doing. This way, the people will think we are the best among the political players around. People have a basis upon which they judge us despite their illiteracy. 

Madam, I would like to point out that the there are some people who think they are very educated. We can have educated illiterates and these are people who can be very educated academically, but know nothing about serving the people on the ground. On the other hand, there are people who are not educated, but can actually be degree holders. I am a headman in my village and my uncle was able to tell me how my ancestors moved from Kola to Lamba land and how some of my relatives left Lamba land and moved on to Livingstone. If my uncle was to go to a university and write history of Bene Mukuni, he would get a doctorate. This is a man who has never been to school, but just the way he narrates his history can tell you that this is a person who has a lot of knowledge. 

The bottom line is that we should not classify our people as illiterates. I have been to school and, therefore, the people around me have also benefited from my education because I am able to explain to them what I have learnt. If I am selfish and just want to be the only one in my area to be seen to be educated, I am not giving a service to the people of Zambia. Whether we are educated or not, we have got an obligation, as leaders, to explain to the people the implications of changing the Constitution. This means telling them how they are going to be ruled so that they also say how they would want to be governed.

 Madam Speaker, I was very surprised when I went for a funeral in my constituency. At that funeral, people were discussing the implications of what we are discussing at NCC. They were doing this with a lot of knowledge and even better than the way some of us in here discuss. 

Now is the time for us to go and discuss changing the Constitution with our people. We all know that some hon. Members boycotted attending NCC, for some reasons, but they are also Zambians and, this time, they have to be heard. Those who boycotted should take this wholesome opportunity to be part of this process because, as Zambians, we want to hear their views. If their views were not included in the adoptions of the NCC report, this is the time for them to air them because this process is not owned by anyone.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Shakafuswa: The process is only driven by the Ministry of Justice and the Attorney-General on behalf of the Government, but as servants of the people of Zambia and not the Movement for Multi-Party Democracy (MMD). Therefore, hon. Members on this side should not consider the Constitution-making process as owned by the MMD. Those on the other side should also know that no political party owns this process. We are only in here as representatives of the people of Zambia.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Shakafuswa: As representatives of the people of Zambia, we cannot say that we own or know what the people out there want. We can only say we strive to give the people of Zambia what they want. Therefore, as we go out from here, let us not create animosity against one another and start saying I did this and that for you. If that is the mode of Government or administration that they want, let them be given a chance. 

   Madam Speaker, I know that some deliberations are open to manipulation and we are aware of that. What we call as a popular view even at NCC could be a view which is solicited by canvassing and doing certain things to make people think in a particular way.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

    Mr Shakafuswa: Someone has said that people in the villages were bought using money from donors. Those are cheap ways of getting cheap opinions. It is better you listen to what the people say and move in accordance with what they want. That is what will help Zambia go forward.     

   Madam Speaker, Zambia, being an African country, has people who still want to maintain the African tradition. They forget that Zambia has grown and do not realise that there are many Zambians out there who are educated and knowledgeable in these things. They know what we are doing. There are people out there who are able to give us answers to the questions that are coming up. Thus, we must let the people participate. 

   Madam Speaker, we wanted this process to be detached from 2011, but the people out there have a feeling that the electoral process might be manipulated as has been the case previously. They thought that with a good Constitution, the election results would not be challenged and there would be no animosity. We need to get their views because they have a point. In other words, we can tell them that, looking at the deliberations, we may not just have time, but we have to detach the process from the 2011 elections so that we can make good laws. If we do not do what the people want, we will be doing a disservice to our people who want change. Furthermore, if we divorced the process from the 2011 elections, we can still bring a Bill, here, and change the Electoral Act on which people have got contentions.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Shakafuswa: We can come here and change the Electoral Act so that when we go into the campaigns, it will be like going into an examination where one is not required to write a leaked paper. If you go into an examination room with a leaked paper, then you will not be a good student because a good student is one who …

The Deputy Speaker: Order!

Is the hon. Member debating the Bill? I am now lost. Can you debate the Bill?

Mr Shakafuswa: Madam Speaker, if you read the report, there is a recommendation from the stakeholders that if we cannot have the Constitution or report by 2011, we should bring a Bill to the House which will look at the Electoral Act. Therefore, I am within the confines of the debate. Is it not so?

Laughter

Mr Shakafuswa: With that lecture, I thank you, Madam.

The Vice-President and Minister of Justice: Madam Speaker, this Bill is not supposed to be controversial because it is straightforward. However, I want to clarify some issues. We have conceded, in the report, that we shall make amendments to provide for a forty-day consultation period. We have already circulated this amendment. I would like to tell those who have not seen the amendment that it is there. 

   Thus, when we talk about people, we should not forget that this process started with CRC where we consulted close to 800 people. I am not too sure of the exact number. When we say people, we refer to those who made submissions to CRC as the people of Zambia. 

   Madam Speaker, the only representatives of the people by law, is us, here, the hon. Members of Parliament, because we were elected by the people of Zambia. We are the only genuine representatives of the people and we make laws for the 12 million people. We have been given that authority to make laws for 12 million people. However, we also made a law to include some other people in NCC. As representatives of the people, we are in NCC and some other representatives have also come into the picture. Therefore, that House of about 500 people is broad enough to represent the people of Zambia.

   Through NCC, we will still go to the people to get their views but, at the end of the day, there will be a safety valve so that whatever will come out from NCC will be brought back here to the genuine representatives of the people. We shall give that process legitimacy. That is how we have been governing this country.

   Madam Speaker, I am also getting concerned to hear that some people, whose leaders have been saying that this process has been going on for too long, now want us to prolong the process. As a Government, we do not want to do so and that is why we have indicated a specific timeframe within which this process should come to an end, specifically between now and 31st August, 2010.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President and Minister of Justice: That is the vision of this Government. We do not want to prolong the process. Of course, we should all work together at NCC and ensure that the few outstanding committee reports are completed quickly so that we conclude this process. We need to complete the processes that are necessary and, at the end of the day, bring the Constitution to the genuine representatives of the people. 

   Madam Speaker, by the way, do we mean the majority or minority when we talk about the people and the 50 per cent plus one majority submission and other issues? We always talk about the majority. At NCC, the majority rejected the 50 per cent plus one majority submission. 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President and Minister of Justice: Those are the people we meant, but, at the end of the day, as I said, the majority of the people are represented, here, by elected representatives. Otherwise, I would like to thank the hon. Members for the overwhelming support of this Bill.

I thank you.

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

Committee to a Committee of the Whole House

Committee on Wednesday, 24th March, 2010

________________

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the 
Chair]

THE ZAMBIA DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Amendment) BILL, 2010

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

CLAUSE 3 – (Repeal and Replacement of Part X)

Mr Mutati: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 3, on page 6,

(a)    after line 15,

 by the insertion of the following new paragraph:

    (c)    fails without reasonable explanation to implement the
        investment described in the licence, permit or
        Certificate of registration within the period stipulated 
        or any extension in respect of an initial period
        stipulated; and

(b)    in lines 16 and 19, 

by the re-numbering of paragraph (c) and (d) as paragraph (d) and (e), respectively.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 4 and 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.

THE ENGINEERING INSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA BILL, 2010

Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62 and 63 ordered to stand part of the Bill. 

First, Second and Third Schedules ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.

THE INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHONOLOGIES (Amendment) BILL, 2010

Clauses 1, 2, 3 and 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. 

Title 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 with amendments:

The Zambia Development Agency (Amendment) Bill, 2010

Report Stage on Wednesday, 24th March, 2010.

The following Bills were reported to the House as having passed through Committee without amendment:

The Engineering Institution of Zambia Bill, 2010

The Information and Communication Technologies (Amendment) Bill, 2010

Third Readings on 24th March, 2010. 

_________

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The Vice-President and Minister of Justice (Mr Kunda, SC.): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

_________

The House adjourned at 1742 hours until the 1430 hours on Wednesday, 24th March, 2010.

WRITTEN REPLY TO A LAPSED QUESTION

CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSES AT SOUTHVIEW RESIDENTIAL ESTATE IN LILAYI AREA

415. Mr D. Mwila (Chipili) asked the Minister of Local Government and Housing:

(a)    how much money would be spent on the construction of houses at the Southview Residential Estate in Lilayi area by the Oxford Marketing Company:

(b)    how many houses would be constructed;

(c)    when the project would be completed; and

(d)    what the source of funding was.

The Minister of Local Government and Housing (Dr Kazonga): Mr Speaker, the Government investigations and inspection of the development of the area called Southview Residential Estate in Lilayi area has revealed that no company called Oxford Marketing Company is constructing houses. Planning permission is always sought from the Lusaka City Council before such development is undertaken. Both the Lusaka City Council and Lusaka Province Planning Authority have no record of application for permission to develop the area by the said company.

Mr Speaker, since there is no record of planning permission, the question to indicate the number of houses to be built in that area is void.

Sir, as indicated above, there is no information about the programme and as such, the question of completing this project does not arise. Therefore, I wish to request the hon. Member to provide more information such as the plot number of where this project is to be carried out so that the ministry can further investigate this matter.

I thank you, Sir.