DAILY PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES FOR THE FIRST SESSION OF THE TENTH ASSEMBLY

Thursday, 16th August, 2007

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

______

Mr Speaker: There is no quorum. Where are the Whips?

Ms Chitika stood up.

Mr Speaker: I see one Whip there.

Hon. Members: There is a traffic jam!

Mr Speaker: I hear there is a traffic jam. In that case, I suspended business until the quorum is formed, but we shall all be here.

Business was suspended from 1434 hours until 1436 hours.

Mr Speaker: Business resumes.

_____

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

MONEY RELEASED TO GWEMBE DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION FOR INDEPENDENCE CELEBRATIONS
838. Mr Ntundu (Gwembe) asked the Vice-President:

(a) how much money had been released to the Gwembe District Administration for the Independence Day celebrations from 2002 to-date, year by year; and

(b) how the funds had been utilised and whether receipts were obtained from the suppliers.

The Deputy Minister in the Vice-President’s Office (Ms Lundwe): Mr Speaker, K13,000,000 was released to the Gwembe District Administration for Independence Day celebrations in 2004, when the province was funded a total of K150,000,000 for the Independence Day celebrations as a whole. There was no money released to the district for the other years.

I wish to inform the House that the funds were utilised to buy attires for selected Government officers who participated in the marching and food and refreshments for the people who participated in the independence celebrations. Indeed, receipts were obtained from the suppliers of the various goods and services and the imprest was retired accordingly.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the Vice-President whether he has made a follow up to the money that was released in 2004 for the Independence Day celebrations. Did he make an effort to go and find out if this money was really used? There is a strong suspicion that this money was not used.

The Vice-President (Mr R. Banda): Mr Speaker, the information that our office has is that the money was used. In view of your question and statement, I will certainly look into this matter and report back.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Habeenzu (Chikankata): Mr Speaker, of the K13 million that was released, I want to find out how much imprest was retired.

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, no imprest was retired.

I thank you, Sir.

Laughter

NUMBER OF NURSES REGISTERED WITH THE GENERAL NURSING COUNCIL OF ZAMBIA

839. Mr Ntundu asked the Minister of Health:

(a) how many nurses were currently registered with the General Nursing Council of Zambia; and

(b) how many of the nurses at (a) above were employed in the following sectors:

(i) Government; and

(ii) Private.

The Deputy Minister of Health (Dr Puma): Mr Speaker, currently there are 14,752 nurses registered with the General Nursing Council of Zambia.

At present, there are 9,300 nurses employed by the Government and we do not have the information on the number of nurses employed by the Private Sector.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I am very disappointed with the answer that has been given by the Hon. Minister. What measures has the Government put in place to stop nurses from flocking outside the country after the Government has spent a lot of money in training them? What measures have you put in place as a ministry?

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, once the nurses are registered with the General Nursing Council of Zambia, they either seek employment in the Government or the Private Sector. Indeed, if they find an opportunity to go outside the country, they are free to do so. As a Government, we are trying to improve the working environment and also the conditions so that we retain a number of nurses that we train in our institutions.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Imenda (Lukulu West): Mr Speaker, has the Government abandoned the process of bonding since we have a situation whereby Government employees, especially nurses, are moving from the Government to the Private Sector and from this country to other countries?

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, bonding still exists and so mostly, the nurses who are going out of the country are those who have worked for more than two years. In some places like the North-Western Province, we have our partners who are supporting all the nurses who are in these schools and after graduating, they are bonded to these institutions for a minimum of, at least, two years before they move out of the province.

I thank you, Sir.

Mrs Musokotwane (Katombola): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister whether the nurses who have just graduated in Livingstone and are registering with the Nursing Council of Zambia at the moment will be employed immediately or they have to wait.

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, the employment of health professionals has already started, following the Treasury authority that has been granted and it will depend on the number that we are going to recruit, which is 5,263. So, if they apply early, most likely, they will all be taken on.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kambwili (Roan): Mr Speaker, it is common knowledge that we have a problem of shortage of nurses in this country. Can the hon. Minister assure this House that the 1,200 who are going to be employed will fill the vacancies that we have across the country?

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, actually, the Treasury authority we have is to employ 5,263 health professionals. As to whether it will satisfy all the problems we have in the country, I would say that as a Ministry, having acknowledged the problem of shortage of nurses, we have embarked on a programme to increase the intake in a number of nursing schools that are already running such as Solwezi and others.

In addition, we have also embarked on opening new nursing schools like Roan, Nchanga, Kaleni and others.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chimbaka (Bahati): Mr Speaker, since there is an increasing need for nurses in all our health institutions as a result of the increase in the number of institutions, is the Government planning to increase the number of intakes for all nursing training schools in this country?

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, in my previous response, I have just indicated that we have actually started increasing the intakes in these institutions. I will give an example of Solwezi General Hospital where we had twenty nurses per intake, but now we have forty six. In addition, I have talked about opening new schools and this is in an effort to increase the number of nurses in the country.

I thank you, Sir.

Mrs Sinyangwe (Matero): Mr Speaker, it is common knowledge that there are a lot of Zambian nurses working in neighbouring countries and overseas. What is the Government doing to bring back the nurses we trained at a high cost?

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, at the moment, the Ministry has no immediate plans to compel all the nurses working abroad to come back. What we are trying to improve the conditions locally to ensure that those we are training are retained. Even those who are abroad, once the conditions improve, we are hopeful that they will be attracted to come back.

I thank you, Sir.

PROVISION OF QUALIFIED ACCOUNTANTS TO DISTRICT COMMISSIONERS OFFICES

840. Mr Chisala (Chilubi) asked the Vice-President when the Government would provide qualified accountants to support the offices of District Commissioners in all districts in the country.

Ms Lundwe: Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the Government is taking necessary measures to address this challenge in line with the staff establishment of these offices.

Mr Speaker, the House may recall that when the offices of the District Administrator (DA) by then and now District Commissioner (DC) were established, the Government in line with the establishment, employed seventy-two accountants to manage the accounting functions for the various offices in all districts.

However, the accountants that had at the time reported felt that they were being under utilised due to:

(a) insufficient funding, as the District Administrator’s offices around the country were only receiving a monthly funding of between K500,000 and K1,000,000 for operations; and

(b) the budgeting process and financial reporting for these offices fell under the provincial administration which had an existing structure of accounting and planning staff to cater for all departments under their head of expenditure.

Further, due to the uncertainty that surrounded the office of the District Commissioner then and the inadequacy in terms of job content, some accounting officers resigned and those who remained were deployed elsewhere.

Mr Speaker, presently, the Ministry of Finance and National Planning and the Public Service Management Division are currently conducting a staff audit which is expected to be completed before the end of the year in order to establish the exact number of accounting and audit staff requirements in all ministries, provinces and other spending agencies that include the offices of the District Commissioners whose provisions have improved substantially, with the view of recommending to the Public Service Commission through the Public Service Management Division (PSMD) for recruitment of staff to resolve the issue.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chisala: Mr Speaker, there have been serious reports of financial mismanagement from the office in question, what corrective and urgent measures has His Honour the Vice- President in mind?

The Vice-President: Mr Speaker, my colleague who has just given a reply has indicated that the seventy-two accountants who were sent to all the districts turned out to be redundant because they had higher qualifications than what was required. However, it was also pointed out that the provincial accountants and other accountants within the province are able to take care of the functions of accounting in the districts for the time being.

I thank you, Sir.

TARRING OF THE PEDICLE ROAD

841. Mr Chongo (Mwense) (on behalf of Mr D. Mwila (Chipili) asked the Minister of Works and Supply when the Government would tar the Pedicle Road.

The Deputy Minister of Works and Supply (Mr Tetamashimba): Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the Government has serious intentions of upgrading the Pedicle Road to bituminous standard. In 2005, a feasibility study was carried out for the same road.

Mr Speaker, the estimated cost of constructing the road was then US$15 million. Currently, the Government can only find donors or source funds after the feasibility study and a detailed engineering design of tarring the road has been drawn.

Mr Speaker, the hon. Member will be pleased to know that the Government is currently constructing a 320-metre bridge across the Luapula River at Chembe at a cost of K46 billion in anticipation of future plans of tarring the Pedicle Road. The Government intends to complete this mammoth task before embarking on the Pedicle Road.

I thank you, Sir.{mospagebreak}

Mr Chongo: Mr Speaker, is the hon. Minister aware that the economic benefit of the Chembe Bridge will not be fully realised if this road is not tarred because we have a lot of copper that is being transported from the Northern part of this country as well as Congo and this has been affected by the long route of Tuta? When is the hon. Minister considering tarring the road so that the economic benefit of this bridge he is talking about can be fully realised.

Mr Tetamashimba: Mr Speaker, I am very happy for the supplementary question coming from the hon. Member of Parliament. I say so because sometimes leaders from the same province do not speak the language that the hon. Member of Parliament is using in this House.

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Mr Tetamashimba: I am saying so because the original questioner and many other Members of Parliament from Luapula, including my own hon. Minister, have been telling us that they do not want the Chembe Bridge and Pedicle Road.

Hon. Opposition Members from Luapula: Aah!

Interruptions

Mr Tetamashimba: Yes, but I am happy from what he is saying that it is the priority. I want to inform you hon. Members of Parliament that after the Chembe Bridge, we intend to tar the Pedicle Road for you people to move even in the night.

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Machungwa (Luapula): Mr Speaker, the hon. Deputy Minister, in his answer, is talking about gravelling the Pedicle Road this year and, maybe next year or until some other time, this road will be tarred. Is the hon. Minister not aware that the President, the Head of State of this Republic, has spoken on various occasions that this road was about to be tarred? For instance, he said it in 2003 in Mansa and Mwansabombwe and in this House in 2004 and 2005.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Dr Machungwa: Does the not realise that an assurance given by the Head of State is an important Government assurance which should be adhered to. Is he saying that this Government does not consider important pronouncements by the Head of State as to what he promises the people of Luapula or the people of Zambia?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Tetamashimba: Mr Speaker, I want to thank the hon. Member of Parliament for Luapula for the supplementary question he has raised. I want to say this that the legacy of President Mwanawasa over the bridge and the Pedicle Road is that before he lives State House, the road will be tarred.

This is the more reason we have been sitting with our Members of Parliament from each of the provinces to hear from them their priorities. This is why I was saying earlier, that even when we met with some Members of Parliament from the province who recognised that the Pedicle Road must be tarred and the bridge constructed- those who did not attend and if I was not challenged to name them I would have named them- came back to us and said the Pedicle Road and the bridge were not a priority, but I am happy that the Members of Parliament want this as a priority.

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

Mr Tetamashimba: So, I can tell you that we are going to gravel the road just like the hon. Minister has been when he was in Government, but before 2011 we are going to give the people of Luapula a tar-marked road.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mooya (Moomba): Mr Speaker, two years ago, the Government wanted to fund the road using Build Operate and Transfer (BOT), but the idea was dropped like a hot cake. Now, that the Government is pursuing PPP Policy, what happens to the BOT?

The Minister of Works and Supply (Mr Simbao): Mr Speaker, all the projects requiring BOT and any other way of partnering in PPP have not yet been worked on in that the framework of how to operate these projects has not been laid down yet. Once the PPP Policy has been agreed upon and legislated in this Parliament, this will be open to whoever wants to go into this kind of arrangement. That is the reason we do not have this road on BOT.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kasongo (Bangweulu): Mr Speaker, following the answers that have been given by the hon. Deputy Minister of Works and Supply regarding the same project, I would like to find out whether the ministry has been able to differentiate between national projects and provincial projects because the way the hon. Deputy Minister is saying the Pedicle Road is a provincial project. Can we know whether in the ministry they have been able to distinguish between a national project and a provincial project?

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, in the ministry, we do not consider whether a road is provincial or national. We look at trunk, main and district. All these are the roads that we think if made or rehabilitated will assist the country. There is, certainly, what we call main roads. These can be within a province, but we know that there are very economic. Then we have the trunk roads that run between provinces. That is how we discriminate amongst these roads.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Milupi (Luena): Mr Speaker, the whole of the pedicle section of this road is actually going through the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Now, in terms of funding the tarring of that road, has our Government made efforts to discuss with the DRC to see if there could be partial funding from that country as they are also going to benefit from the tarring of that section.

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, before these two projects were considered, both the Chembe Bridge and the Pedicle Road, actually there was a meeting of Presidents. Our President travelled to the DRC to meet His Excellency President Kabila so that these two projects are agreed upon or else it was not going to be possible for us to even construct the Chembe Bridge. The Congolese agreed to participate in the construction of both the Chembe Bridge and the Pedicle Road.

However, they also told us that at that time, they did not have the money. They said if we had the money we should continue with the two projects, but they gave the project the blessings and promised to play their part when they will have the money. They agreed to share the costs except that at the moment, they do not have ready money to finance them. That is how, we as Zambians, knowing how serious these projects are to our country, decided to start constructing the Chembe Bridge.

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Kalumba (Chienge): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister confirm the view that the Chembe Bridge and the Pedicle Road are really important national projects and not provincial projects.

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, I defined what we call a trunk road in our language. In our language, we do not yet have what we call national roads. We have a trunk road. This is a road that connects a province to another province and may be another country. At least, it runs through provinces, maybe leading to another country. That is what the Chembe/ Pedicle Road is.

Sir, all big bridges are considered important. We do not specify them as national or provincial. All very important crossings, like Kazungula, are not provincial bridges. Kazungula is a bridge that we consider very important to the country. We do not have infrastructure yet that we call provincial or national. We have our own language of defining these projects.

I thank you, Sir.

NUMBER OF RETIRED TEACHERS FROM 2002 TO 2006

842. Mr Chongo (on behalf of Mr D. Mwila) asked the hon. Minister of Education:

(a) how many teachers were retired from 2002 to 2006;

(b) how many retired teachers at (a) above had been paid their terminal benefits; and

(c) how many had not been paid their terminal benefits.

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, there were 6,437 teachers who were retired during the period under review, broken down as follows:

 Year  Number of Teachers retired

2002     428
2003     616
2004     1,763
2005     1,515
2006     2,115

Sir, on the question of teachers who have been paid their terminal benefits, according to the records at the ministry, a total of 6,437 retired teachers were paid their terminal benefits, amounting to K278.6 billion between 2002 and 31st December, 2006.

Mr Speaker, about 2000 retired teachers have not been paid their terminal benefits and fifty-one have not been paid their pension benefits.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chongo: Mr Speaker, given the scenario that there are a lot of retired teachers that have not been paid, is the ministry considering absorbing back these teachers so that at least they continue working on contract in order to alleviate the problems since they do not get any earnings at all.

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, at the moment, there are no plans to re-engage these teachers on a contractual basis because we have a lot of teachers who have been trained over the passed years and we want to employ. As for their inability to make ends meet, those that have not been paid their terminal benefits remain on the payroll until such a time that they are given their benefits. That aspect is actually catered for, but there are no plans to re-engage them on a contractual basis.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Musokotwane: Mr Speaker, when are the teachers going to be paid their terminal benefits?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, the backlog in terms of arrears that has accumulated for teachers that have not been paid their terminal benefits is quite huge. The ministry will be paying them in phases as resources are made available. I am not in a position to give the exact date or time when the teachers will be paid their benefits.

I thank you, Sir.

Interruptions

Mr Chisala: Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister state why it takes so long to pay teachers their terminal benefits.

Mr Kaingu: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order – oh! He has finished asking the question. The hon. Minister of Education, please.

Laughter

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, I stated in the other response that I gave that the backlog is quite huge. We are operating on a first in and first out basis. Those who have not been paid, will be paid when their turn comes because we have to pay those who retired earlier. Therefore, we cannot say that we are taking long to pay them because we have to pay them as funds are made available, and also, considering that they are quite many. We cannot pay all of them at the same time.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Sing’ombe (Dundumwenzi): Mr Speaker, I would like to know much money is being spent on paying teachers who have already retired?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, we have to come back to the House at a later date with an answer for that question because I cannot just give an answer off cuff since there are quite many teachers who have not been removed from the payroll. We have to come back with the exact figures.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mwiimbu (Monze): Mr Speaker, I would like the hon. Minister of Education to reconfirm her statement …

Mr Kaingu: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Laughter

Hon. Member: Kozo!

Mr Kaingu: Mr Speaker, as you are aware, kozo means peace, in my language. I do not want to antagonise anybody.

However, was the Chairman for the Committee on National Security and Foreign Affairs and some of his committee members in order to vote against the Anti-Terrorism Bill, yesterday?

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order! How many presiding officers are in this House? I shall give leeway in terms of that point of order and rule that that matter is, in fact, already being looked into. That point of order is not new to what is happening. There was a ruling sometime back, before your time, in this House, over this matter. This matter is being looked into and if what that point of order implies is true, then action will be taken.

May the hon. Member for Monze continue, please.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, I was posing a question to the hon. Minister of Education on the earlier statements …

Mr Kambwili interjected.

Mr Mwiimbu: … she had made to the effect that the teachers …

Mr Speaker: Order! Mr Kambwili, you are hereby ordered to take leave of this House and come back when you are sober. The Sergeant-at-Arms will escort Mr Kambwili out of this Chamber until he is sober enough to come back to this Chamber.

Mr Kambwili walked out of the Chamber escorted by the Sergeant-at-Arms.

Mr Speaker: May the hon. Member for Monze continue, please.

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, I was posing a question to the hon. Minister of Education pursuant to the statement she earlier made that teachers who have not been paid their terminal benefits have been put on the payroll and that her ministry has continued paying them. I would like her to confirm and inform the nation that the teachers whose benefits have not paid should go back to their respective schools and start getting salaries.

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, I talked about terminal benefits and not pension benefits. I am aware that there could be administrative lapses in certain places that could, perhaps, give a different picture, but I cannot confirm whether they are on the payroll or not.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka): Mr Speaker, through you, I would like the hon. Minister to inform this House that going by the figures she has given us of 2,000 teachers having not been paid their terminal benefits and fifty-one, their pension benefits, my simple calculation tells me that these people are married, therefore, they should be 4,102 and if each family has an average of six children, they should be in excess of 15,000. How does the ministry think these people are surviving?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, this Government and, indeed, my ministry are well aware of the difficulties that our former employees and their families go through once they are retired and are not paid their benefits. What I can say now is that we are making efforts to ensure that, at least, we manage to clear the backlog. However, as I stated, our biggest constraint is just the huge backlog that is there. We are making efforts to address the situation.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chimbaka: Mr Speaker, if it is a new policy by our Government to pay teachers for not rendering service, for how long does the ministry continue to pay teachers who cease to render service as a result of retiring statutory?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, I think that problem can only be sorted out once we have cleared the backlog that we have. That is the answer I can give for now.

I thank you, Sir.

Mrs Sinyangwe: Mr Speaker, I appreciate that the ministry is maintaining the teachers in good faith. However, with the new technological dispensation, do you not know which teachers are supposed to retire and when because you should be able to know for this year, you are retiring so many teachers and plan and budget for them? When are we going to do that?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, my ministry is up to date in terms of data and statistics on teachers and when they should retire or when they are due for retirement. We actually plan and budget for them. However, in the event that we do not have enough resources, much as we can plan, we cannot pay them because you cannot get water out of a rock.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mwansa (Chifunabuli): Mr Speaker, in view of the hon. Deputy Minister’s answers and taking into account that tax payers’ money is being paid to people who are not working and also the fact that we have a serious shortage of teaching staff in the country, why does the ministry, while people are waiting for their benefits, not allow them to continue teaching in the schools where they were teaching to alleviate the problems that are being faced by our schools?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, we do not have such a policy at the moment and it is impossible for us to do that.

I thank you, Sir.{mospagebreak}

CONDITIONS OF SERVICE FOR ZAMBIA FLYING DOCTORS

843. Mr Ntundu asked the Minister of Health:

(a) how many doctors were currently working for the Zambia Flying Doctor Service; and

(b) what the conditions of service for the doctors at (a) above were.

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, there are currently six doctors working for the Zambia Flying Doctor Service. The Zambia Flying Doctor Service is a statutory board whose conditions are determined by a Board of Directors. In terms of remunerations for the doctors, they are paid the following:

(i) Basic Salary K3,863,187.50;
(ii) Housing Allowance 50 per cent of basic salary, that is, K1,931,593.75;
(iii) On-call Allowance 25 pre cent of basic salary, that is, K965,796.88;
(iv) Retention Allowance 25 per cent of basic salary, that is K965,796.88;
(v) Telephone Allowance K100,000;
(vi) Electricity Allowance K150,000; and
(vii) Water Allowance K50,000.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, this Government is favouring flying doctors. The work which flying doctors do is …

Mr Speaker: Order! You are debating the question.

Continue, please.

Mr Ntundu: I would like to find out from the hon. Minister, Mr Speaker, why the Government is favouring the flying doctors while the doctors who are stationed at hospitals do more work.

The Minister of Health (Dr Chituwo): Mr Speaker, there is no favouritism with regard to the remunerations of our doctors in other institutions and the Zambia Flying Doctor Service. As has been stated, the conditions of service are set by the board. The Zambia Flying Doctor Service was established under an Act of Parliament and it is the board that decides the conditions of service which include salaries.
Mr Speaker, as a Government, we are committed to ensuring equity of access to health services. This is why we have put in place a Retention Scheme where doctors serving in the rural districts receive a payment package that is above those in urban health institutions in our country.
I thank you, Sir.
NUMBER OF WOMEN DYING OF PREGNANCY-RELATED COMPLICATIONS ON A DAILY AVERAGE AT THE UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL
844. Mr Ntundu to ask the Minister of Health:
(a)  how many women die from pregnancy-related complications on a daily average at the University Teaching Hospital (UTH); and
(b)  how many pregnant women were brought in dead on a daily average at the UTH.
Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, two to three women have died of pregnancy-related complications in a month in the last six months at UTH and it is extremely rare that pregnant women are brought in dead.
I thank you, Sir.
Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I wonder who is going to punish hon. Ministers when they do not give correct answers. I would like to disagree with the answer that has been given by the hon. Minister. Can he come out openly? What is he hiding?  He should tell us how many women die of pregnancy-related complications at UTH. The answer he has given is not correct.
Mr Speaker: The hon. Member for Gwembe should be very careful. There is an unwritten rule that Members of Parliament in the House should not be over argumentative. Just soberly put your question across, even if you disagree.
Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, I am disappointed with the manner in which my colleague …
Mr Mtonga: Just answer.
Dr Chituwo: I will answer, hon. Member of Parliament for Kanyama. When we give answers in this House, they are researched and we get information from the personnel that operate in these facilities. We have no desire nor is there any gain on our part, as a Government, to tell half-truths. What we have stated here is what we collected from the institution.
Mr Speaker, I wish he had put the question a little more, shall I say, intelligently? This Government, like the rest of Africa, is concerned about the high maternal mortality ratio. That is the truth and this mostly occurs in our rural settings, for various reasons. At the University Teaching Hospital …
Mr Ntundu: On a point of order, Sir.
Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.
Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I rise on a very serious point of order on the hon. Minister. Is he in order to inform this House that I am dull? I need your serious ruling, Sir.
Laughter 
Mr Speaker: Order! The hon. Member for Gwembe is feeling very upset by being told to ask questions intelligently. I believe that was the word used. This goes back to my very recent guidance to him that there is an unwritten rule in the House for hon. Members not to be over argumentative. As a matter of experience, an over-argumentative approach may also bring about a similar reaction. By the hon. Member for Gwembe implying that the hon. Minister had something to hide you, in fact, was calling him a liar without saying so and that is not allowed in this House.
The hon. Minister may have something important to tell the House for him to continue replying to that supplementary question. Normally, I would stop him, but since he was in the course of replying, perhaps to inform the whole nation, he may continue. 
Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, I was trying to inform the House that Zambia, like in any other country in Africa, particularly in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) region, is concerned with the high maternal mortality ratio. In this regard, we have identified the bottlenecks for this high ratio. 
We know that the major constraints arise from institutions, mainly outside the line of rail and that is in the rural areas where, starting from the community, there are delays in seeking help from our health institutions. There are instances where expecting mothers shun health institutions, for various reasons. There are cases where pregnant women are delayed in being referred to higher health facilities. Sometimes, even if they are referred to higher institutions, there are constraints such as non-availability of skilled personnel or shortage of blood. These are the issues that cause the high maternal mortality ratio. This is where we get the bulk of the figures that we report to this House and our co-operating partners on an annual basis. 
Most of these factors are much easier to deal with in the institutions that are along the line of rail than in the rural areas.
I thank you, Sir.
Mr Kanyanyamina (Kanchibiya): Mr Speaker, going by the hon. Minister of Health’s answer, I was almost shedding tears because without our dear women, we were all not going to be here. Is it normal for this Government to see an average of three women dying per month especially that we even have modern technology? When we say this is the worst performance of the health sector in the country, he always argues to the contrary. I need his serious answer.
Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, any loss of life, is a loss too many. There are instances, due to the referral system, that death is inevitable. If that is the way the hon. Member for Kanchibiya is going to judge the performance of the Ministry of Health, then that is his opinion. I cannot say much apart from that the overall concern is to improve accessibility and the quality of maternal health services and health care in general so that we can reduce the mortalities to acceptable levels.
I thank you, Sir.
Mr Muntanga (Kalomo): Mr Speaker, are we able to know the average maternal mortality ratio per day or month prior to the last six months that have been reported on?
Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, since we are talking about specifics here, that question begs that I go and research before I provide the answer.

I thank you, Sir.

Mrs Musokotwane: Mr Speaker, is it possible for the hon. Minister of Health to liaise with the hon. Member for Gwembe. As much as the question might not have been asked intelligently, it might have some truth in it. The hon. Member seemed to have some facts that were contrary to the hon. Minister’s answer. Is it possible for the two to liaise so that the hon. Minister is satisfied with his answer and the hon. Member for Gwembe also gives the facts to the hon. Minister?

Mr Speaker: There was no supplementary question raised therein.

CONSTRUCTION OF CHIPILI HIGH SCHOOL

845. Mr D. Mwila asked the Minister of Education:

(a) when the construction of Chipili High School in Chipili Parliamentary Constituency would be completed;

(b) what the estimated total cost of the project at (a) above on completion of the work were; and

(c) which contractor was engaged to undertake the construction of the project at (a) above.

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, the construction works at Chipili High School in Chipili Parliamentary Constituency involve the construction of a laboratory which is at roof level with windows and doorframes fitted.

The estimated cost of the science laboratory is about K151,117,278.00. The contractor that was engaged to undertake this project was Chibalala.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chongo: Mr Speaker, the question was when the school would be completed. Could the hon. Minister state when Chipili High School would be completed?

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, the construction that is going on at Chipili High School is that of a science laboratory not a school. I can only answer when that laboratory will be completed.

 However, there is no school that is being constructed at Chipili High School.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Lubinda (Kabwata): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Deputy Minister indicate to this House the procedures that the Government undergoes in making decisions on which schools or laboratories to be constructed.

Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, the procedures are many. The hon. Minister of Education has often stated on the Floor of this House that there are many factors that come into play when it comes to procedure for constructing schools. He talked about the new districts, initiatives for communities and many others that will give a detailed answer if given time.

However, laboratories are usually constructed in schools that were earmarked for upgrading and also schools where there was dire need for the teaching of Science and Mathematics subjects to be improved upon. This information usually comes from our provincial and district offices. Sometimes, when our co-operating partners come in, they also dictate which schools to be upgraded in certain places.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chimbaka: Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister confirm whether the construction of the laboratory at Chipili High School is on the priority list for this year’s Budget.
Ms Changwe: Mr Speaker, the question was, when the construction of Chipili High School would be completed and the estimated cost and the contractor engaged in this project.

Our response is that, it is the science laboratory that we are constructing and its cost has been given as the question was also given. What we are saying is that the process of completing this science laboratory is under way. We are determined to complete this project.

Mr Muntanga: When?

Ms Changwe: We cannot give a timeframe as to when we shall complete because there are many factors that can come into play. All we are saying is that we are going to complete the construction of this science laboratory.

I thank you, Sir.

WORK STOPPAGE AT MOPANI COPPER MINES

846. Mr D. Mwila asked the Minister of Mines and Minerals Development:

(a) what led to the work stoppage at the Mopani Copper Mines at Mufulira and Nkana Mines on 28th February, 2007; and

(b) how much money was lost during the work stoppage.

The Deputy Minister of Mines and Minerals Development (Mr M. B. Mwale): Mr Speaker, the Mopani employees’ dissatisfaction with the progress made on the negotiations for the 2007 Collective Agreement led to the work stoppage at Mufulira and Nkana Mines on 28th February, 2007. After being briefed by the Mine Workers Union of Zambia (MUZ) and the National Union of Miners and Allied Workers (NUMAW), the employees specifically rejected the salary increment of 16 per cent. The issue has since been resolved. The workers finally agreed to a salary increment of 20 per cent.

As regards the loss of income, there was no loss of money or production as a result of the work stoppage because the demonstration was peaceful and employees who took part in the work stoppage were mainly from the maintenance sections at the time when there was no major repair works to be done.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chongo: Mr Speaker, industrial unrest is an unwelcome move. Is the hon. Minister aware that this industrial unrest is promoted by the mining management owing to the fact that while they indicate that they have no money to give to their workers, they continue employing expatriates, many of whom do not have the required expertise which these employees can even be satisfied with. Given that, what is the ministry doing to ensure that the industrial unrest is curtailed?

The Minister of Mines and Minerals Development (Dr Mwansa): Mr Speaker, the response from my Deputy Minister is very clear. In this particular case, it was a misunderstanding between the two unions in the mining industry and the workforce. It had nothing to do with expatriate employees at all. In this regard, we are encouraging the mining industry to dialogue between the two unions and the employers. This dialogue should be continuous and not be restricted to wage negotiations. In addition, periodical meetings must be held so that dialogue is promoted even outside the salary increment negotiations, operations or service negotiations.

I thank you, Sir.{mospagebreak}

Major Chizhyuka (Namwala): Mr Speaker, following that answer from the hon. Minister of Mines and Minerals Development, there has been a lot of questions in this sitting of the House and the last session. Is it possible for the hon. Minister to lay on the Table of this House the development agreements entered into between the Government of the Republic of Zambia and the mine owners so that even as we dialogue to try and solve some of these pertinent problems between the workers and the mine owners, we are able to dialogue from a point of strength based on the knowledge of what is contained in the mining agreements, especially that we heard in the last session that the mine agreements were above the law of this country, that is the supreme law of the land.

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, consideration can be given in the future to the proposal to make development agreements available. I must admit though, that certainly, before April 1st this year, development agreements were superior to the law, particularly the Mines and Minerals Act. However, we moved an amendment this year in the House and that particular clause was removed from the law. From 1st April this year, development agreements are subordinated to the law.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Mukanga (Kantanshi): Mr Speaker, according to the hon. Minister, a 20 per cent increment in salaries was given to the miners. I would like to find out what other conditions changed that prompted the miners to go back to work at Mopani, Nkana and Mufulira because as far as am concerned, miners are the most lowly paid employees in this country.

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, I am not able to give any more information as to what was contained in the collective agreement signed between the Mine Workers Union of Zambia on one hand and the National Union of Miners and Allied Workers on the other with Mopani.  All I can say is that they agreed to a 20 per cent salary increment, that calmed down the situation and the workers went back to work.

If the hon. Member wants to know more about what I have said, he can consult the collective agreement which was signed between the unions and the mining companies in question.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Kambwili: Mr Speaker, we have seen in the recent past that every time mine workers go on strike the Republican President condemns the miners. Is it not interference on the part of the President in the running of the unions?

Hon. Government Member: Bwelelamofye uko wafuma iwe.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Order!

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, the President has never, at any one time supported mining companies. What he has done, however, is to appeal for dialogue between the mining companies and the unions. He has also cautioned workers against going on strike, but only as the last resort. I do not think that is interference, but caution and guidance.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I would like the hon. Minister to kindly tell this House whether or not these development agreements are classified documents. In the event that they are not, I would like him to tell us how many copies of all the development agreements this Government has signed with mining investors are contained in public libraries without any speck of doubt for people whose lives may be affected by the clauses that are contained therein.

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, the question that we are considering is one about what led to a work stoppage and how much was lost. It is not about development agreements.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

REHABILITATION OF THE CHISEKESI/GWEMBE ROAD

847. Mr Ntundu asked the Minister of Works and Supply:

(a) when the Chisekesi/Gwembe Road would be rehabilitated;

(b) when the road was last rehabilitated; and

(c) who constructed the road and when.

Mr Tetamashimba: Mr Speaker, the D375 – Off T001 Chisekesi/Gwembe Road which is sixty-two kilometres was rehabilitated under package ten of the Output and Performance-Based Road Contract (OPRC) last year. There is a maintenance contract on the same road every year until 2010.

As mentioned above, the Gwembe/Chisekesi Road was last rehabilitated last year.

The road was constructed some years ago, but in 2006, it was reconstructed by China GEO Corporation.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, considering the hon. Minister’s answer that there is maintenance on the Gwembe/Chipepo Road, I would like to find out from him when he last visited this road for him to come up with such an answer because as far as I am concerned, there is no rehabilitation on this road.

The Minister of Works and Supply (Mr Simbao): Mr Speaker, there could be some misunderstanding on the road being referred to. However, if this is the road that starts from Chisekesi and goes to Chipepo, I was on it this year and there was a camp by China GEO on this road. It is from there that I actually travelled to Sinazeze from Chipepo at some point. Unless there is some misunderstanding, but what we are saying here is that this is the road where we have China GEO which is the one from Chisekesi to Chipepo.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Kapeya (Mpika Central): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister of Works and Supply inform this House whether there are any guarantees given in any road and bridge rehabilitation or construction contract entered into between the Government of the Republic of Zambia and the foreign contractors in the event of a newly-constructed bridge collapsing like what happened in China this week.

Mr Speaker, every road that we work on has a defect liability period of one year. After that, the contractor is not held against the failure of that project. Whatever weakness is expected, he is given a year to witness that. However, during the construction period, it is the job of the consultant to ensure that the project is done to specification. Yes, there is, in the contract, a defect liability period of a year.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Mooya: Mr Speaker, a defect liability period of one year is not enough. Why is the ministry not considering increasing it to five years?

Mr Simbao: Mr Speaker, we belong to an international body and these are the rules for that body. The defect liability period is given a period of one year. If we break away from that body, then we can make our own rules.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

KONKOLA DEEP MINING PROJECT

848. Mr Chongo (on behalf of Mr D. Mwila) asked the Minister of Mines and Minerals Development:

(a) how much money Konkola Copper Mines Plc would spend to complete the Konkola Deep Mining Project;

(b) when the project would be completed; and

(c) how many jobs would be created at the completion of the project.

Mr M. B. Mwale: Mr Speaker, it is estimated that Konkola Copper Mines Plc (KCM) will spend a total of US$400 million to complete the Konkola Deep Mining Project. The Konkola Deep Mining Project is scheduled for completion in 2010 and is expected to generate about 1000 new jobs.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Chongo: Mr Speaker, what measures has the Government put in place to ensure that this project is completed quickly and not in 2010 so that employment can be created for our people?

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, we are satisfied with the progress on this project. So far, one shaft has been sunk up to a level of 675.7 metres. That particular shaft’s final depth is 944 metres. Therefore, 81 per cent of this shaft has been completed.

Sir, there is some slow progress on the second one and we must admit, only 29 per cent of the work has been completed. This type of work is piling and laying a foundation for the headgear as well as construction of a ring bed. Only 29 per cent of this has been completed, but we are very concerned with this particular work. We will be appealing to the company to speed up progress on this particular shaft.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, during the negotiations for the sale of the mines, it was stated that the mine’s life span was no more than twenty-five years. Given the fact that the extraction capacity has now more than doubled, can the hon. Minister state that the span, therefore, has been reduced to twelve and half years? If that be the case, could that justify an investment of US$400 million just for a short life span of twelve and a half years? If that is not the case, can the hon. Minister state what the Government is doing in view of the fact that the original projection of twenty-five years have now been shifted because now the span is much longer than that?

Dr Mwansa: Mr Speaker, we have never said that the life span of the mine has been reduced. We remain committed to the earlier indication of the life span.

I thank you, Sir.

AVERAGE NUMBER OF BIRTHS AT THE UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITAL

849. Mr Ntundu asked the Minister of Health:

(a) how many babies were born on a daily average at the University Teaching Hospital; and

(b) what the mortality rate on a daily average was.

Dr Puma: Mr Speaker, between two and forty-eight babies are born at the University Teaching Hospital each day. The University Teaching Hospital records an average of one neo-natal death daily commonly due to prematurity.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

_____

BILLS

SECOND READING

THE ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION (Amendment) BILL, 2007

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

Mr Speaker, let me express my gratitude to officers and Members, both inside and outside Parliament, who gave me invaluable counsel on the procedural issues on this Bill. Their guidance is highly appreciated.

Sir, let me now commend your Committee for a well-thought out report on the Anti-Corruption Commission (Amendment) Bill, No. 14 of 2007.

Sir, the Committee deserve salutation for an in-depth analysis of the submissions they received from the six witnesses namely:

(a) the Minister of Justice;

(b) the Judicial Service Commission;

(c) the Magistrates and Judges Association of Zambia;

(d) the Anti-Corruption Commission;

(e) transparency International; and

(f) myself

Mr Speaker, allow me to comment on the most salient submissions to your Committee. The only witness who opposed the amendment to the Anti-Corruption Commission Act was the Learned Minister of Justice, the Learned State Counsel, the very honourable George Kunda. In his submission, he submitted six arguments against the proposed amendment.

Firstly, he argued that he, as hon. Minister of Justice, was not consulted before hand. It is on record that during the debate on the motion to seek leave for me to present this Bill and the Judicial Code of Conduct (Amendment) Bill, I agreed on the Floor of this House to meet with the hon. Minister of Justice to harmonise any aspects of the Bills that he was not comfortable with. This only culminated in one short meeting in the foyer of Parliament where the hon. Minister assured me that he would arrange for me to meet with him and other concerned parties, including, if need be, the Chief Justice. My follow up was not an answered.

Mr Speaker, this not withstanding, what the hon. Minister did not state in his submission is that there is no law that compels an hon. Member of Parliament to consult the Minister of Justice before they propose a Private Member’s Bill. Consultation is a matter of courtesy and Parliamentary strategy and not an obligation. Nonetheless, out of the desire for harmony, I offered to listen to the learned State Counsel, but he made himself conveniently unavailable.

Sir, he claimed that I was vague on the category of officers to be affected by the amendment. Let it be known that in my submission to your Committee, which was accurately captured in their report before the hon. Minister made his submission, I made clarification on the category of public officers to be included and I proposed an amendment to that effect. I would like to refer the House to items (b), (c) and (d) on pages 5 and 6 of your Committee’s report.

The learned Minister of Justice argued that it would be too cumbersome for the Judiciary to handle and store declarations from a large number of officers, unless a separate building for storage of such records is constructed.

Mr Speaker, I am very uncomfortable with such an argument, particularly when it comes from a Minister of Justice in a Government that expulses zero-tolerance to corruption. The Bill is meant to curb corruption to stop the greedy from sucking the lifeline of this country, to stop people from acquiring wealth illegitimately. In short, the Bill is aimed at saving Zambia’s economy from collapse by plugging the loopholes through which one third of the Government’s annual revenue is being channeled to offshore accounts and building mansions for corrupt people.

Mr Speaker, I have no doubt that all hon. Members in this House are alive to the fact that fighting corruption is not an easy task, nor is it cheap. The challenge and cost of building a separate structure to enhance the fight against corruption is, therefore, a very invalid argument. If we do not invest in the prevention of corruption, you run the risk of spending more money in pursuing corruption cases. It is said that a stitch in time saves nine. Look at how much money has gone into the Task Force on Corruption.

What Hon. Kunda suggests is that we should save the costs of constructing one new building and instead continue to lose billions of money to corruption, and spend even more on chasing after the wind.

The hon. Minister asks how the officers outside Lusaka would lodge their declarations with the Chief Justice. The hon. Minister knows too well that the amendment does not compel swearing before the Chief Justice. It simply suggests lodging declarations with the Chief Justice. The learned State Counsel who once served as Attorney-General and is now Minister of Justice knows, like we all do, that this is not insurmountable. There are many regulations that require documents to be lodged in Lusaka, and arrangements are made for them to be received in the periphery and delivered to Lusaka. It would not be a problem for a government that has political will. If court cases involving the Zambian Government on one hand, and Zambian citizens on the other, can be handled by foreign jurisdictions, if Zambian passports can be issued outside the country, if America’s international interests such as the fight against terrorism can have such an influence worldwide, what stops us, in this Parliament, from putting in place systems that will allow the lodgment of declarations in every district of our country?

I have to say that the hon. Minister’s statement is a show of lack of his personal and political will to fight corruption.

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

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister argues that criminalisation of failure to file declarations and finding of false declarations or misleading declarations means that officers concerned will have to value their assets professionally at high cost. There is nowhere in my amendment where it is stated that there must be professional valuation of assets. The Bill is simply extending existing provisions in the Ministerial and Parliamentary Code of Conduct, under which the hon. Minister is compelled to make declarations. Three questions, therefore, arise from this argument.

Firstly, when the hon. Minister made his declarations, which I hope he did, did he pay for professional valuation of his assets?

Secondly, does it imply that absence of law demanding verification of declarations by the Anti-Corruption Commission means that the …

Mr Kunda: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker:   A point of order is raised.

Mr Kunda: Mr Speaker, is the mover of this particular Bill in order to ask whether I valued my assets, and is he in order to personalise the debate?

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: The hon. and learned Minister of Justice is not comfortable with the manner of debate by the hon. Member for Kabwata. I have been listening to his debate and the tone of his debate very carefully.

The position is that I am persuaded that he is trying to answer in advance the arguments as you referred to them, which are contained in the report of my Committee. Since the hon. and learned Minister of Justice is also here, and will be free to debate, he will be in a position, if he so wishes, to counter or clarify….

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Order!...the arguments that are being made by the hon. Member for Kabwata. With regard to the specifics mentioned, the hon. Member for Kabwata is already aware that a certain category of leaders below the Head of State, down to the Deputy Minister, are required to declare their assets and liabilities annually, and this should to be done truthfully.

I am urging the hon. Member for Kabwata to be cautious with the innuendo that may give doubt to the manner in which those who are declaring now, are doing so, either truthfully or untruthfully.

Hon. Member for Kabwata may continue, and the hon. Minister of Justice will be free to reply.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I am much obliged. The third question that begs an answer is whether by the submission by the hon. Minister to your Committee is whether any of the office bearers of offices that under the law, currently, are compelled to declare, ever make false declarations. If indeed, that is the interpretation of the Ministerial and Parliamentary Code of Conduct, then I would like to say …

Major Chizhyuka: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Major Chizhyuka: Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the chance to raise this point of order. I am extremely worried by the debate, bearing in mind the ruling that you have made, especially that the debate is following the same path that it had. Is the hon. Member debating and submitting, in order to suggest that it is incorrect for the hon. Minister of Justice to ask specific questions in searching for clarity with respect to his submission?

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Major Chizhyuka: Should this search for clarity be the basis for debate on such an important Bill? Should he concentrate the entire time on this query, and not justify the basis for bringing this Bill to this House? I beg to be guided, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Order! The House is debating a Bill before you. You are debating this Bill. There are many tactics used in debating a Bill, a motion or any business in this House. Whatever tactics you use in debating, the end result will be to maximise the benefits of such debate on your behalf, not on behalf of others.

While I guide in that manner, other hon. Members of Parliament are also free to punch holes in another hon. Member’s arguments for the sake of clarity. Therefore, while there is no offence in the hon. Learned Minister of Justice seeking the clarification that is being referred to by the hon. Member for Namwala, there is also no harm in the hon. Mover of this Bill defending his Bill in advance of whatever arguments maybe advanced on this Floor by other hon. Members. Therefore, there is no question of ruling either for or against any hon. Member of this House who is debating and each one of you will be free to debate this Bill until a conclusion has been reached.

May the hon. Member for Kabwata, continue.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, when I started my debate, I did mention that, of the six witnesses that submitted before your Committee, only one opposed the Bill. I am referring to the arguments presented against the Bill. Therefore, Sir, I thank you, for allowing me to answer back to the arguments against my Bill.

Sir, the last argument that I would like to refer to, which was present by the hon. Learned Minister of Justice was that officers in sensitive offices such as the military, intelligence and the police should not be exposed to making declaration as this would undermine public security.

Mr Speaker, actually, I had anticipated this very old argument and I presented an answer to your Committee long before the hon. Learned Minister of Justice had made his argument to your Committee.

Mr Speaker, I will leave it to the House to look at the counter arguments that I presented. As for now, let me state that there is a distinction between the office and its order. No one can argue that holders of sensitive offices are infallible. Our recent experience concerning holders of such offices is confirmation of that fact. How many former holders of such sensitive offices are being pursued and prosecuted for corruption? Now that they are being pursued, is the hon. Minister of Justice not concerned that there is a lot of State security information which they could use to the effect of compromising our national security? Is it not better to protect holders of such sensitive offices from temptation of corruption than pursue them after they have left office?

Sir, having addressed the concerns the hon. Minister of Justice, the only antagonist of my Bill, let me turn to the observation of your Committee.

Sir, on page 20 of your report, your Committee welcome the introduction of the Bill, stating that it is timely and is aimed at re-enforcing the effort to fight corruption. It goes on to state that the Bill was generally well received by the stakeholders.

Finally, your Committee recommend that the House should support the Bill as it is well intended. Nonetheless, your Committee also state the view that the sponsor, myself, should consult in order to harmonise …

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

Dr Scott crossed the Floor.

Hon. Members: Order! Order!

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, before business was suspended, I was saying that on page 20 of the report of your Committee, your Committee welcome the introduction of the Bill.

I was saying that nonetheless, your Committee also state the view that I, the sponsor of the Bill, should consult the Government in order to harmonise the categories of positions to be included in the declaration process and accordingly, bring amendments to the Bill and harmonise the question of logistics.

Madam Speaker, given the fact that the concerns of your Committee were already addressed during my submission and that the Committee did not state where the clarifications were not clear, it makes it difficult for me to understand the actual aspects on which they propose consultations.

Madam Speaker, in conclusion, let me render my sympathies to the Anti-Corruption Commission that was alleged by the hon. Minister to have supported this Bill because they are seeking power as a result of the condemnation that had been targeted at them in the past. This is a very unfortunate statement and I pray that such condemnations from a minister, who should provide support to the Anti-Corruption Commission for them to  perform effectively, shall not discourage the commissioners, management and staff in the Anti-Corruption Commission.

To them, I only wish to say, please, keep up this fight. Zambia knows the structural, political and logistical difficulties under which they are operating. I urge them to be encouraged by knowing that their fight is a noble one, a fight on behalf of their fellow countrymen and women. It is a fight for our children and their children after them. When posterity judges us, it shall find that the officers of the Anti-Corruption Commission stood on the right side of the suffering majority.

Madam, finally, we are aware that:

(a) corruption is causing many avoidable deaths of our people;

(b) is escalating poverty levels in our country;

(c) is violating political and civil liberties of the people by distorting or rendering useless political institutions and processes and undermining the function of the Judiciary and law enforcement authorities; and

(d) is violating economic and social rights by denying equitable access to public services such as health and education, placing obstacles in the way of earning a livelihood in the public or private sector by distorting decision-making processes regarding the allocation of national resources.

Having considered all the developments that have occurred from the time we started pushing these Bills and everything that has been associated with the presentation of the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct (Amendment) Bill, the Anti-Corruption Commission  (Amendment) Bill and the Judicial (Code of Conduct) (Amendment) Bill, cognisant of the fact that such laws require total Government acknowledgement and acceptance for them to be enforced effectively, appreciating the financial, social and security implications on the persons of those involved in the fight against corruption while also sympathising with President Levy Mwanawasa on the loneliness that must be surrounding him in his fight against corruption, given the limited support he is receiving from those closest to him and in keeping with my unflinching desire to enable all hon. Members of this House take full participation in coming up with the laws that govern this country, I, Madam Speaker, with a heavy laden heart, beg the indulgence of this House that this particular Bill be deferred so that hon. Members are allowed to look at all the arguments presented and that together, we should come up with laws that will fight corruption.

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Question put and agreed to.

The debate on the Bill deferred accordingly.{mospagebreak}

THE JUDICIAL (CODE OF CONDUCT) (Amendment) BILL, 2007

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

Having debated the previous Bill at length, I will only spend a few minutes on this one.

Madam, for this Bill, too, your Committee deserve commendation for their thoroughness.

Of the six witnesses, only three; namely, the hon. Minister of Justice; the Judicial Service Commission and the Magistrates …

Mr Kunda, SC.: On a point of order, Madam.

Madam Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Kunda, SC.: Madam Speaker, I am getting concerned with the tactics which the hon. Member is using to defer Bills. Is he in order to scandalise me, for example, giving me no opportunity to reply and then deferring a Bill? Is that in order?

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Tetamashimba: That is not right!

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! The Hon. Minister of Justice is concerned that the hon. Member and mover of the Bill is extensively debating the Bill, and yet there is no time given to those with similar or contrary views to also express themselves before he defers the Bill.

Mr Tetamashimba: Hear, hear!

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! The Chair would like to guide that if the hon. Mover of the Bill chooses to debate, then he may have to allow others to debate before he begs that the Bill be deferred. If he wants to defer the Bill, there is no need to subject the House to this extensive debate and only defer it at the end of his debate. There is a need for the nation to get both sides of the coin. If not …

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! If not, my guidance is that the mover of the Bill may defer it without going any further, if that is his intention.

The hon. Member for Kabwata may continue.

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, the debate is aimed at persuading the indulgence of this House to defer, and indeed, it is up to the House to accept the deferment or reject it.

However, having taken your guidance, Madam Speaker, let me say one or two words that one submission to your Committee was to the extent that the Bill that I presented is unprecedented in Commonwealth countries. I would like to say …

Mr Tetamashimba: On a point of order.

Madam Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Tetamashimba: Madam Speaker, in my understanding, the Chair, has ruled that when you are a mover of a Bill and your intention is to defer soon after you finish talking, you do not need to debate the Bill.

Interruptions

Hon. PF Members: What is your point of order!

Mr Kambwili: Tachite defer finshi muletina!

Mr Tetamashimba: Madam Speaker, is the mover of this Bill in order to debate even briefly when he is clearly thinking of deferring as soon as he winds up without giving the same benefit to other people to debate? I think he has to say it clearly. Can he pronounce whether he is going to defer the Bill or not? If he is going to defer it, then he should straight away defer it and not debate while denying others the opportunity to do likewise. I need your serious ruling.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Interruptions

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! The guidance of the Chair was very clear, indeed. I have been listening to the mover and I believe that the mover did get my guidance and he has no intention of going further into the debate of this Bill other than to defer it.

The hon. Member for Kabwata may continue.

Mr Lubinda: I thank you most sincerely. Madam Speaker, the House that granted me leave to present the Bill also deserves reasons for whatever steps I take. I would like to say that seeing from the discomfort of the Hon. Deputy Minister …

Madam Deputy Speaker: Order! Hon. Member, let us follow the guidance. You ought not to debate. Then others have to clarify your understanding of what their opinion may be. Therefore, you are going to spend time, unless you intend to have the Bill go through all the stages. If not, then it is not fair that you interpret the understanding of others, through their submissions, and at the same time deny them a chance to clarify their submissions. I think this is the point that I am trying to make.

Hon. Member, if you intend to defer the Bill, then can you defer it.

Mr Tetamashimba: Hear, hear!

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, I would like to thank Members of Parliament for granting me leave to present the Judicial (Code of Conduct) (Amendment) Bill. However, given the strong opposition presented by the Hon. Minister of Justice which hon. Members are privy to read, and for the sake of giving the hon. Minister sufficient time to consult, and also with me, I seek the indulgence of the House that the Bill be deferred.

I thank you, Madam.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Madam Deputy Speaker: I see no objection. The Bill has been deferred.

Mr Mabenga: I am here, Madam!

Interruptions

Question put and agreed to.

The debate on the Bill deferred accordingly.

_________

 

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES in the 
Chair]

THE ANTI TERRORISM BILL, 2007

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 2 – (Interpretation)

Mr Mwiimbu: On a point of procedure, Mr Chairperson.

The Deputy Chairperson: A point of procedure is raised.

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Chairperson, is it procedural to have amendments to a Bill brought to the House a few minutes before debate without giving due notice and it is not even indicated on the Order Paper as per requirement of our Standing Orders. I need your serious ruling.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

The Deputy Chairperson: Order! What we are doing is a question of practice. The practice is that this House has done that in the past and so in view of this, I think we will have to go ahead.

Interruptions

The Deputy Chairperson: It is correct.

The Minister of Justice (Mr Kunda): Mr Chairperson, I seek your indulgence to defer the committee stage of the Bill to tomorrow morning.

The Deputy Chairperson: Since there has been no objection to the practice, there is a proposal to have the committee stage of the Bill deferred to tomorrow.

Question put and agreed to.

The debate on the Bill deferred accordingly to Friday, 17th August, 2007.

____________

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The Vice President (Mr R. B. Banda): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

_________

The House adjourned at 1651 hours until 0900 hours on Friday, 17th August, 2007.