Wednesday, 15th July, 2015

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______

ANNOUNCEMENT BY MR SPEAKER

MINISTRY OF HEALTH SYMPOSIUM ON Elephantiasis

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, I have an announcement to make. I wish to inform all hon. Members that the Ministry of Health will hold a Symposium on Elephantiasis on Thursday, 16th July, 2015, in the Auditorium, from 1000 hours to 1230 hours. Hon. Members are urged to attend this meeting as it is of national importance.

I thank you.

Interruptions

Mr Chishimba: Mwalabako imo announcement.

Mr Speaker: The National Assembly is administered by the Clerk of the National Assembly.

Laughter

Mr Speaker:  So, send her a note.

Laughter

 

______

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

Commissions of inquiry

619. Mr Pande (Kasempa) asked the Vice-President:

    when the Government would release the findings of the following Commissions of Inquiry:

    Rodger Chongwe Commission of Inquiry into the Mongu Riots;
    the Sebastian Zulu Commission of Inquiry on the Sale of the Zambia Telecommunications Company Ltd (Zamtel) to Lap Green of Libya; and
    the Wynter Kabimba Commission of Inquiry on the Oil Procurement under the Energy Regulation Board;

    how much money was spent on each of the commissions of inquiry at (a); and

    what the main recommendations of the Rodger Chongwe Commission of Inquiry were.

The Deputy Minister in the Vice-President’s Office (Mr Bwalya): Mr Speaker, I will let Her Honour the Vice-President handle this Question.

I thank you, Sir.

The Vice-President (Mrs Wina): Mr Speaker, this is a very sensitive question. Therefore, I will bring a ministerial statement to respond to the issues raised.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Member: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Very well. We will expect a ministerial statement. When will that be, Your Honour the Vice-President?

The Vice-President: Sir, next week.

Mr Speaker: I will allow the request from Her Honour the Vice-President, and she will table a ministerial statement to cover all the questions.

Farmer Input support programme

620. Mr Miyutu (Kalabo Central) asked the Minister of Agriculture and Livestock:

    what measures had been taken to ensure that farming inputs under the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP) were delivered in time countrywide; and

    what caused the delay in delivering the inputs under the FISP in Numa Ward in Kalabo District for the 2014/2015 farming season.

The Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Livestock (Mr Monde): Mr Speaker, the Government commenced the preparations for the procurement and distribution of D-Compound and Urea fertilisers and seed early.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

I can hardly hear what the hon. Minister is saying. That is the only reason I asked for silence.

Mr Monde: Sir, this was meant to facilitate the timely distribution of inputs to all parts of the country. The hon. Minister flagged off the distribution of D-Compound fertiliser at the Nitrogen Chemicals of Zambia (NCZ) on 16th April, 2015. The process for the supply of Urea has also been finalised, with the selection of two local suppliers to deliver the commodity.

Mr Speaker, the delay in delivering the inputs under the FISP in Numa Ward in Kalabo District was due to challenges experienced by the contractor who, after inquiries, stated that he had challenges of fuel.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Miyutu: Mr Speaker, I think it is good to be humane. The Government must be sincere enough to realise that it is here to serve the people and not itself. The response that the hon. Minister has given does not reflect the real picture of what is on the ground.

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member, what is your follow-up question?

Laughter

Mr Miyutu: Mr Speaker, did the hon. Minister verify the response that he has given before bringing it to the Floor of the House? Is it true that the contractor had challenges of fuel or it is the Government which failed to pay him?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Order!

The Minister of Agriculture and Livestock (Mr Lubinda): Mr Speaker, the question seems to suggest that the reason for the delay in the delivery of fertiliser to Numa Ward was that the Government did not pay the transporter. I am sure that everyone who is following this debate will realise that that could not have been the reason. Transporters are not paid until they have delivered the inputs. In this case, the transporter delayed in delivering the fertiliser.

Sir, when the Government inquired why the transporter had delayed in delivering the fertiliser, the explanation given was that he had challenges of fuel. Had the transporter delivered the fertiliser and we failed to pay him, the case would have been different because the fertiliser would have been delivered anyway. So, I would like my dear colleague to calm down when he is posing questions so that he poses intelligible questions.

I thank you, Sir.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Hon. Minister, may you, please, withdraw the latter part of your response.

Mr Lubinda: Sir, I withdraw it and replace it with, “I suggest that my colleague asks questions that make sense and can be followed up”.

Thank you, Sir.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Hon. Minister, let us avoid controversies. Please, withdraw the term, “sense”.

Mr Lubinda: Sir, I withdraw that phrase.

Thank you, Sir.

Mr Shakafuswa (Katuba): Mr Speaker, when a contract is awarded, the contractor is usually given a down payment to cover part of the cost of doing the work. The full payment is made when the work has been completed. Was this the mode of payment in this contract? If this was the case, it could have been what we call ...

Anyway, it has been ruled against by the Hon. Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker: I suppose you have finished your question.

Mr Lubinda: Sir, the contract entailed delivering the inputs to the district before the payment was made.

Thank you, Sir.

Mr Mbewe (Chadiza): Mr Speaker, according to part (a) of the Question, the hon. Minister has already flagged off the distribution of fertiliser. This means that the fertiliser is already in the districts. However, most of the farmers in the country, including those in Chadiza, will only manage to pay for the fertiliser when the Food Reserve Agency (FRA) has paid them. Failure to this, it will be impossible …

Mr Nkombo: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Nkombo: Sir, there is a bee that is disturbing us in this place. Could you kindly ask the ‘policemen’ to come and swat it.

Mr Muntanga: To arrest it.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Sergeant-at-Arms, please, take care of that situation.

Interruptions

The Bee was swatted.

Mr Speaker: If it was the only one, then, we shall have some order after this.

Laughter

Mr Mbewe: Sir, I would like the hon. Minister to state whether the distribution of fertiliser will start after the FRA has paid the farmers so that they can acquire the inputs because I am sure farmers are equally worried that the hon. Minister has not indicated the floor price for maize.

Mr Lubinda: Sir, the Government will release inputs to farmers irrespective of whether or not the FRA buys the maize. The two programmes are totally independent of each other. Currently, many farmers are selling their maize to the private sector, and we have received reports to the effect that the private sector is participating very well in the maize marketing because farmers are being paid instantly. I am sure that some farmers like those in Chadiza who are concerned about the next farming season have already started making arrangements to pay for the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP).

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Musokotwane (Liuwa): Mr Speaker, we always hear stories about contractors who are affiliated with political parties being awarded contracts. In view of this, why was a contractor, who had no means of getting fuel, chosen to do carry out such an important assignment?

Mr Lubinda: Sir, at the time that contractors put in their bids to provide goods or services to the Government, they put in the best bid and do not indicate that they are going to face challenges. Those challenges are only encountered during the execution of the project.

Therefore, the question should have been: Is this the first time that this has happened in this area relating to this transporter? Had that been the case, then, I would have said the Government was aware that this contractor is a poor performer. However, in this instance there is no evidence of this being a repeat. As far as we are concerned, this was the first time that the contractor let us down. Contractors such as this one will not be given preferential treatment by the Government in future.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Hamudulu (Siavonga): Sir, the hon. Minister has said that two contractors have been engaged without providing any details. In the past, we have had contractors with a questionable record being awarded contracts. Could the hon. Minister care to name the two contractors who have been engaged so that we ascertain whether they are coming on board for the first time. If they have been awarded contracts before, did they deliver as per requirement? ascertain   

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, after a long process of evaluating bids, the Procurement Unit at the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, whose composition includes people from other Government institutions such as the Zambia Public Procurement Authority (ZPPA), the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) and others, awarded contracts to two suppliers who have participated in the FISP before. These are Neria and Nyiombo.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Sing’ombe (Dundumwezi): Mr Speaker, may I find out from the hon. Minster whether any punishment was meted on the person who failed to meet the contractual obligations.

Mr Speaker: I believe he meant penalty.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I do not have any information on that. However, we could find out and come back to the House with an answer, needless to say that this is a contractual issue. So, I am not sure whether the contract specified penalties for delayed delivery. Nevertheless, I could come back to the House and inform the Member accordingly.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Miyanda (Mapatizya): Hon. Minister, during the 2014/2015 farming season, the distribution of D - Compound fertiliser was flagging off around July. However, it was received as late as February this year. I would like to find out how sure you are that the distribution of inputs for the 2015/2016 farming season will not be as poorly done as it was in the last season.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, according to the hon. Member, the distribution of D - Compound fertiliser last year was flagged off in July. However, the hon. Deputy Minister said that, this year, it was in April. The Government has taken measures to try to deliver fertiliser and other farming inputs in good time. With regard to how sure I am, I can only be as sure as all the things that are under my control are. On the other hand, there are many other factors that are outside the Government’s control. We are doing whatever we can within our means to try to deliver fertiliser and other inputs in time unless something happens which is outside our control. I hope that with the programme we have put in place and the weekly meetings I have with the suppliers of inputs, we shall meet our target of delivering inputs in

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chenda (Bwana Mkubwa): Mr Speaker, for some time now, ...

Mr Mucheleka: Hammer, hammer!

Mr Chenda: ... the Government has been working on the e-Voucher System in order to enhance the administration of the Farmer Input Support Programme (FISP). May I find out from the hon. Minister how far the implementation of this programme has go.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, may I thank the hon. Member for that very important question that gives me the opportunity to commend the Cabinet for making the bold decision to implement the e-Voucher System. The Cabinet has decided that the e-Voucher System be piloted in thirteen districts this year. The pilot is going to ride on the successful implementation of the Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU) e-Visa Card System. So, everything being equal, this year, farmers in thirteen districts will collect their inputs using the electronic voucher, and not directly from the depots.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutelo (Lukulu West): Mr Speaker, the distribution of fertiliser in Numa Ward delayed due to fuel problems. Has the problem persisted because Numa Ward has not received the inputs for the 2014/2015 farming season to date?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, about a week ago, the hon. Member for Nangoma raised a question on farmers who had paid for fertiliser, but had not received it. In response, I said that the Government was conducting a countrywide survey on this matter. Our records show that although the distribution of fertiliser in Numa Ward of Kalabo was delayed, it was delivered in March, 2015, and all the farmers who paid for the fertiliser collected it from the depots.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Livune (Katombora): Mr Speaker, when commodities like fertiliser are not delivered in time, there should be a mechanism in place for this to be brought to the attention of the Government within the shortest possible time so that remedial measures are taken and people are not affected like the case was in Numa Ward. I would like to find out from the hon. Minister what measures the Government has put in place to remedy such occurrences so that people receive the inputs before the end of the farming season.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, it looks like I am becoming the next victim of the bee.

Laughter

Ms Imenda: Where is it?

Mr Lubinda: Sir, let me thank the hon. Member for that important question that gives me the opportunity to explain that previously, only the Department of Agriculture was involved in the monitoring of the distribution of inputs.

Sir, this year, the Government has instructed the Permanent Secretaries in the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock to liaise with their counterparts in the provinces who, in turn, are to liaise with the district local authorities so that all of us are involved in the monitoring of the distribution of inputs to the farmers. I hope that this gives both the agriculture extension officers and officers from other Government wings the responsibility to participate in the distribution of inputs. It is my hope that that this will enable us to be informed speedily enough to take remedial measures.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mufalali (Senanga): Mr Speaker, since the transporters have not been paid, how are they expected to deliver the inputs? What are you doing to ensure that what Hon. Miyanda said does not happen? In addition, what are you doing to ensure that the transporters are paid  for the inputs they delivered last year in order to attract transporters who are shunning the programme back?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, quite a number of suppliers of goods and services had not been paid by the beginning of this month. However, most of them were paid by last week. All the suppliers of fertiliser were paid up to the last kwacha. Most of the transporters were also paid. However, there may be a few transporters who have not been paid, but we are working hard to make sure that all of them are paid. It would not be right to make a blanket statement that transporters have not been paid because, as far as we are concerned, the majority have been paid their dues.

Mr Speaker, transporters are already queuing up to participate in the distribution of inputs. This means that they have the capacity to deliver. On our part, we are doing everything possible to liquidate our debt.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Antonio (Kaoma Central): Mr Speaker, some areas are difficult to reach, especially during ...

Brig-Gen Dr Chituwo: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo: Mr Speaker, I thank you for granting me this point of order. I apologise to my colleague for disturbing his debate.

Sir, you have said many times in this House that whatever we say must be factual. Is the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Livestock in order to say that his Government has finally made a bold decision to implement the e-Voucher System which others could not? Is he in order to mislead this House when, in fact, it is his predecessors who stopped the implementation of the e-Voucher System? Is he in order to blame others when it is his Government that has now u-turned on the e-Voucher System?

I seek your serious ruling, Sir.

Mr Muchima: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: I will ask the hon. Minister to clarify this issue as he progresses with the questions and answers.

The hon. Member for Kaoma Central may continue.

Mr Antonio: Mr Speaker, I was saying that it is difficult to transport fertiliser to certain areas. A good example of such areas is Kalabo. Is the ministry considering sending more than one transporter to such areas?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, we are not limiting the number of transporters in any area. It is actually in our interests to have as many transporters as possible in order for the commodity to reach all the districts in good time. If the hon. Member is aware of a transporter who wishes to transport fertiliser to Kalabo, he should make this known to the District Agriculture Coordinating Officer (DACO) and he/she will be put on the list of transporters. The more transporters we have, the better for us.

Mr Speaker, as regards the question that you asked me to respond to, it should be recalled that the 2011 Presidential Elections were conducted in September towards the end of the period for the delivery of inputs. Had the previous Government started the e-Voucher System by September, 2011, there would have been agro dealers on the e-Voucher System but, by the time this Government came into power, not a single agro dealer had been registered to participate in the e-Voucher System. It is only this year that the e-Voucher System is going to be implemented.

Mr Speaker, we are still in the process of identifying the agro dealers. Had the previous Government identified the agro dealers and implemented the e-Voucher System, it would have been easy for this Government to continue with it. However, nothing was put in place. There were plans which were not implemented.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Sianga (Sesheke): Mr Speaker, could the hon. Minister be kind enough to provide a list of the transporters that have been paid?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, it is possible for us to provide the list of all the suppliers and transporters that provided services and how they were paid.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister ...

Ms Namugala: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Ms Namugala: Mr Speaker, I apologise to hon. Muntanga for disrupting his debate. However, it is important to set the record straight. Hon. Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo raised a point of order, correcting the information on the implementation of the e-Voucher System, and you guided the hon. Minister to give the necessary clarification. However, this clarification has raised even more questions because the hon. Minister is not being sincere.

Mr Speaker, I am aware that his predecessor, Hon. Robert Sichinga, stopped the implementation of the e-Voucher System because, according to him, the Government was not ready at the time. Is he, therefore, in order to say that had the previous Government done enough to implement the system, it would have been up and running when, in fact, his predecessor is the one who stopped its implementation?

Mr Speaker, I need your serious ruling.

Mr Speaker: We will proceed in the following fashion, and I hope we will put this matter to rest: The hon. Member for Kalomo Central will pose the last question. Thereafter, the hon. Minister will respond. As he responds, I will give him an opportunity to clarify further. If there are any difficulties or challenges encountered thereafter, I urge you to file in a question so that we can have a full explanation. Otherwise, there seems to be no end to what may appear to be a dialogue with the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Livestock.

The hon. Member for Kalomo Central may continue.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, my question is also on the e-Voucher System.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Sir, it is a known fact that the e-Voucher System, being electronic, involved the use of communication masts to be mounted throughout the country. When the then Minister of Agriculture and Livestock, Hon. Sichinga, wanted to implement the project, the major problem was that there was no money available in any bank to pay out the e-vouchers when deposited. In addition to the lack of agro-dealers, there were not enough communication masts.

Mr Speaker, in the process of trying to pilot the project, the distribution of inputs was delayed in ten districts, including Kalomo, Livingstone and Mazabuka. When the hon. Minister says that the e-Voucher System has been implemented, is he implying that he has now solved the problem of funding to cash the e-vouchers and that there are enough communication masts to allow the system to be implemented properly? Have all these problems that his predecessors encountered been solved?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, let me try to clarify this matter again. The hon. Member for Mumbwa, in his point of order, asked whether I was in order not to acknowledge that it was the Patriotic Front (PF) Government that stopped the implementation of the E-Voucher System. In my clarification, I said that this Government took over in September, 2011, towards the end of the distribution of farming inputs. Had the programme been implemented then, this Government would have had no choice, but to continue with it and there would have been agro-dealers on the E-Voucher System. However, by the time we took over Government, the e-Voucher System was still on paper. If, indeed, my predecessors also continued to procrastinate, that is a different matter. What I was clarifying is that there is no evidence that this Government stopped the implementation of the project because the e-Voucher System was still on paper  and had not been implemented at the time it came into power.

Mr Speaker, coming to the question by Hon. Muntanga, yes, there were many reasons that led to the e-Voucher System not being implemented. However, this Government has since solved them. In selecting the thirteen districts for the pilot programme, the Government was very careful to ensure that they were in areas that have the infrastructure to support the implementation of the e-Voucher System of distributing inputs.

Mr Speaker, there are many issues that are outside the control of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock. All I am saying now is that the Cabinet sanctioned a pilot programme to implement the e-Voucher System in the thirteen districts this year. If something comes up to stop us from implementing it, I do not want to be held accountable, because they are factors that are outside the control of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock and the Government. The decision has been made, the intention is clear, and the political will is real.

I thank you, Sir.

KANYAMA CATTLE BREEDING CENTRE IN MWINILUNGA

621. Mr Katuka (Mwinilunga) asked the Minister of Agriculture and Livestock:

    when the construction of Kanyama Cattle Breeding Centre in Mwinilunga Parliamentary Constituency would be completed;

    what the total number of animals at the centre was as of February, 2015; and

    when the animals would be available for sale to the public.

The Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Livestock (Mr Ng’onga): Mr Speaker, the construction of Kanyama Cattle Breeding Centre is expected to be completed by the end of 2015. The only remaining work to be done is the construction of a dip tank and dam to supply water to the cattle and for growing pastures. However, the completion of the works is dependent upon the availability of funds.

Mr Speaker, as of February, 2015, the total number of animals at Kanyama Breeding Centre was 247, of which 114 were in calf.

Mr Speaker, the animals will be made available for sale to the public when the calves have reached the right age to be sold to the public.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Katuka: Mr Speaker, Kanyama Breeding Centre has been in existence for over five years now, but none of the workers is on the Government Payroll. Why has it been difficult to put the workers on the Government Payroll from the time they were employed? They have been surviving on the little operational funds that are sent to the breeding centre.

Mr Ng’onga: Mr Speaker, the ministry is fully aware that the staff at the breeding centre are drawn from other Government departments. This year, authority has been granted to employ more extension workers in the ministry. The ministry also has plans to put some of the workers at the breeding centre on the payroll and send more workers to the centre.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, Kanyama Breeding Centre has been talked about for five years. It was one of the success stories that were talked about in this House. When animals are taken to a breeding centre, they should start breeding in the second year of being at the centre. In the third, fourth and fifth years, the offspring of the initial animals should also start reproducing. When the hon. Minister said that the remaining work at the breeding centre will be completed this year, what did he mean? Is he saying that Kanyama Breeding Centre is not operational as it has been reported?

Mr Ng’onga: Mr Speaker, in my response, I talked about the completion of the infrastructure. As I indicated, there are 247 animals at the centre, 114 of which are in calf. The infrastructure will be completed by the end of 2015. To clarify further, there is a medium cost house and three low cost houses, six paddocks, a spray race that are supposed to be completed and one borehole that is supposed to be sunk. This is the infrastructure that is supposed to be in place by the end of 2015.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muchima (Ikeleng’i): Mr Speaker, the idea of having breeding centres, which was introduced by the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD), especially in the North-Western Province where there is abundant rainfall, is a brilliant one. I live not very far from Kanyama Breeding Centre. There was another initial breeding centre located at the source of the Zambezi River. Some animals were taken there, but there was no infrastructure there. Later on, all the animals disappeared. Was the Government’s intention to assess whether this programme of establishing breeding centres would work or not, and then move away quietly if it did not work? What are your plans for the centre that you abandoned?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, the question by the hon. Member is extremely important. However, for as long as this centre remains nameless, I will be in a difficult position to respond.

Laughter

Mr Lubinda: The hon. Member has not mentioned the name of the centre. So, I do not know which centre he is talking about. If he could kindly file in a Question with a specific name, I will be able to give a reasonable response. Otherwise, I run the risk of fishing in deep waters, which I want to avoid.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe (Mpongwe): Mr Speaker, I want declare interest and state that I am very interested in Mwinilunga because I am Deputy Chief Kanongesha.

Laughter

Mr Namulambe: Sir, the Government has introduced this very good programme. However, there are fears of certain animal diseases being transmitted from Angola across the border. Will the Government construct a cordon line which has not been in existence for some time now?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, the question may be related to livestock but, with your permission, I would like the hon. Member to give the ministry an opportunity to look at the issue of the cordon line as a separate matter. If he can kindly file in a Question, we shall come up with a response on our plans to re-establish the cordon line. I do not think that his question has much to do with Kanyama Breeding Centre.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Pande: Mr Speaker, when the hon. Member for Mwinilunga mentioned the suffering of the workers at the centre, the hon. Deputy Minister said that some of the workers would be put on the Government Payroll. Why only some of the workers and not all of them?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, the Question on the Floor has to do with the construction of Kanyama Cattle Breeding Centre in Mwinilunga, the total number of animals at the centre as at February, 2015, and when the animals would be made available for sale to the public.

We did not anticipate this digress from talking about animals to talking about workers. The response by the hon. Deputy Minister was in regard to the plans that we have concerning some of the workers who would be put on the Government Payroll. With regard to the number of workers to be put on the payroll and so on and so forth, I am sure that we can provide that information if it is solicited. However, we did not anticipate those details regarding the workers.

I thank you, Sir.

 Mr Miyanda (Mapatizya): Mr Speaker, in response to the first part of the Question, the hon. Deputy Minister indicated that the remaining works include the construction of a dip tank and dam to provide water for animals. He also talked about a spray race. I would like to find out why they would want to do away with a spray race and go for a dip tank to cater for 247 animals.

Mr Lubinda: Sir, we are not doing away with the spray race. The hon. Deputy Minister added it to the initial list that he gave when responding to a supplementary question. In his written response, he mentioned the dip tank and dam. In a follow-up question, he included housing and the spray race.

If the hon. Member had asked why the hon. Deputy Minister did not include them in the initial response, I would have understood, but he included them in the following response, meaning that they are all part of the infrastructure to be provided at the breeding centre.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Hamusonde (Nangoma): Mr Speaker, I would like to find out the breed of cattle that is at Kanyama Cattle Breeding Centre.

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I cannot say offhand the breed of the cattle.

I thank you Sir.

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Mr Speaker, not so long ago, the hon. Member for Katuba said that when the hon. Minister is asked a Question, he must look at the peripheral of the Question in anticipation of follow-up questions. I want to say that I am somewhat disappointed with the hon. Minster’s responses.

Hon. Minister, since you do not know the breed of the animals, how many heifers and bulls were there at the beginning of the project so that we can see whether or not there has been reproduction?

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, yes, we anticipate follow-up questions. However, we cannot prepare for all of them. The question by the hon. Member for Mazabuka is one of those that we did not anticipate.

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah!

Mr Lubinda: Sir, the Question is quite clear. It is talking about the total number of animals as at February, 2015, and we anticipated questions relating to that date and onwards. However, if the hon. Member wishes to know the number of animals that were there when the breeding centre was established, we can certainly provide this information.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: I will have the last question from the hon. Member for Gwembe.

Mr Ntundu (Gwembe): Mr Speaker, my question has been overtaken by events.

I thank you Sir.

BOREHOLES IN MPONGWE DISTRICT

622. Mr Namulambe asked the Minister of Local Government and Housing:

    what the total number of boreholes in Mpongwe District was as of December, 2014;

    how many boreholes were required to meet the demand for water in the entire district; and

    when additional boreholes would be sunk.

The Deputy Minister of Local Government and Housing (Mr N. Banda): Mr Speaker, as of December, 2014, Mpongwe District had a total of 299 boreholes. Four hundred and sixty boreholes are required to meet the demand for water in the entire district. The Ministry of Local Government and Housing and co-operating partners intend to site, drill and equip with hand pumps, a total of forty boreholes in the district under the 2015 Infrastructure Development Work Plan.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, when an individual sinks a borehole, the cost of drilling the borehole and equipping it with a hand pump is about K18,000. However, when it is the ministry sinking a borehole, the cost is about K28,000 and, in some cases, K32,000. Why is it expensive for the Government to drill boreholes and cheaper for individuals?

The Minister of Local Government and Housing (Dr Phiri): Mr Speaker, we have been advised to think around a particular question in anticipation of follow-up questions.

Laughter

Dr Phiri: The principal Question by the hon. Member for Mpongwe seeks to establish how many boreholes are in Mpongwe and how many will be sunk. Suddenly, we have digressed to the cost of drilling a borehole in Mpongwe. If we could be given an opportunity to look at the cost of drilling a borehole in Mpongwe, we would be able to provide a more intelligible answer. So, may we be excused.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mbewe: Mr Speaker, the drilling of boreholes in Mpongwe and other areas in Zambia is a welcome initiative because people really need clean water. It is good that the Ministry of Local Government and Housing is drilling boreholes in rural areas. However, some communities fail to raise the K1,500 necessary for them to have a borehole sunk in their area. Are you going to expunge the K1,500 fee so that the poor communities can have boreholes sunk for them?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, Hon. Namulambe specifically asked how many boreholes had been sunk in Mpongwe and the response was 299. He also wanted to know how many would be sufficient to meet the demand for water in the district, and the response we gave was 460. He further inquired how many boreholes would be sunk in the 2015 Infrastructure Development Work Plan and are working on sinking an additional forty boreholes.

Sir, whether or not it is expensive to sink the boreholes is an issue that is outside the principal question. I would advise that the hon.  Member files in a question ...

Mr Muntanga: Ah!

Dr Phiri: ... that would enable us provide the required information so that we also look intelligent in your eyes.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Hon. Minister, imported into the question is a policy matter.

Hon. Opposition Members: Yes!

Mr Speaker: Respond to the policy matter.

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, we need time to reflect on the policy matter.

I thank you, Sir.

Ms Masebo rose.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: I indicated that we would proceed with the Hon. Members for Katombora, and Katuba, and close with Kalomo Central.

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, the issue of water in the rural areas cannot be overemphasised. It is more expensive for the Government or councils to drill boreholes than it is for individuals. Can the Government consider helping councils to procure drilling machines that can be used to sink boreholes for rural communities?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, without negating the position that I have taken on this issue, there are a number of councils that are already doing that under the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) and other arrangements.

I thank you, Sir

Mr Shakafuswa: Mr Speaker, generally, it is more expensive for the Government to procure services than it is for of an individual. To simplify the question, is the Government not going to look into this issue so that more boreholes are sunk?

Mr Speaker: I gather that is a statement.

Laughter

Mr Shakafuswa: It was a question.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, we use figures and monetary levels in all budgets. Figures are drawn from the value of money that is budgeted for. Hon. Minister, do you know the value of the boreholes that you drilled as opposed to just the number?

Dr Phiri: Mr Speaker, I do not think that is the same as saying that we do not know how much it cost to sink each borehole. If there was a specific question on how much the boreholes that were sank in Mpongwe cost, then, we would have readily availed that information. From that information, you would have had the leeway to ask whether it is more expensive to do it our way or any other way. However, since the question was specifically on numbers, we did not anticipate questions on the cost of each borehole. However, you may want to move further next time and ask us whether or not it is cheaper or more expensive to use our procurement procedures to drill boreholes.

I thank you, Sir.

POWER-GENERATION CAPACITY

623. Mr Simfukwe (Mbala) asked the Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development:

    which areas were benefitting from the increased power-generation capacity following the upgrading of Lunzuwa Power Station, and in what quantities; and

    whether the Government had any plans to distribute the power generated from the Lunzuwa Power Station to various rural electrification projects in Mbala District.

The Deputy Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development (Mr Zulu): Mr Speaker, the power station has not been upgraded.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

Mr Zulu: Instead, we built a new power station. The old one was only generating 0.75 MW, and the new one generates 14.8 MW. We did not upgrade the station, but built a new one.

Sir, the following areas are benefitting from the newly-upgraded Lunzuwa Power ...

Hon. Members: Ah!

Mr Zulu: ... Station:

    Sumbawanga (3.8 MW)
    Mbala (3 MW)
    Mpulungu (2.5 MW); and
     Nkamba Bay (1 MW).

Mr Speaker, the Government, through the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO), has plans to distribute the increased power generated from Lunzuwa Power Station to the following areas:

    Mambwe Mission and the surrounding areas;
    Chief Mpande, Chief Nsokolo and the surrounding areas;
    Chief Chitimbwa;
    Masamaba Community;
    Kalukanya Community;
    Kasesha Boarder and the surrounding areas;
    Chief Zombe;
    Ndundu Community; and
    Kalambo Falls and the surrounding areas.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Hon. Minister, you are contradicting yourself.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Earlier on, you said that this question is suggesting that the power station was upgraded, which was not the case. However, in reading your written response, so to speak, you have reverted to what you corrected earlier. To avoid a flurry of questions, please, clarify this matter.

Mr Zulu: Mr Speaker, I think the people who prepared the answer ...

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Just clarify. The Speaker is not concerned ...

Mr Zulu: The clarification is that there was a power station which was generating 0.75 MW. That power station was decommissioned and ZESCO put up a new power station. The power station was not upgraded. I will follow this up with the person who prepared the response.

I thank you, Sir.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Anyway, Her Honour the Vice-President is here. Hon. Member for Kalomo Central.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, ...

Mr Speaker: Sorry, the hon. Member for Mbala is the one who asked the Question.

Mr Simfukwe: Mr Speaker, thank you for reminding the hon. Minister to clarify the issue of upgrading Lunzuwa Power Station. I want to commend the hon. Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development and the Minister for Northern Province for expediting the commissioning of the power station. That was an extra effort on their part.

Sir, I would like to find out how several new places will be connected to power following the construction of the power station. The power that is being exported to Sumbuwanga in Tanzania is now electrifying the border between Tanzania and Zambia, and yet Kasesha, which is on the Zambian side, is in total darkness. Tanzania is using electricity that is generated in Zambia. With the raised expectations in Mbala as a result of the increase in power generation, when does the ministry intend to supply power to all the areas that the hon. Minister has mentioned?

Mr Zulu: Mr Speaker, we shall liaise with the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) and chart the way forward.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has said that there is more electricity of about 14 MW that is being generated and gave a breakdown of the supply. Could he clarify if there is no load shedding in these areas. If there is none, with the upgrading of Lunzuwa Power Station, why is the excess electricity not supplied to the areas where there is a shortfall?

Mr Zulu: Mr Speaker, yes, we are going to connect all these areas. I would like to apologise for saying that we are upgrading the power station when it is newly-constructed. We, therefore, intend to connect all the areas that have no electricity. The new power station was commissioned by His Excellency the President three months ago. The Ministry of Mines, Energy and Water Development and the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) are still looking at how the connection will be spread to all the areas. All those who would like to be supplied with electricity are at liberty to contact ZESCO in Mbala.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: The question by the hon. Member for Kalomo Central sought to establish whether or not there is load shedding in those areas and, secondly, whether you are able to transmit power from those areas to the deficit areas?

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Tell us!

The Minister of Information and Broadcasting (Mr Kambwili): Mr Speaker, first and foremost, it must be noted that all the power generations from various areas feed into the national electricity grid. If there is a problem with the national electricity grid, then, it follows that even the areas that fed from the smaller generations will be equally affected.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, the hon. Deputy Minister stated that there is a new power generation point at Lunzuwa. May I find out whether the old one is still operational and, if not, are there considerations to move it elsewhere where it can be used?

Mr Kambwili: Mr Speaker, the old plant has no water supply. It has been decommissioned completely. However, the question of whether the plant will be moved to another area will be looked at by the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO).

I thank you, Sir.

PRISON IN CHADIZA DISTRICT

624. Mr Mbewe asked the Minister of Home Affairs:

    when the construction of a prison in Chadiza District would commence; and

    what the cost of the project would be.

The Deputy Minister of Home Affairs (Col. Kaunda): Mr Speaker, currently, Chadiza has an open air prison which is under the management of Chipata Central Prison. The Government has no immediate plans to construct a new prison in Chadiza District.

Sir, since there are no immediate plans to construct a prison in Chadiza, the cost of the project has not been estimated.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mbewe: Mr Speaker, it is true that there is an open air Prison in Chadiza, but the problem is that the prison is understaffed. How will the prison authorities make sure that the inmates are properly monitored since the prison is an open air one?

Col. Kaunda: Mr Speaker, the Ministry of Finance has given us authority to recruit a number of prison officers. We hope that once that has been done, we can give some of them to Hon. Mbewe.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga: Hon. Mbewe?

Laughter

MINERAL EXPLORATION IN NAKONDE

625. Mr Sichula (Nakonde) asked the Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development:

    whether there had been any mineral explorations in Nakonde Parliamentary Constituency;

    if so, what minerals were discovered; and

    in which areas the minerals were discovered.

The Deputy Minister of Mines, Energy and Water Development (Mr Musukwa): Mr Speaker, the Government, through the Geological Survey Department (GSD), has carried out geological mapping of Nakonde Parliamentary Constituency. Currently, there are four private exploration companies. Kouri Mining Ltd started works in 2011, Zirconia Investment Ltd commenced works in 2012, P and C Pranch Investments Zambia Ltd commenced works in 2015, and Vale Zambia Ltd started works in 2015.

Mr Speaker, it is also worth noting that in the early 1930s to 1973, several companies carried out various mineral exploration activities in the area. This is the information that the GSD banked on to undertake the new works.

Mr Speaker, the mining houses that are doing works have not reported any discovery of minerals yet because the operations are still ongoing.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, what is the time frame for the works that companies such as Zirconia Investment Ltd are carrying out?

Mr Musukwa: Mr Speaker, the licences that we issue have different validity periods. Some are for two years while the maximum validity period is seven years.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has said that the Geological Survey Department (GSD) has carried out geological mapping of Nakonde to ascertain the various minerals that are available, and they have come up with nothing for all this period of exploration. What sort of minerals were mapped in the area?

Mr Musukwa: Mr Speaker, the ministry carried out geological mapping of the area that indicated the presence of various minerals, including copper and manganese. So, the exploration companies that we have given licences to will provide detailed information on that area.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

WOMEN’S CLUBS IN SIKONGO

626. Mr Ndalamei (Sikongo) asked the Minister of Community Development, Mother and Child Health:

    how many women’s clubs in Sikongo Parliamentary Constituency received funding from the Government from January, 2014 to April, 2015;

    how much money, in total, was distributed to the clubs; and

    what the names of the beneficiary clubs were.

The Deputy Minister of Community Development, Mother and Child Health (Ms Limata): Mr Speaker, five women’s clubs from Sikongo Parliamentary Constituency received funding from January, 2014, to April, 2015. These are broken down as:

                     Year                                         No. of Women’s Clubs Funded

                     2014                                                                3

                     2015                                                                2

                     Total                                                                5

Sir, a total of K57,000 was given to the above-mentioned women’s clubs.

Mr Speaker, the clubs in Sikongo Parliamentary Constituency that were funded are:

         Name of Women’s Club                      Amount (K)                 Date

         Kandanda Women’s Club                  10,000                         10/01/2014

         Naka Women’s Club                           10,000                         14/11/2014

         Tulimange Women’s Club                  10,000                         20/11/2014

         Twashengwene Women’s Club          17,000                         23/03/2015

         Lwahumba Women’s Club                 10,000                         07/05/2015

         Total                                                    57,000

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Ndalamei: Mr Speaker, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister who authorised the District Commissioner (DC) in Sikongo to hold onto the cheques for women’s clubs because they do not belong to the Patriotic Front (PF)?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

The Minister of Community Development, Mother and Child Health (Ms Kabanshi): Mr Speaker, I do not think there was any District Commissioner (DC) in Sikongo who held onto any cheques for the clubs that did not belong to the Patriotic Front (PF) Government.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Simfukwe: Mr Speaker, women’s clubs are registered under different arrangements. Some are registered under the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA), Registrar of Societies, council while others are registered as co-operatives. For women’s clubs that were given funds, what is the approved form of registration by the ministry?

Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, the ministry only considers women’s clubs that are registered under the Registrar of Societies and those that are registered at the council.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, funding women’s clubs is good because it is one way of empowering them. However, I would like to find out from the hon. Minister if an evaluation has been carried out to see how the clubs are performing and whether their performance has improved after being funded?

Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, the evaluations have been conducted. The ministry is implementing a lot of programmes. Further, we have observed that the women’s clubs have not made much impact on the economic welfare of women. That is why the Government has scaled up the Social Cash Transfer Scheme which has made a big impact on poverty alleviation.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, the hon. Member for Sikongo stated that the District Commissioner (DC) held onto the cheques for women’s clubs for political reasons, but the hon. Minister blatantly denied that allegation. Would it be prudent for her to investigate the matter rather than her denying it when the hon. Member of Parliament, who is usually on the ground with the people, has brought the matter before this House?

Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, I always go round the country to check how the programmes are being implemented, but have never come across the allegation the hon. Member has brought up. So, if he has any proof, I would like him to bring it to my office so that we can deal with the matter.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister stated that she usually goes round to inspect ...

Mr Ndalamei: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Ndalamei: Mr Speaker, this is the first time that I am rising on a point of order.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Ndalamei: Is the hon. Minister in order to deny that the District Commissioner (DC) did not hold onto the cheques for women’s clubs when I reported the matter to her?

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah!

Mr Mucheleka: Ulula manje!

Mr Ndalamei: The DC held onto the cheques for two months. They were only released after the provincial administrator summoned him to Mongu?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 Mr Speaker: My ruling is simple. She has invited you to her office.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: I have no doubt that this issue will be resolved.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, since the hon. Minister goes round to inspect the programmes for the women’s clubs, did she come across a situation where there was a delay in the delivery of cheques from her office to any club?

Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, I have never received such reports.

Mr Sikazwe: Hear, hear!

Ms Kabanshi: When I go on the ground, I find out from the women if they are happy with the way things are being done. However, there are times when some applications are not approved by the ministry and those are the complaints that I find on the ground.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Katuka (Mwinilunga): Mr Speaker, the funds that were released to the clubs seem to be standard. I would like to find out from the hon. Minister whether those were the funds the women had applied for or that the ministry allocated to the clubs?

Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, the funds that are disbursed to the clubs are dependent on the projects that the women apply for and the funds that are available at the ministry.

I thank you, Sir.

Dr Kalila (Lukulu East): Mr Speaker, women’s clubs whose certificates are obtained from the district councils like Mbala, Lukulu and Mitete have been denied access to the funds. The hon. Minister has said the only form of registration that is recognised is that which is done through the Registrar of Societies and the councils, which has provided much relief to us. Could the hon. Minister clarify, by way of a circular or on the Floor of this House that her offices will no longer refuse to recognise registration certificates that are issued by the councils?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 Mrs Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, I will do that.

I thank you, Sir.

Ms Lubezhi (Namwala): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has said that she always travels round the country. I would like to find out when she was last in Sikongo.

 Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, I cannot remember.

Laughter

Ms Kabanshi: I am not sure whether it was last month, three or four months ago. However, I will get back to her since she wants to know when exactly I last went to Sikongo.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Prof. Lungwangwa (Nalikwanda): Mr Speaker, in her response to the question by Hon. Namulambe on the impact assessment, the hon. Minister said that the impact is insignificant compared to that for the Social Cash Transfer Scheme. Could she clarify whether or not the funding to women’s clubs is a waste of the scarce public resources.

 Ms Kabanshi: Mr Speaker, I did not say that the funds that is being spent on women empowerment is a waste of resources. What I said was that the impact is not as much as that being created by the Social Cash Transfer Scheme. In addition, there are more beneficiaries on the Social Cash Transfer Scheme than there are on the Women Empowerment Fund.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

CATTLE FARMERS IN KAFUE FLATS

627.  Mr Hamusonde (Nangoma) asked the Minister of Agriculture and Livestock:

    whether the Government was aware that some cattle farmers in the Kafue Flats were levied by the local headmen; and

    what measures the Government would take to correct the situation.

Mr Monde: Mr Speaker, the ministry was not aware of this situation. However, investigations revealed that the local chiefs, together with the headmen in the Kafue Flats, have come up with a measure to control stock movement, where all animals going to the abattoir have to be cleared by the local headmen. A clearance fee of K5.00 is charged per animal. The measure has been put in place to curb the escalating cattle thefts in the Kafue Flats.

Sir, the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock shall engage the provincial and district administration, together with traditional leaders in the Kafue Flats to come up with alternative measures to ensure that cattle rustling is brought under control.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, I would like to know how the levies are utilised by the headmen.

                                                                                                               

 Mr Monde: Mr Speaker, according to the information that has been brought to our attention, the funds are used to carry out administrative activities to bring sanity to the Kafue Flats.

 Mr Speaker: Order!

 How are these funds utilised?

 Mr Monde: Sir, the funds are used by the village headmen to take stock of the animals, manage the programmes and attend meetings. In short, they are used to conduct administrative activities.

 I thank Mr Speaker.

 Ms Imenda (Luena): Mr Speaker, cattle rustling is a disturbing vice that is very common in areas where there is livestock farming. Does the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock have a policy in place to ensure that before somebody sells cattle to the abattoirs, there is a way of ascertaining that the animal has been cleared and belongs to the person who is selling it?

 Mr Monde: Mr Speaker, to alleviate and reduce cattle thefts, the Department of Livestock has made a provision in its documentation for local headmen and chiefs to consent to any movement of livestock countrywide.

 I thank you, Sir.

 Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, the practice of using headmen, the police and veterinary officers to monitor the movement of livestock has been there for a long time. Suffice it to say that the most effective measure has been the use of boluses which is determined when the animal is being killed at the abattoir. Has the hon. Minister of Agriculture and Livestock, which is well known to project or make budgets, ensured that the boluses are procured in order to control cattle rustling.

 Mr Monde: Mr Speaker, that is a good idea that we shall look at as a ministry.

 I thank you, Sir.

 Mr Katambo (Masaiti): Mr Speaker, can the hon. Minister clarify which law the local headmen are applying to charge the K5.00 per animal.

 Mr Monde: Mr Speaker, like I said earlier, the ministry was not aware about this development. However, we discovered that this is a local arrangement that the people in the Kafue Flats have designed in order to reduce cattle thefts. So, there is no law that governs this. As a matter of fact, we assumed that these are agreed rules in the villages in order to protect the animals.

 I thank you, Sir.

SECONDARY SCHOOL FEES

628. Mr Miyutu asked the Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education what plans the Government had for pupils who could not afford to pay Government approved secondary school fees, especially in rural areas where incomes were generally low.

The Deputy Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education (Mr Mabumba):  Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that there are two types of user fees at secondary school level. There are boarding fees and the general purpose fund.

Sir, the ministry is aware of the challenges the rural communities face to pay fees. Currently, what is happening is that the ministry has a budgetary allocation to assist orphaned and vulnerable pupils. However, the challenge has been that the allocation is not enough to cater for a large number of disadvantaged pupils. Nevertheless, the ministry will continue working towards increasing the allocation.

Mr Speaker, the effort of the ministry is also complemented by some non-governmental organisation (NGOs) such as the Campaign for Girls Education (CAMFED) and the Forum for African Women Educationalists of Zambia (FAWEZA) who have come on board to offer bursaries to girls that come from disadvantaged households.

Mr Speaker, the challenge is that the fees charged vary from school to school. I should mention that Hon. Namulambe asked a similar question not too long ago. The ministry has observed that in some cases, secondary schools in rural areas charge higher fees than those in urban areas. In order to address this anomaly, the ministry is currently working on an instrument that will prescribe the user fees that will be payable at secondary schools in order to standardise school fees.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Miyutu: Mr Speaker, it is good that the Government is working on an instrument to assist vulnerable and poor families. How long will it take for this instrument to be completed in order to ensure that families are not prevented from accessing education due to the high user fees?

Mr Mabumba: Mr Speaker, with regard to the timeframe, I do not want to give my colleague and the House a misleading response. However, I would like to inform this august House that some consultations have already been made. From the information I have, we are yet to consult the trade unions on the matter, given its sensitivity. Therefore, the hon. Minister will inform this august House on how we shall proceed on this matter.

I thank you, Sir.

Ms Namugala (Mafinga): Mr Speaker, given the high poverty levels in the country, especially in rural areas, user fees are out of the reach of many people. Is the Ministry of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education not considering reducing the user fees?

Mr Mabumba: Mr Speaker, whether the user fees are reduced or retained will be clarified when the instrument we are working on has been completed. I do not want to give a misleading response. However, we shall look at the issue that the hon. Member has raised.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Dr Musokotwane: Mr Speaker, it has been said over and over again that education is one of the most powerful tools against poverty. The Patriotic Front (PF) Government has always emphasised that it is a Government for the poor. That being the case, I would like to know when school fees will be expunged, just like the United National Independence Party (UNIP) did in order to provide children ladders to enable them escape poverty.

Mr Mabumba: Mr Speaker, Hon. Dr Musokotwane should be aware that the Government offers free education from Grades 1 to 7. However, for secondary schools, it may not be possible because some of them are boarding secondary schools and the pupils need to be fed. So, in this case, the instrument that we are proposing is the only way to ensure that we increase access to education and children do not drop out of the school system as a result of the prohibitive user fees. This will ensure standard school fees from one province to another and from one district to the other. So, the issue of completely abolishing user fees, especially in secondary schools, may not be tenable, but the instrument that is being proposed by the ministry will go a long way in helping vulnerable and poor children.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, in most cases, parents do not know how much the Government user fees are. This is because the fees are lumped with the Parent/Teacher Association (PTA) approved fees. Is it not possible for the ministry to regulate the fees that are charged by the PTA committees?

Mr Livune: Hear, hear!

The Minister of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education (Dr Kaingu): Mr Speaker, the Government has clearly stated that it is not happy with the fees being charged.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

Dr Kaingu: Mr Speaker, when business was suspended, I was saying that there is a need to clarify that school fees are not set by the ministry, but agreed upon by the school boards. As you have heard from hon. Members, there is a general concern about the fees being too high. So, as the Government, we are trying to come in and intervene. There is no provision in the Education Act, for the hon. Minister to intervene in such a situation. However, the hon. Minister has to work with the boards to come up with the fees. It is important for us, as a ministry, to accept that the fees are quite high and we need to do something about them.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Simfukwe: Mr Speaker, following the hon. Minister’s admission that the fees are too high, and as a Member of Parliament from a rural area where boarding fees are a common feature, I would like to find out what advice he has for pupils who fail to pay user fees. I know that such pupils are listening to Parliament Radio at the moment and would like to know whether they should stay home or there is a channel they need to follow to be allowed to stay in school.

Dr Kaingu: Mr Speaker, we have agreed that education is an enabler. So, I would like to appeal to the children out there who may be in a desperate situation to continue going to school. We also have an arrangement with our colleagues in the Ministry of Community Development, Mother and Child Health under the Public Welfare Assistant Scheme which assists children in such situations. However, what is important is for us to look into these high user fees.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, the Patriotic Front (PF), in its manifesto, clearly states that it will provide free education from Grades 1 to 12. The hon. Minister is, however, saying that free education will only be provided from Grades 1 to 7. Can the hon. Minister tell the nation that what is stated in the Patriotic Front (PF) Manifesto is not what is obtaining on the ground.  Further, what is the ministry doing to help the rural people because they are eagerly waiting for the free education up to Grade 12?

Dr Kaingu: Sir, I think I have made it very clear that schools fees are actually a local arrangement. They are arrived at by the district education boards and not the ministry. In fact, the ministry gives grants to schools.

Mr Muntanga: They are not enough.

Dr Kaingu: Yes, I agree that they are not enough. However, I want to appeal to parents to take note of the fact that the provision of education is a partnership between them and the schools. The Government is doing everything possible to provide free education, in some cases, up to university level through bursaries. Bursaries actually enable students to access education at no cost. So, we have actually exceeded the Grade 12 target for free education, and I want to thank the Government for that.

Sir, Hon. Mutelo should know that we are following the PF Manifesto. We shall continue providing an environment that will make learning easier. This is the more reason we are seriously working on the Students’ Loan Scheme so that education can be accesses equitably.

Thank you, Sir.

________

BILLS

SECOND READING

THE NATIONAL PENSION SCHEME (Amendment) BILL, 2015

The Minister of Labour and Social Security (Mr Shamenda): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you for giving me an opportunity to contribute to this Motion on the Floor. On 16th May, 2015, the Government revised the retirement age for public service workers under the Public Service Pensions Fund (PSPF) to sixty years as normal retirement with an option of early and late retirement at fifty-five years and sixty-five years respectively.

Mr Speaker, in order to ensure the harmonisation of the retirement age in the public and private sectors and uniformity across the pension schemes, the Government laid on the Floor of this House the National Pension Scheme Authority and Local Authorities Superannuation Fund Amendment Bills to equally allow for sixty years as normal retirement with an option of early retirement at fifty-five years and late retirement at sixty-five years.

 Mr Speaker, the changes imply that those who are contributing members and wish to retire early at fifty-five years may proceed to do so while those who elect to continue in employment are also free to do so up to the normal retirement age of sixty years. Upon mutual consent between an employee and employer, an employee may continue in employment until late retirement at the age of sixty-five years.

Hon. Members may also wish to note that these changes will not affect the accrued rights of workers. In short, what I am saying is that those workers who were employed at the time when this was enforced, their rights are going to be accrued to the extent that they will be entitled to retire or opt out at the age of fifty-five, unless they wish to continue.

Mr Speaker, the decision to adjust the retirement age took into account the following fundamental factors:

    the retirement age of fifty-five years under NAPSA is not in conformity with the prevailing economic, demographic and other statistical and actuarial considerations. For instance, actuarial valuations conducted independently by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank recommended an upward adjustment of the retirement age;

    the proposed amendments will improve the financial position of the pension system and result in increased pension benefits while providing an option for those who wish to retire based on the old system to do so; and

    the Government undertook a comparative analysis of countries in the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Region which showed that Zambia was the only country that had the lowest retirement ages while the majority of the countries in the region have retirement ages of either sixty or sixty-five years. For example, the retirement age for Tanzania, Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia is sixty years while the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is at sixty-five years.

Mr Speaker, it is against this background that the amendment of the National Pension Scheme Act is required and proposed. I wish to request hon. Members of Parliament to support the Bill because failure to do so will result into having different retirement ages for public and private sector workers as well as different pension rights under the three statutory pension schemes. Additionally, these changes provide an opportunity for us as a nation to address the plight of pensioners, retirees and members in a manner that is affordable and sustainable in the long term.

I wish to conclude by saying that the Government consulted all the key stakeholders including PSPF, LASF, NAPSA, Pensions and Insurance Authority (PIA) and social partners, which included the Zambia Federation of Employers (ZFE), Zambia Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) and Federation of Free Trade Unions in Zambia (FFTUZ).

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Hamudulu (Siavonga): Mr Speaker, your Committee considered various submissions on the National Pension Scheme (Amendment) Bill, 2015, which was referred to it by this House on Friday, 19th June, 2015. The object of the Bill is to amend the National Pension Scheme Act, Cap. 256 of the Laws of Zambia in order to revise the retirement age from fifty-five to sixty years for all members of NAPSA.

Mr Speaker, all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee were in support of the Bill as it will harmonise the retirement age among the pension schemes. While appreciating this revision, stakeholders raised concerns on a few clauses and I will highlight some of them in my discourse.

Sir, clause 18(2), which allows the employees decision to retire subject to the approval of the employer, raised concerns from various stakeholders. They submitted that this provision is not necessary, as the scheme would already have made provision for the member to enjoy the benefits whether that member’s employer is ready for them to retire or not. In any event the employer has absolutely no say over the management of the scheme. As such it is unnecessary for a member to seek the employer’s approval before retiring.

Sir, the stakeholders further observed that the Bill does not differentiate entitlement to full pension between early retirement and late retirement. This means that, there would be no incentive for someone to continue working beyond fifty-five years. The stakeholders lamented that this could defeat the aim of securing the liability of the pension because the fund will be required to pay the member anyway.

Mr Speaker, stakeholders also expressed concern that it was important for the issue of accrued rights to be clarified when effecting the changes to the retirement age. They stated that this would assure the public that any member who would have joined the pension scheme prior to the current amendment of the National Pension Scheme Authority Act would effectively and legally still be entitled to the same benefits currently obtaining, including the right to retire at the age provided for under the current legal framework.

Mr Speaker, after careful study of the submissions by stakeholders, your Committee observes with concern that the absence of the operational definitions of early retirement and late retirement in the Bill may be a source of conflict in the implementation process. Your Committee strongly recommends that, clear definitions for early retirement and late retirement be included in order to avoid ambiguity in the interpretation of the Bill.

Your Committee further observes that the proposed subjecting of the pensionable age to both, the Act or any other written law, may result in unnecessary problems in administration and viability of the scheme. Your Committee therefore, recommends that phrase, “… or any other written law.” be deleted from Clause 4 of the Bill. It strongly recommends that Clause 4, therefore, reads, in part, as follows:

“ … subject to the provisions of this Act, A member shall retire upon attaining pensionable age. ”

Mr Speaker, with regard to the concerns raised by stakeholders highlighted above, your Committee agrees that the member’s right to retire has been left at the absolute discretion of the employer which could be subject to abuse. Your Committee therefore, recommends that a proviso be included in the Bill to provide for recourse for the aggrieved party in an event that the employer does not accept the early or late retirement decision of the employee as the case may be.

To address the issue of accrued rights, your Committee notes that the Bill does not address the transitional arrangement of members of the scheme. Your Committee recommends therefore, that transitional arrangements be provided for under the regulations to avoid administrative problems at implementation stage and that the funds should be portable across schemes.

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

Thanks also go to the Clerk of the National Assembly and her staff for the support rendered to your Committee.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo (Mumbwa): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to say a few things regarding this Bill.

Mr Speaker, I strongly feel that the benefits accruing from this Bill are only partial in the sense that there are inherent serious problems in the Public Service Pension Scheme (PSPS), the Local Authority Superannuation Scheme or fund except for National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA).

Sir, for the Public Service Pension Fund to thrive, it depends on membership which, by introducing this Bill, the hon. Minister is trying to only partially solve. We have seen that the current Public Service Pensions Fund is actually practically insolvent. When one considers that the fund base is only K1.5 billion as at 31st December, 2014 with liabilities of K24.4 billion. So, clearly, one can see that they are serious problems. Why have these problems arisen or persisted? It is the issue of membership which this Bill tries to resolve by increasing or giving options of retirement to fifty-five pensionable, retirement age at sixty and late retirement at sixty-five. The numbers that will be added will be very small because those who will be maturing to retire, in other words the outflow, will be much more than the inflow of cash unless there is this harmonisation between the National Public Service Pension Fund, NAPSA and LASF.

Mr Speaker, there is the second issue of the lump sum which has to be paid. As long as the outflow of cash is more than the inflow, this problem will continue. There will be long delays in paying retirees their benefits, some of whom end up dying before they access them.

Mr Speaker, the other issue relates to your Committee talked about of the employer being the ultimate decider as to when an employee should retire. I hope there will be a clarification by the hon. Minister in the Bill.

Mr Speaker, the third issue, which is equally important, is the debt that prevails at the moment. I have said all these things in order to lobby for comprehensive pension scheme reform that will take into account all the three pension schemes and ensure viability so that both the retirees and beneficiaries are not disadvantaged in the end.

 

Mr Speaker, the issue of contributions from the employer has to be sorted out if benefits are to be accrued from this Bill. The Government owes the pension houses as much as K265 million in the form of contributions as per December, 2013. This is a lot of money.

Mr Speaker, in view of these observations, I would like to emphasise the need for a comprehensive Pension Scheme Reform Programme. The hon. Minister must bring Bills here to harmonise the pension schemes so that they can benefit those who have contributed so much to our country.

Mr Speaker, I support your Committee’s report with reservations and seek clarifications from the hon. Minister that can create hope for us and show that the reforms will come forthwith.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Ms Kalima (Kasenengwa): Mr Speaker, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Bill on the Floor of this House.

Mr Speaker, the then Acting President, Hon. Dr Guy Scott, introduced this topic to the nation, it generated a lot of debate and caused a lot of uncertainty, especially among people who were about to retire or had planned to retire in a year or two.

Mr Speaker, I would like to state outrightly that this Bill will help clear the anxiety of many, including those that I have met in my constituency.

Mr Speaker, allow me to commend and thank the President for the intervention and the clarification he made over this matter in his usual style of keeping peace, providing guidance and directing policy just as he has done on many other issues, including those such as the issue of the Chitimukulu and on many other programmes in the country since he became President.

Mr Speaker, we saw the Bill come to the Floor of this House through the hon. Minister. I, therefore, commend him and the President.

Mr Chilangwa: Ebanakashi aba!

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr P. Ngoma: Hear, hear!

Ms Kalima: Mr Speaker, I am glad that the Bill brings in three pensionable classes. It provides for retirement at sixty years, early retirement at fifty-five years and late retirement at sixty-five years. This clarification takes care of everybody. It takes care of those that would want to go on early retirement, those that would want to go up to sixty-five years and now probably, a bonus for those that would want to retire at sixty years.

Mr Speaker, I want to illustrate how important it is to retire early. While I support the provision of various age categories that allows everybody a choice, I know that early retirement is beneficial. For example, if we have ten people retiring at fifty-five years, out of these, probably eight would want to start up companies like I did with Plant Agri-chem. Out of the eight companies that would have been started, maybe four would flourish and would be able to employ, at least, ten workers. In ten years, these workers would have multiplied to four hundred.

Mr Speaker, I support the Bill and wish to emphasise that I am glad that the different ages have been considered as opposed to imposing sixty-five years as the retirement age. Right now, we are concerned about job creation. If we allow people to retire at will at fifty-five years or at sixty and not sixty-five as it was pronounced initially, those that would have retired early would be able to create employment for other people unlike when they remain in employment up to sixty five years.

Mr Speaker, this Bill has challenges that have already been outlined by your Committee. For example, I need clarification on early retirement. In some companies, in the spirit of encouraging early retirement, an employee who retires early, gets more benefits than one who retires late. I have not seen a clarification and this is a challenge that has been noted. I appeal to the hon. Minister to look into this and specify what is in it for somebody who retires at fifty-five years or at sixty-five years. What are we trying to bring to the table? Are we trying to encourage people to retire early or late? There should be a clarification on the difference between early retirement and late retirement.

Mr Speaker, the other challenge that will come with late retirement is if, as mentioned earlier, the discretion will be left to the employer to decide whether an employee can go on retirement or not, will be the creation of jobs. It must be left to the individual to decide when to retire. One should be automatically allowed without any infringement on their rights. They should retire without the discretion of the employer. This way, we will see the creation of openings where we will have movements.

Mr Speaker, already, there is a lot of congestion in the Government departments where promotions are not frequent. However, if we allow the three options where somebody can retire early if they want, we are going to see some movements and youthful people will take up senior positions.

Mr Speaker, as the hon. Member earlier stated, I would like to appeal to the hon. Minister to review the employer and employee decision to ensure that the rights of the employee are not infringed upon.

Mr Speaker, with these few words, I would like to support the Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Mucheleka (Lubansenshi): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this report submitted by your Committee.

Mr Speaker, from the outset, let me put it on record that I, Patrick Mucheleka, representing the people of Lubansenshi Constituency in Luwingu District, of the Northern Province, may perhaps be the only one objecting to this Bill.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, not too long ago, when this issue of the retirement age was first introduced in the public domain, there was a serious reaction from the Zambian people, particularly the workers. They were against the new retirement age, to a point where the Patriotic Front (PF) Government accused the then Vice-President of sabotaging the PF in his attempt to make them not win the 2015 Elections in January. They promised that once elected, the first thing that they would do was to reverse what Dr Guy Scott …

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mucheleka: … tried to do. I am very surprised that, in their style of deceit, they came back and brought this Bill to …

Mr Speaker: Order!

Hon. Member, withdraw the word “deceit”.

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, I withdraw the word, and replace it with “misleading”.

Mr Speaker, in their usual style of misleading the people of Zambia, they have re-introduced this Bill. It is my considered view that this Bill is not being done in the interest of the Zambian people, particularly the workers.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, in my view,  it is being done in order to take into account very narrow interests of a particular political party in the Government, which thinks that it can lock up the funds for the people and abuse some of these pension organisations, especially the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA).

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, who does not know that is one institution that has been used as a conduit to siphon public money to fund political parties, that Patriotic Front (PF).

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, in this era of massive youth unemployment …

Mr Chilangwa: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, at what point do you create opportunities for the young people that are graduating from tertiary institutions? Are you constantly facilitating the closure of learning institutions because you do not want people to graduate?  When are graduates from the Copperbelt University (CBU), University of Zambia (UNZA), Evelyn Hone College of Applied Art and Commerce, and Natural Resources Development College (NRDC) going to be absorbed in the formal employment sector? In this era, we should be talking about somebody retiring at fifty-five years old. Give them the money that they have worked for when they still have the energy to go and perhaps create more jobs. When you retire at fifty-five years, and are given your retirement package, you will be able to create a lot of job opportunities for others, apart from giving an opportunity for a graduate from a tertiary institution to take the place that you are leaving. When you talk about late retirement at sixty-five years, you must be able to compare that with our life expectancy in Zambia. What is the life expectancy in Zambia today? Technically, at less than forty-two years, we are all expected to be dead. In fact, I am being generous. I have been corrected that the life expectancy is thirty-seven years. You can refer to the statistics.

Mr Speaker, social security funds are very important for all of us, and we want to have an environment where these funds are given to the people who have worked for them. Given the experience that we have, when it comes to getting these pension funds, these people who will retire at sixty-five years will only get their money when they are seventy years old,  older than that, or they would have long died. Therefore, what are we trying to do here? Do we want to continue perpetuating poverty and inequality? Why do we want to be unfair? In my view, when somebody has reached the retirement age of fifty-five years, give them their money and they will be able to start new lives elsewhere and create more jobs.

Mr Speaker, it is my considered view that the witnesses who appeared before your Committee were skewed towards certain interest groups. Why did you leave out civil society organisations, for example? I am aware that there are civil society organisations that deal with issues of social security. Why were they left out from giving submissions? Why did you …

Mr Kambwili: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Mr Kambwili: Mr Speaker, thank you very much for according me this opportunity to rise on a very serious point of order. Is the hon. Member of Parliament who is debating in order to bring Parliament into disrepute by saying that the Office of the Clerk, and the Clerk, avoided to call certain witnesses in order to tailor the Bill to the interest of others? Is he in order to bring your Committee into disrepute by debating in that manner? I need your serious ruling.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Order!

The hon. Member is certainly out of order.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Order!

He is certainly out order. I am sure you know how Business of the Committee is conducted. It is apolitical. Let us be very careful with our generalisations. This is a technical Bill. Let us not underpin it with over generalisations, especially of a political character. It is a labour question and operates regardless of your political affiliation. Let us look at the pros and cons of retiring at a particular age. Certainly, Parliament does not eschew certain witnesses in the manner that you are suggesting. I can say that with a great deal of confidence, because I am part of this administration.

Mr Mucheleka: Mr Speaker, I sincerely acknowledge your guidance.

Mr Speaker, I have been in touch with workers in the Public Service such as teachers, nurses and doctors in my constituency, since this Bill was introduced.  They have given their views to me, and I am merely conveying the message the stakeholders said to me. The issue that they brought to my attention was that I should stand in solidarity with them. Workers would like to retire at fifty-five years. This was the generic view that I  was given and I was instructed not to support this Bill.

Mr Speaker, I want it placed on record that I do not support this Bill.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Lubezhi: Well done!

Mr Speaker: Order!

Ms Imenda (Luena): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to add a voice to this Bill. I want to look at it from a different dimension.

Mr Speaker, we have so many problems in our social security sector. With regard to retirement, I wish someone could conduct a research and come up with statistics. My perception, however, is that retirees are suffering. They do not get their benefits on time and some of them end up, because of high blood pressure, dying or suffering strokes.

Mr Speaker, retirees have to travel from as far as Luena or Sikongo to Lusaka to try and get their benefits. Only three or four weeks ago, I got a Short Message Service (SMS) message from someone asking to borrow K300 because he had no transport money to go back to Luena. This gentleman has been travelling back and forth to claim his benefits. He was given a date for collection of his package, but there were stories and he had no way of getting back to Luena. This story is not just for this individual but many others. Where is the genesis of the problem?

Mr Speaker, I know for a fact that in the 1990s to 2000, there were so-called comprehensive Social Security Reforms. I am sure that the hon. Minister, who was in the labour industry then, knows what I am talking about. These comprehensive social security reforms were what culminated into the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA). The reforms, sponsored by the World Bank, were supposed to be modelled on the basis of the United States of America (USA) Social Security Association. The USA has a comprehensive scheme which every worker contributes to. There are a lot of benefits, including medical benefits. When a person retires, they have the social security system to look up to.

The US Social Security Administration does not preclude the creation of in-house social security schemes. Even NAPSA did not preclude these because the Public Service Pensions Fund (PSPF) was supposed to be some kind of an in-house arrangement. Those who were already contributing to the Public Service Pensions Scheme were supposed to continue and the new entrants to the employment market were supposed to contribute to the national scheme. The PSPF is only meant for Public Service workers. What about the rest? What about the person who is employed in a small company?

Mr Speaker, NAPSA was supposed to be national while the PSPF ...

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

Ms Imenda: Sorry, Sir?

Mr Speaker: I was controlling my right side.

Hon. Members: Continue, hon.  Member.

Ms Imenda: Thank you, Sir.

These others like PSPF and a lot of other employers could have those in-house schemes. The problem we have had is that the technocrats in the Civil Service did not like what happened so they wanted to continue with business as usual. They did not want to accept that the PSPF is an in-house scheme. What they were supposed to do, just like National Provident Fund (NPF), was restructure so that they could confine the cost of running such a scheme to what was going to be available. They did not do this and this is why they are now lamenting that NAPSA has created problems and that they have lost membership. No membership was lost. The membership that came on board after the NAPSA Bill was brought to this House, was new. They had to run with their own, but they should have cut the size according to the material that they had.

Mr Speaker, from a professional point of view, there was a notion of actuarial variation. Every social security scheme is every five years or so, supposed to be subjected to actuarial variation. Concerning actuarial variation at the time, there was a deficit in the PSPS which the Government of the day was supposed to make good of because it owed money to the PSPF.

When there is a deficit in actuarial variation, either one of two things can be done or both. You either increase the contribution rate so that you get more money to cover the deficit or increase the retirement age. Before I get to where I am going, I want to talk about something which someone has mentioned earlier. Someone said that if a person retires at fifty-five, more jobs will be created. Can someone, please come, up with the statistics? How many jobs have been created by those who retired at fifty-five?

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Imenda: Mr Speaker, when there is an actuarial variation deficit, there are two options, you either increase the retirement age or increase the contribution. If the hon. Minister suggested that we increased the contribution rate, there would be another hullabaloo.  

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Imenda: The Government, therefore, decided, and this is completely professional, according to actuarial variation, to increase the retirement age.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Imenda: For me, they have no choice. It just has to be this way because that is what actuarial variation entails.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Imenda: Otherwise, these pension schemes would collapse.

Mr Speaker, I thought that I should just mention this. I have given professional advice and I totally agree with the Bill and support it.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune (Katombora): Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Speaker, I want to state that as professional as this matter may be, it has a direct bearing on the poor person. It is, therefore, important that the Government, which is the custodian of people’s lives, take serious measures and reflect seriously in dealing with these matters.

Mr Speaker, I want to adopt the debate by the hon. Member for Lubansenshi that was recorded earlier on the Floor of this House, as my own.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: I also want to adopt part of the debates by the hon. Member for Luena.

Hon. Opposition Members: Part.

Mr Livune: Yes, I only adopt part of it because I do not support the Bill.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: I will illustrate why I do not support this Bill.

Sir, social insurance or a pension is compensation of lost income at retirement. If it is compensation of lost income at retirement, then, there is a need for those who are tasked with the responsibility to ensure that a pensioner is not deprived of this pension at retirement.

Mr Speaker, it is important that in dealing with this matter, hon. Members understand the genesis of the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA). I agree with the debate of the hon. Member for Luena when she talked about the creation of NAPSA and her analysis of the pension schemes that we had. The schemes were the Public Service Pension Fund (PSPF), which was formed by an Act of Parliament, the Local Authority Superannuation Fund (LASF) and the National Provident Fund (NPF) which are also babies of this House.

Sir, the background to this is that most of the countries that were colonised by Britain used the National Provident Fund mode that entailed that the contributions of members were not indexed. As a result, inflation impacted members’ accounts. This is different from the current NAPSA situation where the inflation is borne by the institution. The contributions are indexed so that the value of the money is not lost.

Mr Speaker, under the NPF, K1 1980 remained K1 in 2015, for example, but under NAPSA it is different situation. I would like to place on record my thanks to the architects of NAPSA. We actively participated in the process and the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security was also an active participant at that time. I must recognise that fact.

Sir, we are talking about retirement adjustments as a result of actuarial reports. The creation of NAPSA did not sentence the other institutions to death. It is the mentality of people who refused to reform who brought about the problem that we have today. The problem that we have is that the contribution at NAPSA today is 10 per cent, 5 per cent from the employer and 5 per cent from the employee. However, for these other institutions like LASF, unless things have changed, the contribution is 23 per cent. The contributions at NAPSA were pegged at 10 per cent recognising the fact that the other institutions that existed because of the failure of the NPF to adequately compensate people at retirement, allowed for the existence of in-house pension schemes. These in-house pension schemes were born out of agreements between employers and employees.

Ms Imenda: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: At the time when the decision was made, Zambia decided to use a three tier system in terms of pension administration. The first was the NAPSA. Everyone in the country was expected to contribute to NAPSA. The second tier was an occupation pension scheme which was from employee to employer based on the capacity and strength to pay and honour those obligations. The continuality of those pension schemes was based on the employer and the unions being in agreement.

Sir, the third tier system was a personal investment. If I was going to invest by myself, I was going to make decisions as to when I would use my money. It was a three tier system. The Government prescribed the conditions of when one got money from NAPSA, the employers and unions would agree when one would get their money in the in-house pension schemes and in the third one you could make your own decision.

Mr Speaker, the problem that we were having, as I said, was that when NAPSA was born, these institutions wanted to remain at their highest levels of contribution instead of adjusting so that, with 10 per cent going to NAPSA, they would have continued receiving new members as in-house pension schemes, which are LASF and the PSPF. However, there could also have been a problem on the part of the technocrats who did not remind the policy makers that all these institutions were created by Acts of Parliament. There was LASF, PSPF, NPF and then NAPSA which was born without powers being removed from these other institutions. The three institutions continued operating at the same level, but then NAPSA took over all the new members, according to their claim, while these other institutions claim that they lost members.

Sir, it is also a fact that there were differences between the PSPF, LASF and the NPF. The difference was that the employers who were contributing to the NPF would take the money and the returns of those that contributed to the scheme. On the other hand, as the Government does in its normal nature, the PSPF and LASF were not taking money and just submitting returns.

Mr Mutelo: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: At the end of the day, the NPF would invest the money whereas these other institutions would not receive the cash and would have to wait for the Government to give them a grant. Eventually, they failed to meet the obligations.

Mr Mutelo: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: At evaluation, the NPF was stronger than the two hence they decided to go national on the NPF.

Mr Speaker, this problem has continued now. The other institutions were supposed to reform. Those who were getting 23 per cent should have reduced to 13 per cent. In fact, they should have reduced to 5 per cent because 5 per cent is from the employee and the 5 per cent is from the employer so that the other 5 per cent goes to NAPSA. There would have been new members in LASF and the PSPF, except that they would operate as occupational pension schemes. This is why I also agree with the hon. Member for Mumbwa when he called for comprehensive reforms in these institutions.

Sir, when I heard that the hon. Minister would bring a Bill, there were issues that I was looking forward to seeing. One of the things I expected was for the hon. Minister to bring a Bill, within NAPSA, to deal with the beneficiaries of NAPSA. In the current form, if you die and you have no child, there is a problem as regards those benefits, unless something has happened that the nation needs to know about. There is also a situation where NAPSA is also a beneficiary on the claim. When you are claiming for a deceased person, NAPSA also gets a share, which I feel is not fair.

Mr Speaker, I do not think NAPSA has financial problems because it has continued receiving money from employees and employers and there is no default. I think they are doing extremely well and all they need is support from all us. We need to fine-tune the benefits in supporting the hon. Minister so that people can appreciate the need for institutions like NAPSA.

Sir, page 2 of this report states:

“This clause seeks to revise the meaning of pensionable age. Whereas pensionable age currently means the age of fifty-five years, it is proposed to revise this to sixty years.”

Mr Speaker, is NAPSA involved in the actuarial reports of these three institutions? Is NAPSA that bad or are you lumping the weakness of the PSPF and LASF on NAPSA? I would like clarification on that issue because I know that the problems that these institutions find themselves in are the issues that I referred to earlier.

Mr Speaker, I do not think NAPSA has got these problems because they are sound and they are able to pay their beneficiaries well. Sometimes, the mishappenings at the NPF are taken to be those of NAPSA which is not correct. There must be a distinction because the NPF still exists under NAPSA today, but these benefits are questionable because they are still operating under the NPF Act within NAPSA. The National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) is good and sound because it is able to meet its obligations. When you talk about increasing the retirement age, who do you want to save that money for? When we begun this issue, we debated on raising the retirement age. I knew where these people were going. Look at them.

Laughter

Mr Livune: Sir, all that they wanted to do was to save money from the poor people and abuse it in their usual style.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Katombora, ...

Mr Livune: Yes, Sir.

Mr Speaker: ... I just cautioned earlier on. Let us avoid these generalisations. You have been proceeding factually and seemingly professionally. Keep it that way because those are conjectures. It is difficult to adduce proof in support of those assertions. We are always encouraged to be factual in our debates.

Interruptions

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, I meant abuse in the by-elections and other things that do not benefit the poor people of Zambia. For example, working is a serious and difficult issue. One musician sung that, “at lunch we drink maheu.” Here is a common man drinking maheu throughout his working life and, at fifty-five years, he is told to retire early and wait for another five years before he can start getting his pension at NAPSA. It is unacceptable.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, if the Government allows early retirement at fifty-five years according to the way they are putting it, which I would have loved to reduce because of the life expectance, people should be allowed to get their pension.

Ms Lubezhi: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: Sir, I am questioning the issue of pensionable age and retirement age. Who do you want to preserve this money for? After fifty-five years, what will the money be waiting for? At fifty-five years, somebody would have died leaving his money. I mentioned to this House that a pension is meant to replace a lost income at retirement. If I have retired at fifty-five, why should I be denied to get my pension for me to continue surviving? The reason for pension is to preserve life after retirement. It has been proven that once you stop getting your monthly salary, you perish quickly. When you know that you are receiving a salary and that at the end of the month, you will get another one, you can use that money and use it the way you want. You can either throw it away or donate to your political party if you want because you know that you will still get another one at the month end. If that is your last salary, you will surely die within a shortest possible time.

Laughter

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, it is not good to force people to retire. This Government think they are doing a good thing when they are actually not because their intentions are to keep people longer in employment.

Sir, I would also like to state that the issue of people working for sixty to sixty-five years should be left to some profession of some kind. For example, without demeaning any job, how can a cleaner or a watchman work until sixty to sixty-five years? How can an immigration officer at the border work for sixty to sixty-five years ...

Laughter

Mr Livune: ... when Grade 12 school leavers can do that job? What is the Government’s intention? How can a police officer work for sixty to sixty-five years? Can he even be able to operate a gun? It is not possible. That is why we are saying that the issue of sixty-five years would have been left to professionals such as the learned hon. Minister of Justice, the lawyers and medical professionals  because the older the wine, the better it tastes.

Laughter

Mr Livune: Mr Speaker, it is not possible for us to let every Jim and Jack to retire at sixty-five years. Some people must be forced to retire early so that they can go and do other things in order to help the nation grow in terms of food security and other devices.

Mr Speaker, I mentioned that I do not support this Bill, hence my call to adopt Hon. Mucheleka’s debate ...

Mr Mucheleka: Hear, hear!

Mr Livune: ... on the Floor of this House. I still maintain that I do not support because it is a recipe of sending the poor Zambians to their early graves. I am not going to be part of those killers who will kill the Zambians by inducing the retirement age to those levels which are unacceptable.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, ...

Mr Speaker: By the way, we are legislating and not killing.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: ... the problem is that we are debating a Bill which is not here. This particular Bill is simply agreeing with what has already been put in force. In the Statutory Instrument (SI), there is a law that you can retire at fifty-five, sixty or sixty-five. When the issue of retiring at sixty-five was raised in this House, there was a problem. Now, there is already a law that you can retire at fifty-five to accommodate those who want to retire early and at sixty and sixty-five to those who want it that way. What this Bill is asking is to let NAPSA and other pension schemes go in line with what has already been put in place.

Mr Speaker, those who want to retire at fifty-five, will get their money and the same applies to those who want to retire at sixty and sixty-five.  It is a straightforward arrangement. I think you should listen to your Committee very well. My problem is that you cannot allow the optional retirement to be based on your employer. That is wrong because even when you are going to keep the money for planning purposes, you will not be able to know when the employer is going to agree that the money should be available for those at fifty-five. The fear is that you will be trying to hold money and give the people when they retire at sixty-five. This is not right. We know that our administration is fond of making laws and also, delay payments.

Sir, Hon. Livune was very clear in his debate. The problem in the Civil Service is that the pension contributions are not remitted to NAPSA. The problem we are having now is that the money that is remitted to NAPSA is not enough to pay the retired people. We have arrears. The Government is not investing this money. This Government has tried to be clever by trying to delay payments for the retirees but they are caught up because the people have refused.  Those that want to retire at fifty-five, they should do so. The Government should work out something to ensure that the money intended for pension is remitted to NAPSA. There is no point in deducting money.

Sir, we have handled cases where teachers’ money has been deducted and at retirement, when the go to NAPSA, they will only realise that the money was never remitted. They will have to go back to the Ministry of Education, Science, Vocational Training and Early Education and start looking for files. They will even find that the files are still held up in some offices. You cannot do that. We are now forced to debate the problems that people face. Hon. Livune has asked you to come up with another law to improve on the pension scheme. In certain situations, you will need to insure your pension. There are a number of countries that insure pensions. It is guaranteed that when people retire at a certain age, they will get so much. They know that the money which they will get is insured.

Mr Speaker, the Zambia National Provident Fund (ZNPF) was a disaster. Those of us that contributed to ZNPF got totally nothing. We were contributing about K300 then and by the time I was going to check how much was there, there was nothing. That pension scheme did not work. We are making these proposals because we are talking about pensions for our people.

We are worried because the Government owes people a lot of money. It should put a programme of paying off these people especially with this law in place now. Those that want to retire at fifty-five will need to be paid. There will be no need to have excuses. We support the idea that you want to give those who retire at fifty-five their money. However, if you are not going to pay them when they retire at fifty-five, the number of retirees will keep increasing, and you would have postponed the problem of paying them, and it will become a bigger problem. In addition, a number of these retirees would have died before you pay them their pension benefits. That is why I hesitate to support this Bill.

Sir, even if I do not support this Bill, a law to retire at either fifty-five, sixty or sixty five years has already been effected although it was not even brought into this House. Cabinet took the Statutory Instrument to be signed by the then Acting President and that is delegated legislation. So, my argument is that you have already made a law for people to retire either at fifty-five, sixty or sixty five? In that regard, I support the Bill but the hon. Minister should ensure that the pension payable to the people is given to them. We are at crossroads to defend our people who are not paid their money.

Mr Speaker, after this Bill is passed, Zambians will now raise on us hon. Members of Parliament to say that we legislated that they should retire at sixty five and they will not understand that there was already delegated legislation. The only reason we support this Bill is to ensure that those that retire early can be paid their money. That is all and I do not see any problem. Let us read the Bill and understand what the hon. Minister is asking for. However, it is the inherent factors and what has been going on that makes us worried of what we are doing. I appeal to the hon. Minister that this Bill should ensure that the pensioners get their money. When the hon. Minister stated that at sixty-five some people would be useless, I could see that Hon. Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo was about to raise on a point of order …

Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo: Yes.

Mr Muntanga: … because he is sixty-five. Does he look sixty-five? There are people who age fast.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: You may not even want to retire them at fifty-five and you may need to retire them at forty.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: You may look at someone and think he is already sixty when someone is only barely forty-five or forty-eight. So, these are the problems that we face.

Sir, in the United Kingdom (UK), they have reached a stage where they have increased the retirement age to seventy years and it is a law. Even when that person reaches seventy years, he/she cannot be forced to retire at that age because they will regard it as a form of segregation.

You know, Hon. Mr Speaker, I am in charge of an office in London, and we face that problem.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: I can confirm it is true.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: We shall not go into the details.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, in the UK, you cannot retire someone at seventy. You will have to beg him/her to retire because there are laws that state that a person cannot retire on the issue of age. There are people who are eighty years and are still working and the Government cannot do anything about it and has to convince such people to stop working.

Sir, life expectancy in Zambia is low and it is true. The young ones have died and those that have remained are those that are not caught up with the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) aspect and this is the older generation of people. So, what is the Government going to do? These are the problems that they must handle without fear.

Interruptions

Mr Muntanga: The number of unemployed people, especially in Africa, is increasing dangerously. We only have about 300,000, 400,000 or 500,000 people in formal employment in this country.

Mr Speaker, the Social Cash Transfer Scheme that started in Kalomo was my initiative.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Continue hon. Member.

Mr Muntanga: It is a pity Hon. Namugala is not here. People should know the truth. It was an arrangement that I made with a German friend of mine and we started it in Kalomo as a pilot project giving an amount of K30 to each beneficiary. Now, we are talking about K70. Check your figures. I am very happy because I initiated the Social Cash Transfer Scheme. However, the real issue is for the hon. Minister to find ways of creating employment for the youth because the Social Cash Transfer Scheme will now be a big issue. This is because money will not only be given to the old people, but also the young ones who literally have nothing.

Sir, even in this room, if we start asking people’s ages, you will be surprised that some people look old, and yet they are not.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: I think you should end there.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I support this Bill, but I would like to urge the hon. Minister …

Lt-Gen. Rev. Shikapwasha: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: A point of order is raised.

Lt-Gen. Rev. Shikapwasha: Mr Speaker, is the hon. Member of Parliament for Kalomo Central who is also my younger brother, who is debating so well in order to state on the Floor of this House that even us that looking younger …

Laughter

Lt-Gen. Rev. Shikapwasha: … are old?

Laughter

Mr Speaker: That is why I stopped him.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I support the Bill, but with an appeal to the hon. Minister to come back and bring regulations or another Act to cover the pension schemes that will support those who are working although the best retirement package is not a pension scheme that people want. They must prepare themselves well before they are forty years. People should start businesses when they are young. There are some people who want to start businesses at fifty years when it is too late.

Hon. Government Members: Hammer, hammer!

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, order!

Mr Muntanga: Sir, I have heard this issue of retirement too much. Some people are scared to retire because they are not ready. You will never be ready at fifty. If you did not prepare yourself at thirty and did not start any business at twenty five and you want to start a business at fifty, it is too late. The short cut for some people is to have an employment contract with the Government and take money without permission. These are the dangerous type of people and this is the problem that we face. I did not worry about a pension scheme. I did not get any ngwee from the Zambia National Provident Fund (ZNPF) because the trouble I would have to go through to travel from Kalomo to Lusaka was not worth it.

 Mr Speaker, the best we can do is to prepare pension schemes for our people. The majority of Zambians do not work and have no pension schemes. The Government needs to do something in order for them to prepare themselves for their survival. When you die, do you know how your property will be shared? If you cannot answer that question, then, you are not a manager.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mutelo (Lukulu West): Mr Speaker, I have just been provoked after having listened to the debate. There is a tendency of agreeing and disagreeing. On one hand, someone will say no to the idea and say that let us go for sixty or sixty-five years as a retirement age yet on the other hand, someone is saying it is better to retire at fifty-five. Suffice to say that your report is saying that there are certain things which need to be cleared. It is for this reason that the hon. Minister has to go back and have a look at this Bill again and come up with something that is concrete.

As a person who has been very close to the youths, I feel for them. Where do you want the youths to be? Currently, the new birth certificates indicate the dates when someone was born and therefore, it will be very difficult for someone to lie. The question still remains the same as to where you are going to take these youths. Even in the family of lions, there are specific ages which are supposed to hunt for the rest of the pride. If a lion is old, it is old.

 Laughter

Mr Mutelo: It will depend on the young ones to fetch food for them. So, where are you placing the young ones as you are arguing in this House? This is what has provoked me to stand up.

 Laughter

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, as we are considering this Bill, let us be mindful of the youths as this is the biggest age group in Zambia.

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 Mr Mutelo: Is it the aged or the youth? Where is our population graph? Where do have the majority in as far as the age group is concerned? Which age group is more productive? I am asking these questions because people will be holding onto the positions up to sixty-five years. Even if we saying that there is an option for someone to retire at sixty years people would not want to go because it is not the final retirement age. They would instead want to hold onto the positions. So, what do you think will be happening to your children, your grandchildren and your great grandchildren because before you reach sixty or sixty-five, many generations would have come into play.

 Laughter

Mr Mutelo: Sir, it is important for us to take into consideration the rate at which our children and your children are growing. With the genetically modified organisms (GMO) food that people are eating today, one wonders what you are going to do with the two, three or four generations.  So, as we are debating and looking at this Bill, let be mindful of the youths and the young ones.

Mr Speaker, the issue at hand is not the scheme or the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA), but the beneficiaries. We are not protecting the would-be beneficiaries who are the youths. We are instead protecting the schemes, the organisations that are getting the money when someone is still a youth.

 Mr Livune: Hear, hear!

 Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, when the time comes for the beneficiary to go and claim for their money as the saying goes, “Give unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar and to God what belongs to God.”  People are tired of being made to start queuing for their money. The common answer which they get is “come tomorrow”, that is the only benefit.

 Laughter

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, even if someone continues pushing for his/her money, he/she will be told that his/her file is missing. So, he/she will continue going to check for his/her benefits and, sometimes, die in the process, before getting his/her dues. If this issue is not resolved while one is still alive, who will get his/her benefits when he/she dies at sixty or sixty-five years? Just like the hon. Member of Parliament for Katombora mentioned, there is another claimer of this money other than the beneficiary who is the contributor. There is a silent beneficiary who is not seen.

Sir, as it was stated by a professional, the hon. Member for Luena, this whole issue has been politicised. This announcement has brought about mixed feelings, especially among the youths and the public at large. It is likely that this Bill will come back to this House with a different retirement age of fifty-five. Afterwards, this Government will again silently come back and say no, the retirement age should be at sixty-five years. Therefore, let us be mindful with whatever pronouncements and promises that we make to the people of Zambia. Otherwise, we will keep on saying something different and people out there may react. It is important that we do the right thing once and for all.  Are we going for fifty-five years as a retirement age or sixty-five years?

 Mr Speaker, these are the issues which have provoked me to briefly contribute on this Bill. Finally, I would like to say that let us be mindful and care for the youths.

Mr Speaker: Order!

 I think you have debated your point extensively.

 Mr Mutelo: Sir, we should also consider the beneficiaries when they retire because people will be dying leaving their money if the retirement age is adjusted to sixty and sixty-five years respectively.

Sir, with these very few words, Bo Minister, …

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Order!

That expression is not allowed.

Mr Mutelo: Mr Speaker, he is my son because of the age issues.

 Laughter

Mr Mutelo: Sir, let us look at this Bill carefully.

 I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Mr Mufalali (Senanga): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank you for giving me an opportunity to contribute on this Bill.

Sir, from the outset, may I indicate and let it be on record that I do not support the Bill. The world today is looking for men and women who will stand true like a needle to the pole.

Mr Speaker, I can remember very well that in January this year, I, Likando Mufalali who belongs to the United Party for National Development (UPND) and hon. Member of Parliament for Senanga Central Constituency, agreed with the rest of the Civil Service and my Party President, Mr Hakainde Hichilema, that the adjustment of the retirement age from fifty-five to sixty-five was not right.

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: Mr Speaker, it was not right because we believed to the fact that when people retire at 55, they will be able to work for themselves. They will at least be able to do something for themselves.

Sir, the syndrome of poor dad and rich dad comes into play. The poor dad would want his children to continue working until they are no more youthful yet, the rich dad would want his children to go back and start doing their own things.

 Mr Speaker, on that point, we believe that the removal or the change from fifty-five to sixty-five years is not and it will never be right.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: Mr Speaker, the fact that there was a loud outcry out there by the general public, it made those who were contesting then should change to what we believe in and that fifty-five was the right retirement age. It is surprisingly that today, people are shifting from one position to the other. I think that is why the world is looking for men and women who stand true to their promises.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: The fact that people want to start moving is an indication that people are following their principles because they do not want to believe in what that indicated before. It is for this reason that I think that the respect for human and especially for those in politics is slowly dwindling down because peplum do not want to keep their promises.

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: It is not right for people to continue shifting from one position to the other. Therefore, let it be on record that I, Likando Mufalali, UPND Member and Chairperson of youths in the UPND, will never support the adjustment in the retirement age from fifty-five to sixty-five age.

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 Mr Mufalali: Mr Speaker, the people out there have suffered enough and want to retire. They have had the wage freeze, which affected them. The two-year wage freeze has seriously affected the workers. Now, you want to continue inflicting more pain. We are not having any austerity measures where we have to start shifting from fifty-five to sixty-five.

Sir, we have been told by the hon. Minister of Finance that everything is alright. In Europe, they are talking about adjusting the retirement age because they are having problems because they have over borrowed.  This is why we stand firm and say that we should not borrow more than we require …

Mr Ndalamei: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: … because that will lead us into  trouble and, in the process, we are going to  have the austerity measures like in Europe where they are saying you have to continue working because their pension schemes do not have money.

Mr Speaker, I would like to borrow Hon. Mutelo’s debate and agree that the youths have suffered enough. If we increase the retirement age to sixty-five years, the cycle will show that a youths will have to wait for someone to retire, ten years after graduating, in order for them to be employed in the Civil Service.

Hon. Opposition Members: Shame!

Mr Mufalali: That is not going to auger well. I think we are not taking this issue seriously. We are instead shifting problems from one position to the other.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mufalali: That is not the way to solve problems. I suggest that we leave the retirement age at fifty-five years. I am not going to be part and parcel of those who believe that the retirement age should be increased. Let it be on record that I am not going to be part of that. The youths out there are crying for employment. Therefore, ...

Mr Speaker: Order!

You are now repeating yourself.

Mr Mufalali: ... the position for Senanga and the UPND is that we do not support this Motion of increasing the retirement age to sixty-five.

I thank you, sir.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

The Minister of Information and Broadcasting (Mr Kambwili): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me this opportunity to say a few words concerning this Bill. I think it is a question of understanding what we want to achieve collectively, as the Government and the Opposition. If we are just going to talk for the sake of politicking, then, we are going to mislead the masses. It is becoming tradition in Zambia that if you want to take a political stance, even when you know that the effects of that particular stance will be negative on the general citizenry, you still go ahead and do it.

Sir, from the debates that I have heard this afternoon, we know from this side of the House, that if an issue is worth discussing, we know who the seasoned debaters are. If I see Hon. Hamududu stand up not to support the Bill, ...

Hon. UPND Members rose.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: Order!

 Hon. Minister, let us not debate ourselves.

Hon. UPND Members resumed their seats.

Mr Kambwili: If I see certain hon. Members of Parliament stand to object to a certain Bill, you even see that indeed, there is something wrong. However, when you see certain individuals stand up to debate, ...

Laughter

Mr Kambwili: ... you even know that this is for the sake of politicking.

Mr Speaker, when we were in the Opposition, we, in the PF, together with the UPND pushed for pension reforms. Our cry was that pensioners were not being paid their dues on time. If someone retires at fifty-five, that person is removed from the payroll when the money to pay him is not ready. It takes five years to pay that retiree his money. In the process, that individual dies, leaving the money behind and yet he had worked for many years. So, we, the PF are saying that it is better for one to reach fifty-five years, but continue earning a salary until sixty years. During this time, we shall be cleaning up the pension houses so that when the time to retire finally arrives, the retirement cheque will be ready. So, which is a better devil between one who makes you retire at fifty-five years, removes you from the payroll without income until five or ten years before you get your pension or one who says you should remain on the payroll while we are putting our house in order so that we pay you at the time of your retirement? So, unless you understand these issues, you would not be objecting to this Bill for the sake of it.

Mr Speaker, when the PF came into office, we wondered why people were not getting their retirement benefits after leaving work. Even when you are saying that the youths will be disadvantaged in terms of getting employment, that may be true, but when one retires at fifty-five years, we will create jobs for those youths. However, when they retire, they will never see their pension. Is it not better to bite a bullet today and make a decision that will enable everybody who retires to get their benefits at the time of retirement or to continue with a system where people will retire without getting their retirement benefits until they die?

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr Kambwili: Sir, we did an actuarial assessment which revealed that there will be a ten-year gap in the payment of pensions. There will be a deficit in the payment of pensions. There are only two issues to be resolved. It is either we increase the pension age or increase the contributions. However, when you look at the money that the Zambian workers are earning, and most of the companies under the Nation Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) Act, it is very difficult for the companies to deduct 5 percent of the workers’ earnings and take it to the pension scheme. So, we decided that the best way forward was to increase the retirement age so that we give breathing space to the pension houses to make sure that when an employee retires, he is given a cheque, immediately.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Kambwili: Sir, this is what we are trying to say, as PF. Any reasonable person will not politicise this issue for the sake of politicising. Some of your parents have died without getting their pension. Do not heap this blame on the PF. We are trying to clean up the mess, ...

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah!

Mr Speaker: Withdraw the word, “mess”.

Mr Kambwili: Mr Speaker, I withdraw the word, “mess”.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

The word has been withdrawn. You may continue.

Mr Kambwili: Sir, we are trying to correct the mistakes made by previous Governments. We want to make a decision that will stand the test of time. Great men are seen by the decisions they make because we will be judged by posterity.

So, Mr Speaker, I would like to inform my dear brothers on the left that what we are trying to do is for the better of the pensioners. Unless you just want to politicise the issue and say as UPND, we want the youths to be employed.

Hon. UPND Members: Yes!

Mr Kambwili: The youths will be employed by creating more industries and jobs and not by reducing the pension age.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Kambwili: Sir, my appeal is that we should be reasonable and address this matter with the seriousness that it deserves. If we do not address the current situation, there will come a time when it will take more than ten years before one pensioner is paid. Is this what you want to do for the people of Zambia?

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr Kambwili: So, do not mislead the people because some people like my dear brother in a red tie (pointing at Mr Mucheleka) are always trying to politicise issues.

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr Mucheleka: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Mucheleka: On a point of order on Kambwili.

Mr Speaker: Order, order!

Mr Mucheleka: Stop misleading the people. You want to continue abusing NAPSA ...

Mr Speaker: Order, order!

The Deputy Minister of Youth and Sport (Mr Chitotela): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving this chance to contribute to the Bill on the Floor of the House.

Sir, after listening to so many hon. Members debate, I feel compelled that there is a need to put the records straight, having served in the Ministry of Labour and Social Security where I was in charge of Social Security. The reality is different from politics. A lot of people have made political statements on the retirement age.

Sir, I remember how the incumbent President promised the Zambian people, during the campaigns, that he would listen to them as well as give them the chance to speak. Immediately he assumed the Presidency, he called the workers that we are seemingly speaking for. A tripartite consultative meeting was held and it drew participants from the Government and the unions. It was in the public domain that the agreement for the variation of retirement at the age of fifty-five, sixty and sixty-five was an agreed upon by the workers themselves who were represented by the Zambia Congress of Trade Union (ZCTU), Federation for Free Trade Unions of Zambia (FFTUZ) and the Government. This proposal to retire at sixty-five years was made by the workers themselves. So, when people start politicking, I understand that we may seemingly be representing the workers when, in fact, not since we are speaking against the position of the workers. The proposal by the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security is, ...

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1815 until 1830 hours.

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

Mr Chitotela: Mr Speaker, before business was suspended, I was stating that we must be careful when purporting to represent workers in this country. Our labour laws must be in conformity with what the people want. The amendments we are proposing in this Bill are what workers want. In their submissions to the Committee, workers made it clear that they wanted to be retiring at fifty-five, sixty and sixty-fives years. Therefore, it is important that we get our facts right and know the reality on the ground before standing up to debate on a particular issue.

Mr Speaker, after making submissions to your Committee, the workers themselves even had a press conference addressed by the two mother unions, ZCTU and FFTUZ, just to confirm that they were in support of this Bill. The president of FFTUZ, Chingati Msiska, issued a statement to that effect. Mr Roy Mwaba, who is the ZCTU secretary-general, said that as workers they had resolved that the early retirement age should be at fifty-five years, normal retirement at sixty years and late retirement at sixty-five years.

 Mr Speaker, I therefore get surprised when hon. Members, who are representatives of the people, come to this Chamber and begin giving opinions which are contrary to what the people, or the workers in this instance, want. Maybe, some of our colleagues do not live in their communities and, therefore, are out of touch with reality.

Mr Livune: Question!

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chitotela: Mr Speaker, some people have proposed that people who retire be paid a lump sum immediately they retire. I wonder whether we study the laws that we make. We need to study the National Pension Scheme Act. NAPSA does not give a lump sum to someone who retires after fifteen years of continuous service. Such a person qualifies for a life pension. They will be getting a monthly salary until death. After the retiree dies, the spouse will continue getting this month salary or any children below the age of twenty-one years. That is what the Act provides.

Mr Speaker, I do not understand why some people choose to stand up and begin to mislead the nation and House as though they are speaking the truth about the workers’ position on this matter. Those of us who come from rural areas have seen what has happened to some teachers and headmasters after being given a lump sum when they retired. Money cannot be kept for a long period of time. After one to three years, most retirees are broke. All of us here must have experienced this with someone we know who retired. Someone who never bought a deep freezer or car while in employment will certainly go and buy such items with their retirement benefits.  That is why they would have finished their money in two to three years.

So if we do not have proper pension laws that provide for retirement, it becomes difficult to take care of employees after they retire. This is why retirees who do not have a consistent income begin to suffer from depreciation two to three years into retirement. High blood pressure comes in and it is the fastest way of sending people that have served this country with integrity to an early grave. So, as hon. Members of Parliament, who have been elected to represent the people, we must come here and speak for the people.

Mr Speaker, some people said that the life expectancy in Zambia has reduced to thirty-one. I was wondering if we read the documents we are given. The new publication from the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and these documents were given to us, life expectancy in Zambia has risen to fifty-three years.

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr Chitotela: So, when people stand up to debate without reading, I wonder which part of Zambia they live in and where they get information. Are we really debating from a factual perspective?

Mr Speaker, I did not want to take long. I just wanted to correct the impression because when President Lungu was elected he promised the people of Zambia, I remember it was at the Mandevu Rally where he said, “I will listen to you. I will not do anything without consulting you.”

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chitotela: He gave the opportunity to the workers themselves to decide and this is what they decided.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chitotela: We are a listening Government. We cannot do things against the wish of the majority because they are the ones that have given us power to represent them.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chitotela: Mr Speaker, with those few words, I support the Act.

Thank you so much, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Shamenda: Mr Speaker, I would like to heartily thank the Chairperson of your Committee and all the Members for the good report. I think this gives us an opportunity, as the Government, to refine the Bill. I would like to assure this august House that we will take into consideration all the issues that have been raised by your Committee.

Mr Speaker, we will avoid to look at issues where others were politicking. Those are for outside of this House. As you had said earlier on, this is a technical subject which we are discussing and we need to look at it from that perspective.

Mr Kambwili: Hear, hear!

Mr Shamenda: I would like to assure the Committee that all the issues which have been raised in this Report, we agree with them. I would like to emphasise that they will be taken into consideration. In my statement earlier on I had commented that we agree. I would like to pay tribute to the hon. Member for Luena, hon. Muntanga for Kalomo Central and my two hon. Ministers who have clarified the issues which I would have raised myself.

Mr Livune: Question!

Mr Shamenda: It is important to put it on record, even at the expensive of repetition, that when the Patriotic Front (PF) was campaigning they never misled anybody. The issue which other people have raised that, the Bill was signed after the demise of our late President.

Mr Mufalali: Why?

Mr Shamenda: I had discussions with the late President, may his soul rest in peace. Why he had not signed the Bill was because the consultations had not concluded. So, the Acting President came in, he did not realise that the consultations were going on, then he signed, that was when he was reminded that, Sir, although you have signed this Bill, it was still at the stage of consultations.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Interruptions

Mr Shamenda: Hence, during the campaign, His Excellency the President made it very clear because the consultations were still going on, he said we are going to listen. It is very clear as I stated in my statement that we consulted the Federation of Employers and the Trade Unions. The most representative trade union in this country is the Zambia Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), then, we equally consulted the Federation of Free Trade Unions and all of them were saying this is what we were looking at before we brought this Bill to Parliament. Fortunately, your Committee has done a splendid job that we are able to refine the grey areas.

Finally, Mr Speaker, I would like to emphasise that we are dealing with the National Pensions Scheme Authority (NAPSA) Bill. We are not talking about the other Bills. We may have problems with the other pension schemes but this is why in our wisdom as the Patriotic Front (PF), as indicated in the manifesto, we said that we would carry out pension reforms.

Mr Speaker, the issues which have been raised by Hon. Imenda from Luena are some of the very progressive ones which are coming into the reforms. The issues which Hon. Livune was mentioning of a pyramid type of arrangement of the pension scheme with a three tier system is the way we are going so that there is a national pension scheme which is compulsory, occupational pension schemes and voluntary pension schemes. This is aimed at making sure that Zambians are not going to eat rhetoric. This is a technical subject. If you do not know what they are talking about, you better keep quiet.

Laughter

Mr Shamenda: These are straightforward and academic issues. The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the International Labour Organisation (ILO) who have the experts were able to advise. Who are we?

Hon. Government Member: Hear, hear!

Mr Shamenda: Mr Speaker, once again, I would like to thank the Committee for a good document and assure that everything that has been raised will be taken care of.

 I 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 at a later date.

__________

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

THE URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING BILL, 2015

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 2 – (Interpretation)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 2:

    on page 11, in line 3, by the deletion of the definition of land and the substitution therefor of the following definition:

“land” includes a building, land covered by water and a rightin or over land, except a mining right, mineral processing licence or gold panning certificate granted under the Mines and Minerals Development Act, 2015;”and

    on page 12:

     in line 18 by the insertion, immediately after the word “of” of the words “a province or “;  and

    in line 35 by the deletion of the words “is ordinarily a resident” and the substitution therefor of the words “ordinarily resides”.

Amendment is agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

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

Clauses 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 9 – (Regional Planning Authorities)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 9:

    on page 17:

    after line 31 by the insertion of the following paragraph:

“(b)      a representative of each of the planning authorities in the region;”; and

    in line 32 by the renumbering of paragraph (b) as paragraph (c); and

    on page 18, in lines 1 and 3, by the renumbering of paragraphs (c) and (d) as paragraphs (d) and (e) respectively.

Amendment is agreed to.  Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 18 – (Regional Development Plans)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 18, on page 25:

    in line 30 by the deletion of the word “and”;

    in line 32 by the deletion of the full stop and the substitution therefor of a semi-colon and the word “and”;  and

    after line 32 by the insertion of the following new paragraph:

 

Amendment is agreed to.  Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 18, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses, 19, 20, 21 and 22 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 23 – (Adoption of Local Area Plan)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 23, on page 33:

    after line 12 by the insertion of the following new subsections:

 

 

 

    direct the local planning authority to amend the local area plan as the

provincial planning authority may determine.

(8)        a local planning authority shall, where the provincial planning authority directs the local planning authority to amend the local area plan, amend the local area plan within a period of forty-five days.”; and

(b)        in line 13 by the renumbering of subsection (6) as subsection (9).

Amendment is agreed to.  Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 23, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 24 is ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 25 – (Planning Agreements)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 25:

    on page 34, in line 34, by the insertion, immediately after the word “management”, of a comma and the words “and other areas as may be prescribed”;

    on page 35:

    in line 1 by the deletion of the word “between” and substitution therefor of the word “among”; and

    in line 2 by the insertion, immediately after the word “authority” of a  comma and the words “local community”.

Amendment is agreed to.  Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 25, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 26, 27 and 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 CLAUSE 29 – (Subdivision and Control of Improvement Areas)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 29, on page 36, in line 25, by the deletion of paragraph (a) and the substitution therefor of the following:

“(a)      subdivide, consolidate or alter the boundaries of land in an Improvement Area for purposes of a local area plan;”.

Amendment is agreed to.  Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 29, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 and 38 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 39 – (Preparation of Integrated Development Plan)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 39, on page 40, in line 25, by the insertion, immediately after the word “Chiefs”, of the words  “and the local communities”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 39, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 40 and 41 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 42 – (Submission of Integrated Development Plan)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 42, on page 42, in the marginal note by the insertion of the word “Submission” and the substitution therefor of the word “Adoption”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 42, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 43 – (Adoption of Integrated Development Plan)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 43:

    On page 42:

    in the marginal note by the deletion of the word “Adoption” and the substitution therefor of the word “Implementation”;
    in lines 33 and 34 by the deletion of subsection (1) and the substitution therefor of the following:

    in line 35 by the deletion of the word “adopted” and the substitution therefor of the word “approved”; and

    On page 43

    in lines 1 to 3 by the deletion of subsection (3); and
    in line 4 by the renumbering of subsection (4) as subsection (3).

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 43, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 45,46, 47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58 and 59 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 60 – (Report to Planning Committee)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 60, on page 51, in line 19 by the insertion, immediately after the word “planning” of the word “committee” and a full stop.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 60, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 61– (Register)

Dr Phiri: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 61, on page 51, in the marginal note by the deletion of the word “Register” and the substitution therefor of the words “Register of planning applications and permissions”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 61, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

 

BB BB BB BB BB BB BB BB

 

Clauses 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75 and 76 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.

THE REFERENDUM (Amendment) BILL, 2015

CLAUSE 1 – (Cap. 14)

The Minister of Justice (Dr Simbyakula): Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment immediately after Clause 1 by the insertion of the following new clause:

“insertion of2.The principal Act is amended by the insertion of the

new section 1Afollowing new section:

                                               

otherwise requires –

“Commission” means the Electoral

Commission established by

Cap. 1                          the Constitution;

                                    “Director” means the Director

                                                Appointed under the

Cap. 17                        Electoral Commission Act; and “referendum officer” means a person appointed by the Commission to be –

    a district referendum officer;
    a returning officer;
    a presiding officer;
    a polling assistant; or
    a counting assistant; and includes a person appointed by a referendum officer under subsection (2)  of section eight or the Director where functions are conferred on the Director under this Act, in respect of a referendum.”

                                   

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 1, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 2 – (Amendment of Section 3)

Dr Simbyakula: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 2:

    in line 5 by the renumbering of Clause 2 as Clause 3;

    in line 11 by the deletion of the words “or questions”; and

    in lines 12 and 13 by the deletion of the words “which is or are required to be put to a referendum by” and the substitution therefor of the words “under Article 79 of”.

 

 

The Deputy Chairperson: As a result of the Report of the Committee, the hon. Minister of Justice came up with amendments.

Dr Simbyakula: Mr Speaker, I beg to move an amendment immediately after line 19, by the insertion of the following new clauses:

“Repeal and replacement        4. The principal Act is amended by the repeal of section  section 4   four and the substitution therefor of the following:

                                             Administration of       The Commission shall be responsible Act and supervision                  for the administration of this Act and            of referendum                  for supervising a referendum held Pursuant to section two.

         “Repeal of section 5                5. The principal Act is amended by the repeal of section      

                                                         five.

 

         “Repeal and replacement        6. The principal Act is amended by the repeal of section six of section 6 and the substitution therefor of the following:

                                                        

                                                         Procedure of               6. Section eight of the Electoral        

                                                         Commission Cap 17    Commission Act applies to the

                                                                                             Commission.

        

         Amendment of section 8        7.  Section eight of the principal Act is amended by the

                                                         deletion of subsection (6).

         General amendment                8. The principal Act is amended by the deletion of the

                                                         words “Director of Elections” wherever they appear and

                                                         the substitution therefor of the word “Director”.”                                        

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

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

THE FOREST BILL, 2015

Clauses 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 16 – (Establishment of Local Forests)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 16, on page 18, in line 23, by the insertion immediately after the word “in” of a comma and the words “or footpath frequently used by residents within or adjacent to,”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 16, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

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

CLAUSE 29 – (Community Forest Management Group)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 29, on page 24, in line 37, by deletion of the word “ownership” and the comma immediately after that word.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 29, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 30 – (Recognition of Group)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 30, on page 26, immediately after the line 10 by the insertion of the following new subsection:

“(6) A group of persons which is aggrieved by the decision of the Minister may, within thirty days from the date of receipt of the decision, appeal to the High Court.”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

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

Clause 31 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 32 – (Rights and Obligations of Local Community under Community Forestry Agreement)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment to Clause 32, on page 28, in line 5, by the deletion of the word “Minister” and the substitution therefor of the word “Director”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

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

Clauses 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48 and 49 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 50 − (Control and Management of Major Forest Produce on State Land and Customary Areas)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 50, on page 36, in lines 27 and 30 by the insertion immediately after the word “Land” of a comma and the words “land under leasehold tenure vested in and person”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 50, as amended, ordered to sand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 51 − (Sale of Forest Produce)

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 51, on page 36, in line 35 by the insertion immediately after the word −

Ms Ngimbu: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 51, on page 36, in line 35 by the insertion immediately after the word −

    “sell” of the word “forest”; and

    “estimate” of the words “at such places and in such a manner as the Minister may prescribe by statutory instrument”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 51, as amended, ordered to sand part of the Bill.

Clauses 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66,  67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76 and 77, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

__________

HOUSE RESUMED

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

The following Bills were reported to the House as having passed through Committee with amendments:

The Urban and Regional Planning Bill, 2015

The Referendum (Amendment) Bill, 2015

Report Stages on Thursday, 16th July, 2015.

_________

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The vice-President (Mrs Wina): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

_____

The House adjourned at 1917 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday, 16th, July, 2006.