Wednesday, 4th May, 2016

The House met at 1430 hours

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

NATIONAL ANTHEM

PRAYER

_______

QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER

MASANGANO/FISENGE ROAD

422. Mr Chishimba (Kamfinsa) asked the Minister of Works and Supply:

(a) when the Masangano/Fisenge Road on the Copperbelt Province, which is in a deplorable state, would be rehabilitated; and

(b) what the cause of the delay in rehabilitating the road was.

The Deputy Minister of Works and Supply (Dr Mwali): Mr Speaker, the Masangano/Fisenge Road Project on the Copperbelt Province is at the procurement stage and its works are expected to commence in the third quarter of 2016. The project will be executed using the public-private partnership (PPP) mode. The delay in the rehabilitation of the road is attributed to the limited resource envelop due to competing needs.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chishimba: Mr Speaker, this road is important because we all use to get to and from the Copperbelt. Now that the hon. Minister has said that works on this road will start in the third quarter of 2016. I wish to find out whether the contractor has already been found. If so, who is it?

Dr Mwali: Mr Speaker, the tender for this project was floated on 13th April, 2016, and is scheduled to be closed by 13th May, 2016. Six contractors have been shortlisted to participate in the tender. We shall know the name of the contractor when the evaluations and awards have been conducted.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Kazabu (Nkana): Mr Speaker, most of us, hon. Members from the Copperbelt, use that road. So, it is true that it is in a bad state. While we await the commencement of the major rehabilitation works, is there any plan to patch up the potholes, if not dongas, on some stretches of the road?

The Minister of Works and Supply (Mr Mukanga): Mr Speaker, in the interim, we shall consider patching the potholes on some parts of the road.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has said that the considerations will be made in the third quarter of 2016. Experience has shown that when there is a change of Government, there are always excuses to execute roadworks. We shall have elections in August this year. How much effort has the Government made to ensure that if there is a change of Government, the new Government continues with the projects that the current Government has started?

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, firstly, I would like to state that there will be no change of Government.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mukanga: The people have seen the progress …

Mr Speaker: Hon. Minister, take your seat.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: I provided guidance at some point in regard to the line of debate you have taken. Let us transact like we all do not know the outcome of the elections. The hon. Member has asked a contingent question. So, let us proceed on that basis.

Mr Sing’ombe: Hear, hear!

Mr Mukanga: Mr Speaker, in the most unlikely event that there is a change of Government, everything has been put in place to ensure that the project continues. This shows that this Government is following proper procedures. Therefore, whichever Government will be in power which, I believe, is the Patriotic Front (PF), will be able to execute the project.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwila: Ema Ministers, aya!

AGGREKO POWER IMPORTS
423. Mr Hamusonde (Nangoma) asked the Minister of Energy and Water Development:

(a) whether the Government had continued to import emergency power from Aggreko despite the normal rainfall recorded in most parts of the country;

(b) if so, how many megawatts of power per month the country was importing at the moment, and

(c)  whether the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) had any plans to limit load-shedding in farming areas to night time in order to enable farmers to irrigate their crops during day time.
 
The Deputy Minister of Energy and Water Development (Mr Zulu): Mr Speaker, the Government has continued to import 40 MW emergency power from Aggreko from 0600 hours to 2200 hours daily. The contract with Aggreko expires in December, 2016. The imports have been necessitated by the low water levels that the country is still experiencing at the main reservoirs for power generation since the 2015 hydrological season.

Mr Speaker, the hon. Members of this august House may wish to note that Lake Kariba was 22 per cent full as of 11th April, 2016. This is still lower than the 48 per cent level that was recorded last year on the same date. In addition, the Kafue Gorge Reservoir was 21 per cent full on 11th April, 2016. This is also lower than the level recorded last year on the same date when the reservoir was 36 per cent full.

Sir, currently, the country is importing an average of 300 MW of power per month. The power imports are as follows:

Amount of Power (MW)   Source   Rate (US cent/kWh)

40      Aggreko   18.18 

100      Karpowership    16.73

50-200     EDM    14

50-300  Eskom 6-19

The imports from Eskom are mostly off peak and vary depending on the time of use.

Sir, ZESCO has no plans of limiting load-shedding in farming areas to night time only.

Mr Speaker, the Current Demand Side Management (DSM) regime for Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) is meant to encourage large consumers of power in the maximum demand category in excess of 15 KVA, which includes industries, farmers and commercial establishments, to shift some of their operations from peak periods (from 1800 hours to 2200 hours and during the day) to off-peak periods (from 2200 hours to 0600 hours) through various incentives. This is intended to address the challenge of peak power demand by minimising the unwarranted strain on the ZESCO power system. In light of this, a three-tier time of use tariff (TOU tariff) has been put in place to help smoothen the power demand curve, thereby utilising the available generation resources more efficiently. The rates for the three-tier tariff are:

Rate   Time   Charge (US cents/kWh)

Standard   0600 to 1800    0.7

Peak    1800 to 2200     0.87

Off-peak   2200 to 0600    0.52
 
Mr Speaker, as can be seen from the three-tier tariff, it is more cost effective for farmers to conduct irrigation activities at night, from 2200 hours to 0600 hours when the price of electricity is cheapest, than during the day, from 0600 hours to 1800 hours when it is relatively expensive. So, it is in the interest of the farmers that ZESCO supplies power more at night than during the day.

Sir, it is also worth noting that during the monthly consultative meeting between the Zambia National Farmers Union (ZNFU) and ZESCO, held on 28th April, 2016 at the ZNFU Head Office, the farmers’ representatives expressed happiness with the current load-shedding schedule between 0600 hours and 1200 hours on a daily basis and urged ZESCO to continue with it. The ZNFU were in support of irrigation during the night when there is more moisture absorption and less evaporation.

 Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Milambo (Mwembeshi): Mr Speaker, does the hon. Minister agree with me that load- shedding has increased in Zambia despite the importation of surplus power?

 The Minister of Energy and Water Development (Ms Siliya): Mr Speaker, it is important to put some matters into context. The Kafue Gorge, which normally generates 990 MW of power, generates below 600 MW at the moment. The Kariba, which is supposed to generate 1,080 MW of power, generates below 300 MW at the moment. That is the gravity of the deficit of power generation. Even with the emergency power imports, power supply is still adequate, hence the continued load-shedding.

Sir, load-shedding is supposed to last eight hours. I know that in the recent past, we have experienced extended hours of load-shedding because we have had problems with the inter-connector wheeling power from Zimbabwe through which we import from Mozambique and South Africa. The House may wish to know that Zimbabwe has stated that the problem will last until 6th May, 2016, as it is still working on its transmission line. This is the reason there have been extended hours of load-shedding. Otherwise, the load-shedding is supposed to last eight hours.
 
Mr Speaker, I thank you.

_____

MOTION

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AFFAIRS, ENERGY AND LABOUR

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do adopt the Report of the Committee on Economic Affairs, Energy and Labour on the Report of the Auditor-General on the Management of Occupational Safety and Health for the Fifth Session of the Eleventh National Assembly laid on the Table of the House on 21st April, 2016.

Mr Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

 Ms Mulasikwanda (Mulobezi): Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.

Mr Nkombo: Sir, your Committee, in accordance with its terms of reference, considered the Report of the Auditor-General on the Management of Occupational Safety and Health.

Mr Speaker, I will begin by thanking the Auditor-General’s Office for undertaking this performance audit.

Sir, as you are already aware, performance auditing:

(a) is key to the prudent management of public resources because it encourages learning and change in the public sector by providing new information and drawing attention to the various challenges the public sector is faced with;

(b) plays an even more important role by keeping the legislature well informed about governmental actions and the impact of its decisions;

(c) increases public transparency and accountability; and

(d) provides objective and reliable information on how the public service is performing.

However, Sir, these efforts by the Auditor-General’s Office will be meaningless if the Government does not respond by taking concrete measures to improve and reform public administration in the country.

Mr Speaker, let me also state that workplace safety and health should be a priority to any well-meaning Government. This is because people have every right to be assured of going back home safely when they leave home for work. Additionally, when workplace safety is compromised, the human cost of injury and disease has a negative impact on productivity.

Mr Speaker, let me also highlight some of the concerns raised in the audit report. It is worth stating that the report of the Auditor-General has exposed various weaknesses in the management of occupational health and safety in our country. It has also revealed how this country has paid very little attention to issues of occupational health and safety. The report has revealed that the interventions that the Government has put in place to manage occupational safety and health have not been effective.

Sir, the report has also brought out the weaknesses in the legal framework which have resulted in the major weaknesses in managing occupational safety and health effectively that have resulted in the increase in workplace fatalities in various industries by 65 per cent, from sixty-seven cases in 2011 to 127 cases in 2014. Non-fatal injuries have also increased alarmingly by 221 per cent, from 312 cases in 2011 to 1,003 cases in 2014.

Mr Speaker, regarding the prevention of diseases in workplaces, Zambia has not fared well as can be seen from the high statistics of occupational diseases in the report. For example, in 2013, there were 192 certified cases of workplace-related illnesses per 100,000 miners still in employment and former miners. As a result, the amount that the Government is paying in compensation claims arising from workplace injuries and deaths has also increased from K10,072,000 to K16,704,000 in 2011 and 2014, respectively. Therefore, the results of the performance audit are a serious indictment on all of us, policy makers, and should serve as a wakeup call for the Government to take urgent steps to address the situation.

Sir, the Auditor-General’s audit report has raised a myriad of anomalies in the way occupational safety and health is being managed in our country. For purposes of this debate, I have grouped the challenges into two. These are organisational anomalies and those at operational level. As hon. Members may be aware, there are four key institutions that are charged with the responsibility of controlling occupational safety and health activities in our country, namely:

(a) the Occupational Safety and Health Services Department under the Ministry of Labour and Social Security which is responsible for regulating and inspecting occupational safety, health and hygiene in factories;

(b) the Workers Compensation Fund Control Board (WCFCB) under the Ministry of Labour and Social Security which is responsible for workers’ compensation, occupational safety and health inspections in mining and non-mining companies;

(c) the Occupational Safety Health Institute under the Ministry of Health is responsible for workers’ health, occupational safety and health inspections; and

(d) the Mines Safety Department under the Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development is responsible for regulating and inspecting occupational safety, health engineering and hygiene in mining companies.

Mr Speaker, the roles of the above-mentioned institutions are found in different pieces of legislation. For this reason, the need for collaboration among them is critical and this was undoubtedly envisaged by the law. Unfortunately, it has not been spelt out how the institutions are supposed to collaborate and feed into each other’s work. To make matters worse, the audit revealed that contrary to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) Convention, Zambia has not formulated a comprehensive national policy on occupational health and safety in spite of this being a cross-cutting issue. As a result of this, many services are duplicated and the health and safety system is fragmented. The fragmentation is compounded by a lack of centralised data repositories. Your Committee finds this situation highly anomalous.

Sir, to help address the malaise, your Committee has recommended that the Government seriously considers establishing a single …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

Mr Nkombo: Thank you, Sir. I will repeat that. To help address this malaise, your Committee has recommended that the Government seriously considers establishing a single regulatory authority to serve as a one-stop shop for all matters relating to occupational health and safety. Your Committee also urges the Government to urgently formulate a comprehensive national policy on occupational safety and health.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

There are too many conversations going on, on both the left and right.

Mr Nkombo: Thank you, once again.

Mr Speaker, let me now discuss the operational challenges the institutions involved in safety and health are faced with. Your Committee notes that the major cause of this is inadequate funding. One of the areas that have been negatively affected by underfunding is staffing. The audit revealed that all the Government departments and statutory bodies put together had inadequate staff to carry out inspections of workplaces throughout the country. For instance, in 2012, there were thirty-two inspectors, representing 43. 8 per cent of the establishment, while in 2014, ...

Hon. Siliya conversed with Hon. Shamenda.

Mr Nkombo: Please, give us space, Dora. I cannot concentrate because of the noise.

Mr Livune: Hear, hear!

Mr Mooya: That is right!

Mr Nkombo: … the number of inspectors increased to forty, representing 46.5 per cent which was still below the approved establishment. In the same vein, the audit report revealed that the institutions did not have most of the required modern equipment and infrastructure for carrying out …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the left!

Mr Nkombo: … their work to satisfactory levels. This state of affairs is regrettable and should not be allowed to continue in our country. Your Committee, therefore, reiterates its recommendation that the Government sets up an authority that will be responsible for the administration, reporting, enforcement and monitoring of all matters pertaining to occupational health and safety. The institution should be well funded in order to enable it to attract and retain qualified staff. Adequate funding should also be provided in order for the institution to procure modern inspection equipment.

Mr Speaker, I wish to conclude by thanking you most sincerely and the Office of the Clerk for the guidance rendered to your Committee during this session. Let me also thank the stakeholders who made submissions to your Committee. The deliberations of your Committee could not have been ably concluded without the assistance of the officers from the Auditor-General’s Office who attended all the meetings as permanent witnesses.

Sir, lastly, but not in any way the least, let me express my gratitude to the members of your Committee for their professionalism and dedication to work.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

Mr Livune: Hear, hear!

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

Ms Mulasikwanda: Now, Mr Speaker.

Mr Speaker, in seconding the Motion, let me thank the mover for the able manner in which he has highlighted the issues that were deliberated upon by your Committee. I would also like to thank him for the good leadership qualities he demonstrated during your Committee’s meetings. I further thank the Members of your Committee for allowing me to second this Motion.

Sir, let me also thank the Office of the Auditor-General for undertaking this performance audit. Performance audits are very important because they help stakeholders such as us, Members of this House, see whether public institutions are operating in a manner that ensures efficiency and effectiveness.

Mr Speaker, as leaders, I believe that we are all committed to ensuring that workers in this country operate in a health and safe environment. I believe that we all do not want workers to be injured, sick or, indeed, die as a result of workplace accidents or diseases. It is for this reason that I consider the revelations in the Auditor-General’s Report as sad.

Sir, when I was asked to second this Motion, I reflected deeply on why we have found ourselves in this state of affairs regarding occupational safety and health. I have come to the conclusion that the main reason has been our failure to keep pace with the changes in the economy. The reforms from a commandist economy to a liberalised one resulted in the increase in the participation of privately-owned companies in the economy. By their nature, privately-owned companies focus on profit-making and neglect workers’ welfare. Unfortunately, we have not seen any corresponding enhancement of the capacity of State-owned institutions to effectively regulate issues of workers’ safety and health.

For instance, the Auditor-General’s Report revealed that there were limited numbers of inspections conducted by the inspectors from the responsible institutions. For instance, the Workers’ Compensation Fund Control Board (WCFCB) inspected, on average, eighty-six of the 15,073 companies registered per annum, representing a 0.045 per cent inspection coverage. Of the 1,416 companies registered with the Occupational Safety and Health Services Department, 272 companies were inspected during the period under review, representing an inspection coverage of 19.3 per cent.

Sir, this has resulted in most employers relaxing in their provision of a healthy and safe working environment, making most work places unsafe. For example, the Auditor-General’s Office found that although most companies had fire extinguishers, most of them were not operational. The provision of protective clothing has also remained a challenge as 32 per cent of the companies visited did not provide protective clothing for their staff. In most work places, workers were not provided with changing rooms and conveniences were in a deplorable state.

Mr Speaker, the only way to address this matter is by going by your Committee’s recommendation of the Government considering coming up with a one-stop authority to handle all issues related to occupational safety and health. The authority should be well funded so that it can employ professionals to do the work. Failure to this, we shall continue seeing workers being ferried to work in defective trucks and receiving reports of workers being locked up overnight in bakeries and factories.

The time to act is now, and I urge the hon. Members to support your Committee’s report.

Mr Speaker, I beg to second.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

The Vice-President and Minister of Development Planning (Mrs Wina): Mr Speaker, the Government has taken note of the issues raised by the mover and seconder of the Motion. I would like to thank them both for raising the issues that need to be addressed.

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to wind up the debate which never was.

The report raises pertinent issues that affect the Zambian citizens. So, it only remains for me to thank Her Honour the Vice-President and Minister of Development Planning for the assuring response that she has given that the Government is going to take note of the issues that have been raised by your Committee and the Auditor-General’s Report on the performance audits.

I thank you, Sir.

Question put and agreed to.

_________

BILLS

SECOND READING

THE PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE, GENETIC RESOURCES AND EXPRESSIONS OF FOLKLORE BILL, 2016

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

Sir, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to make my statement on the Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources and Expressions of Folklore Bill, 2016. I would also like to express my gratitude to your Committee for its work in reviewing the Bill and facilitating consultations on the fundamental aspects of the Bill.

Mr Speaker, traditional knowledge refers to a living body of knowledge that is developed, sustained and passed on from generation to generation within a community, often forming part of its cultural and spiritual identity. It includes knowledge, know-how, skills, innovations or practices that are passed on between generations and form part of the traditional lifestyle of indigenous and local communities who act as custodians.

Sir, traditional/cultural expressions or expressions of folklore are forms of expressing tradition and culture. These may include dances, songs, handicraft, designs, ceremonies, tales or many other artistic expressions.

Mr Speaker, traditional/cultural expressions are integral to cultural and social identities, heritage of indigenous and local communities, and reflect core values and beliefs. Similar to traditional knowledge, they are handed down from one generation to another, and are maintained, used or developed by their holders.

Sir, the Bill also covers genetic resources which, for purposes of the Bill, are defined as part of biological materials that contain genetic information of value and are capable of producing or being reproduced. Examples of genetic resources include plant and animal materials or microbial origin such as medicinal plants, agricultural crops and animal breeds.

Mr Speaker, the current Intellectual Property Legislation has not effectively facilitated the exploitation of traditional knowledge. This scenario has prompted the Government to come up with this Bill to put in place a legal and institutional framework that will foster the development and protection of traditional knowledge, culture expression and genetic resources.

Sir, in recent years, indigenous people, local communities and governments, mainly in developing countries, have demanded intellectual property protection for traditional forms of creativity and innovation which, under the conventional intellectual property systems, are generally regarded as being in public domain. For indigenous people, the protection of traditional knowledge, traditional/cultural expressions and genetic resource centres on the question of fundamental justice and the ability to protect, preserve and control their cultural heritage. There is also the associated right to receive a fair return on what some of the communities have developed.

Further, Mr Speaker, it has been noted that there are several reasons for traditional knowledge, traditional/cultural expressions and genetic resources to be protected. This includes equity, conservation of biodiversity, preservation of traditional practices and the prevention of bio-piracy.

Sir, in Zambia and many other places, there is a lot of traditional knowledge that has been exploited for its commercial value without duly recognising or compensating the original holders of the knowledge. This is possible because the current legislation does not provide for the protection of traditional knowledge, cultural expression and genetic resources. In this regard, there is a need for a systematic way of identifying the right holders of traditional knowledge in the community, collecting data, distributing benefits and providing adequate protection to the holders.

Mr Speaker, the main object of the Bill is to protect the rights of traditional knowledge holders and recognise and reward holders of traditional knowledge, as it relates to genetic resources. The specific objects of the Bill are to:

(a) provide for a transparent legal framework for the protection of access to and use of traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore, which also guarantees equitable sharing of benefits and effective participation of holders of traditional knowledge;

(b) recognise the spiritual, cultural, social, political and economic value of traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore of the holders of traditional knowledge;

(c) recognise, protect and support the inalienable rights of traditional communities, individuals and groups over their traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore;

(d) confer rights on traditional communities, individuals and groups and promote the conservation of the sustainable utilisation of the country’s bio-diversity resources;

(e) promote fair and equitable distribution of the benefits derived from the exploitation of traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore; and

(f) prevent the granting of patents based on traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore without the prior informed consent of relevant traditional community, individual or group.

Mr Speaker, during consultations on the Bill, it was observed that there is a need for further clarification of certain definitions and concepts in the Bill. These include those related to the purpose of establishing a register and the prevention of the improper acquisition or exercise of intellectual property rights over traditional knowledge, genetic resources and expressions of folklore. I will, therefore, present some amendments to the Bill to facilitate this clarification.

Sir, once enacted, this Bill will lead to the protection of traditional knowledge, expressions of folklore and genetic resources against misappropriation, misuse and exploitation beyond the traditional context. In addition, traditional knowledge and expressions of folklore holders and the relevant communities will be recognised and rewarded. Culture in the respective communities will also be preserved. The Act will be administered by my ministry through the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA). Due to its multi-faceted application in a wide range of subject matter, the effective implementation of the Act will require collaboration with several stakeholders.

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, let me emphasise that there is a growing appreciation of the wider significance of traditional knowledge, expressions of folklore and genetic resources which has been, and continues to be important for both humans and the environment. This knowledge is valuable not only to those who depend on it in their daily lives, but also the modern industry and agriculture which are important to the development of our country. The contribution of traditional knowledge to the modern industry is enormous, ranging from small scale to big business industries. As such, the Government remains committed to ensuring that it is protected for the benefit of the people.

I, therefore, look forward to the full support of the hon. Members of this House.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Mr Speaker, in accordance with the terms of reference, as provided for in the Standing Orders, your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources and Expression of Folklore Bill, 2016.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Let us have some order.

Mr Nkombo: The people making noise are my friends.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Nkombo: Sir, in seeking to understand the ramifications of the Bill, your Committee sought oral and written submissions from various stakeholders. Broadly speaking, the Bill is about indigenous knowledge. For the benefit of the House, indigenous knowledge can be divided into three categories, namely:

(a) knowledge which includes medicinal and other uses of plants or animals,

(b)  knowledge of the seasons and extreme climatic events;

(c) genetic resources which is about the information in the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of indigenous peoples whose evolutionary history and different traits are of interest to biologists; and

(d) expression of folklore which is basically art, music and dance that expresses knowledge, history and identity of a people.

Sir, the basis of the proposed law is that poor people can turn their knowledge into income- generating activities and opportunities. This can be achieved through the use of modern methods to protect and market such knowledge. Conversely, cases are known where unprotected cultural expressions emerging from our communities have been appropriated and commercialised by individual interests without the benefits going to the communities.

Sir, at the centre of traditional knowledge is the understanding of medicinal applications of plant materials. We are all aware that pharmaceutical companies have a lot to gain from extracting biologically-active compounds and marketing them as drugs. Several lawsuits across the world have revealed that researchers have not treated indigenous people ethically once they have obtained access to their knowledge. In India, for example, the Neem Tree Case became the key example of biopiracy that the hon. Minister referred to earlier. Biopiracy refers to when a pharmaceutical company tries to profit from traditional knowledge without giving any benefits to the traditional owners. In this case, a company from the United States of America (USA) patented the compounds that were derived from the neem tree. However, after a ten-year battle with the European Patent Office, the patents were finally revoked.

Mr Speaker, it should be clarified that the law is not trying to prevent important medicines from becoming commercially available per se. The point of contention is that pharmaceutical companies use the existing knowledge for their own financial gain, much to the exclusion of those who discover the knowledge or without giving appropriate compensation to the owners.

Sir, in the past decades, biologists have taken a keen interest in the genetic resources of indigenous people around the world. For example, evolutionary biologists have great curiosity for comparing the genetic history of different groups, which can give insights into the combined history of the human race. Unfortunately, many researchers have not considered the rights of indigenous people before using their DNA. This law is an attempt to address this anomaly.

Similarly, Sir, the artistic forms of knowledge have raised new concerns in the area of copyright law. Whilst copyright law assigns rights to the individual creator for a fixed period, in Africa, local people regard their artistic works as belonging to a certain group and have not been patented or protected.

Mr Speaker, having appreciated the importance of the proposed law, your Committee’s concern was on how best this could be achieved. Your Committee is aware that traditional knowledge is widely shared and dispersed within communities and across national boundaries. An example is the situation of the Tonga people across the Kariba Dam who were simply separated by the creation of the dam. The groups on different sides of the dam have common habits and knowledge. This has presented a lot of challenges regarding the establishment and implementation of policy and legal frameworks that would facilitate and improve protection. Most notably, examples of such situations have rendered the identification of right holders a difficult task. It has further complicated the establishment of access and benefit-sharing agreements.

Sir, your Committee dealt with these matters with the stakeholders during its deliberations on the Bill. Your Committee is happy to report to the House that the current Bill has tried to address these issues. For example, your Committee’s main concern regarding the identification of right holders has been adequately addressed by the eligibility criteria set out in Clause 14 of the Bill. Your Committee has made proposals for amendments that should be considered by the House in order to improve the Bill.

Sir, should the Bill be passed and the law be effectively implemented, your Committee is of the view that a lot of work will need to be undertaken by the implementing agency. This will include the establishment of registers for traditional knowledge and folklore which has hitherto not been attempted in this country before. This entails, inter alia, the building of capacity of the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA) in order enable it to perform this task effectively.

Mr Speaker, this is a welcome Bill which should be supported by the House. In conclusion, I wish to express my gratitude to you for granting your Committee the opportunity to scrutinise the Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Genetic Resources and Expressions of Folklore Bill, 2016. In the same fashion, your Committee wishes to thank the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support rendered to it throughout its deliberations. It is indebted to the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Mtolo (Chipata Central): Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Minister and Hon. Nkombo for trying to make us understand what this Bill is all about. I have two observations and I will be extremely brief. I appreciate the fact that we want to protect traditional knowledge because people are known by their music, dressing and cultural norms and so on and so forth. However, I have a concern that I would like the hon. Minister to take note of.

As much as we are trying to protect this knowledge, which is mostly in the hands of our traditional leaders and has to be extracted from them, it is the same traditional knowledge and practices that are also inherently in contradiction with modern society. We misunderstand what protection of traditional knowledge is and start promoting, in a very dangerous way, the primitive trend which we now see in our country of regional and tribal groupings. I would, therefore, urge the hon. Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry to work closely with the hon. Minister of Chiefs and Traditional Affairs so as to ensure that as we protect traditional knowledge, we do not use it for unnecessary confrontation and contradiction in our society.

Sir, if you go to the Eastern Province, you will find that sometimes there is unnecessary conflict between the Ngonis and Chewas. This happens in Zambia generally. We see unnecessary confrontation and contradiction between the Lozis and Bembas, and the Tongas and Bembas because of the same knowledge that this Bill is trying to protect. So, we must also be mindful that as much as we want to protect this knowledge, it intrinsically in collision with the modern way of life.

Secondly, Mr Speaker, as we craft this Bill, I would like to find out what benefits will accrue to the communities that will give us this information. For example, a few days ago, there were a number of traditional healers at Parliament Buildings and I wondered what they had come to do. Now I know that they were witnesses to your Committee which was handling this subject. What benefit, for example, will accrue to them as they give us the knowledge that we intend to protect?

Mr Speaker, Hon. Nkombo, the Chairperson of your Committee, has given us an example of a case in India. However, speaking on behalf of those who possess folklore knowledge, I would like to say that as we craft the laws, let us ensure that the benefits that are derived from this trickle down to them as they are the ones giving us the knowledge to preserve.

Sir, I totally support this Bill. We should have our knowledge preserved, albeit with caution, given what I have said.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Muntanga (Kalomo Central): Mr Speaker, from the outset, I wish to state that I support the Bill. As the previous speaker has stated, misunderstanding and abuse of traditional knowledge of other people is the cause of fights. In some instances, some tribes are not aware of the traditions of other people while in others, some tribes tend to look down upon the traditions of others. This is what causes confrontations. What we are trying to protect is all traditional knowledge regardless of whether or not it belongs to a small grouping. Even the knowledge of small groupings and its ownership must be protected. It should be appreciated that particular knowledge belongs to certain groups of people regardless of their size.

Mr Speaker, I am concerned that I have not heard what benefit will accrue to the owners of the knowledge. Researchers collect information from us and write books. At times, we even become research-fatigued because researchers come every time to ask, “How about this and that?” They go, write, obtain degrees and become doctors using the information that they get from traditional people. What, therefore, is the benefit to the one who supplies the knowledge? I know that people get degrees, master’s and Doctor of Philosophy (PhDs) degrees after getting information from a villager who does not have any of these qualifications.

Hon. Member: Nkandu Luo!

Mr Muntanga: What about the owner of the information that you have written about?

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: My question on this proposed law is: What will be the benefit to the owners of the knowledge? For instance, the person who is known to have discovered the Victoria Falls is Dr Livingstone, yet the falls were shown to him by the local people. Books have been written about his having discovered the falls when the local people knew about them before he did. The people showed him the falls are the ones who were supposed to be honoured. However, the question is: How are they supposed to be honoured? How do we ensure that the people who are deemed ‘too small’ even when they give us information, benefit?

Sir, we want to institutionalise folklore. However, this might disadvantage the people who provide the information. I would like to be clear on what we are about to do. Customary knowledge has been preserved for years. The Lozis, for example, will not tell you about kunu. Unless you are Lozi, you cannot understand it.

Hon. Member: What does it mean?
Mr Muntanga: What does it mean? You have to be a Lozi to understand it. We want to institutionalise the fact that it belongs to the Lozis …

Mr Speaker: What does that word mean?

Mr Muntanga: Sir, kunu is a technology. One must be Lozi to understand it.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: I am saying that this law will instutionalise kunu as belonging to the Lozis. So, I do not think that I should begin to share this protected information because this is what the object of the Bill is about. I believe that we are legalising the ownership of the kunu by the Lozis so that that only they should understand what it is.

Mr Speaker, someone said that we will complain about traditions. Others want to fight tradition by doing away with chiefdoms because they do not want to belong to a chief or people to know their origins. They come here and behave differently from what they are. They want to make people believe that they have ‘mutated’ into something else. However, when they are about to die, their origins will be revealed. When police officers arrest someone, they will torture them until they squeak. They will cry in their mother tongue. People may pretend to be something else but, when they are beaten up, they will reveal who they are.

Mr Speaker, this law is intended to protect people’s identity and origins. They should not be ashamed of what they are. People should appreciate and respect other people’s traditions. We should also appreciate who we are. This should not be the cause of fights. Why should there be such fights in this day and age when people are more educated and knowledgeable? People should be able to accommodate one another.

Mr Speaker, I support this Bill. Some music that is played outside Zambia originated from here. However, we did not have a way of protecting it. We may have heard some folk music being played somewhere else, yet it originated from Zambia.

Mr Speaker, I have travelled outside the country and seen people dancing, with due respect, like the Chinyau dance in Zambia. I wonder who owns this type of dance. Does it belong to us in Zambia or elsewhere?

Do not be ashamed of who you are. This law wants to protect who you are. Mr Speaker, we have delayed in coming up with this law because with the passage of time, some information may have been lost. Some information may have died with the owners.

Mr Speaker, certain things should be explained as we protect this knowledge. We have heard stories of people flying on certain objects.

Mr Mutale: Hyenas!

Mr Muntanga: Hyenas, trees or something like that. We have heard that when someone was shot at, what died was actually a hyena. How true is that? We need to know whether such stories are true or just fiction. This law will try to protect such information.  When we read about it, we should know that this particular information belongs to this group of people.

Currently, most of what we know is based on hearsay. Much as this Bill is aimed at protecting this type of knowledge, let us go further and ensure that the owners of folklore and traditional knowledge benefit from it somehow. We should not shy away from our traditions. Instead, let us protect them because they make us who we are.

I thank you, Sir.

The Minister of Gender (Prof. Luo): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to contribute to the debate in support of the Bill that is on the Floor.

Sir, I wish to begin by saying that this Bill is long overdue. When I used to be Minister of Chiefs and Traditional Affairs, I used to say to the people in the chiefdoms that I visited that people are emigrating from the rural areas to the urban areas in search of a livelihood and wealth, yet the people in the villages are sitting on wealth. They have not been able see the wealth that is around them and translate it into wealth for themselves. So, as we enact this Bill, it is very important that we popularise it in such a way that our people get to know that indigenous knowledge can be used to create wealth.

Sir, I want to put this in context. If you went to Japan, the first thing that would happen to you during your visit, whether it is official or unofficial, is that you will be invited to a tea ceremony. The Tea Ceremony in Japan is indigenous knowledge, but it has been raised from village level to university level. People even train to become professors of the Tea Ceremony. People go to watch this ceremony and the country makes money out of this. It has become part of tourism in Japan. We get aid from Japan when we could have done something similar in our own country to generate revenue.

Mr Speaker, if indigenous knowledge was popularised and people started appreciating it, it would become part of the subjects taught in the universities and this knowledge would be linked to industrialisation. I am glad that this Bill has been brought through the Ministry of Commerce, Trade and Industry. As the Government, we are going to take it further and make sure that we link our indigenous knowledge to industry so that we can create wealth. For example, in the past, people knew how to preserve food. They did not need chemicals to preserve food. That knowledge is still there amongst our people. Today, people spend a lot of money on organic food. They do not want to eat food that has chemicals. Why do we not take advantage of this? We should not only grow food without chemicals, but also preserve it without chemicals and export it. The protection of indigenous knowledge is important. We should also patent it so that it becomes a preserve of the Zambian people. Industrialisation, wealth creation and tourism will be some of the offshoots of this law which will protect indigenous knowledge.

Sir, with regard to genetic resources, I was in Mansa recently, where a study is being carried out. There is an algae which is being grown in ponds on a big scale. Research is being conducted on this algae which is given to babies. One group of babies is being given High Energy Protein Supplement (HEPS) and ordinary food. The other group is given the algae, ordinary food and HEPS. The outcome of this study is that the children who are given the algae do not frequently suffer from infectious diseases. However, the babies who are being given ordinary food and HEPS continue to suffer from infectious diseases. We, Africans, think that traditional medicine is primitive. However, people fly into this country to take our roots, barks of trees and leaves to Antwerp and conduct studies and make medicines from them. These medicines are brought back to us to buy at a high cost. Can you imagine what would happen if we conducted studies on our genetic resources in this country and took the study on this algae further in order to understand its benefits? I have invited my colleagues who have a Doctorate of Philosophy (Phd) in nutrition to write a book on the study on the algae. I will conduct the immunological study about the children and he will conduct the nutritional study. This is what we need to be doing in this country.

Mr Speaker, Zambia can link the second aspect of this Bill to industry and other institutions so that the knowledge can be popularised in our country.

Sir, why do we, Zambians, continue to say that we are a poor country? We do not have poverty as per the definition in the English dictionary, but what we have is poverty of the mind. If we popularised folklore in this country, it would create wealth for us. Folklore is a ‘loaded’ word. It includes art, dances and stories. Most people of our age have been shaped into who we are because of folklore. We listened to stories from our grandmothers and this built some resilience in us. For example, we were told stories on how to make fire without using matches. This built some resilience in us. We took that resilience into schools and our studies to become who we are.  We can take our dances outside Zambia and create wealth for ourselves. People come all the way to see the art in our caves which was produced by our forefathers.

Mr Speaker, as I said earlier, this Bill is long overdue and, if properly harnessed, indigenous knowledge will be our source of wealth. It will also contribute to industrialisation and our pride as Zambians. Our indigenous knowledge or folklore is not a source of conflict. If anything, our forefathers were close to each other because of this. These inter-tribe fights we have are of our own making. They have nothing to do with folklore or indigenous knowledge. So, let us not hide behind this curtain. I think that if we go back to protecting our indigenous knowledge and promoting folklore, we will be a much more united country and tribalism will be a thing of the past.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Prof. Luo: Sir, when we come back into the Government on 11th August, I will be one of those ...

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Order!

Hon. Minister, take your seat.

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Mr Speaker, let me take this opportunity to appreciate the sense of common understanding of this Bill and what it intends to do; the sense of common ownership by the hon. Members of this august House; and the sense of urgency. Like all the debaters have said, this Bill is long overdue. I wish to thank all the hon. Members who have debated and I take note of the concerns raised.

Mr Speaker, the first concern was the capacity within the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA). This has been and continues to be addressed. PACRA is a dynamic agency which is one of the best registration agencies in Africa. I have no doubt that it will be able to create a registry of what we are talking about in its magnitude.

The other concern that was raised relates to inter-ministry co-ordination. Again, there is common ownership between the Ministries of Chiefs and Traditional Affairs and Tourism and Arts. Both ministries have been widely consulted and are on the same page in regard to ensuring that the Bill becomes effective as soon as possible.

Mr Speaker, there was a question of who the owner of the Chinyau dance was.  The essence of the Bill is to ensure …

Mr Mwale: Gule wamukulu!

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Mr Speaker, I am being corrected that it is actually called gule wamukulu or “the big dance.”

The essence of the Bill is to ensure that communities benefit from their knowledge both financially and are recognised as originators and owners of the knowledge. So, anyone wishing to use the knowledge should negotiate with the owners on agreed terms. Usually, the terms will be determined as a royalty or a share of profits. Where the two parties are not in agreement, the benefits can be enforced through the courts of law and a fair sharing will be determined.

Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you and the hon. Members once again.

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 on Friday, 6th May, 2016.

THE SUPREME COURT OF ZAMBIA (AMENDMENT) BILL, 2016

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

Mr Speaker, hitherto, the Supreme Court of Zambia, as the highest court of appeal, has been exercising appellant jurisdiction over decisions of the High Court and certain quasi-judicial bodies. With the enactment of the …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

Dr Simbyakula: … Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, Article 133 of the Constitution has now established the Court of Appeal which, in the hierarchy of the Judiciary, ranks above the High Court and will, therefore, exercise appellant jurisdiction over decisions of the High Court and certain quasi-judicial bodies, and administrative tribunals.

The Supreme Court on the other hand will henceforth, in accordance with Article 125 of the Constitution, exercise appellant jurisdiction over decisions of the Court of Appeal. The Bill before this august House, therefore, seeks to give effect to the provisions of Article 125 of the Constitution by providing for the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to hear appeals from the Court of Appeal and provide for matters connected with, or incidental to the foregoing. This Bill is innocuous and I urge the House to support it.

I thank you, Sir. 

Mr Ntundu (Gwembe): Mr Speaker, in accordance with its terms of reference, as provided for in the Standing Orders, your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill, 2016. In order to acquaint itself with the ramifications of the Bill, your Committee sought both written and oral submissions from stakeholders.

Mr Speaker, following the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

Mr Ntundu: … a number of changes relating to the hierarchy of the superior courts have taken place in the Judiciary. One such change is the creation of the Court of Appeal between the High Court and the Supreme Court. This change entails that appeals from the High Court will now lie to the Court of Appeal while appeals from the Court of Appeal will lie to the Supreme Court. In view of this development, there is a need to amend the Supreme Court Act Chapter 25 of the Laws of Zambia.

Sir, the Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill, 2016, is necessary, as the amendment of the Supreme Court Act is consequential to the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2016 which brought changes to the country’s judicial system. The Bill also enhances some provisions of the Supreme Court Act. However, your Committee recommends amendments to Clause 10, which repeals and replaces Section 22(2) so that the time spent in custody pending an appeal should count towards the final period of imprisonment after the final conviction. Your Committee, nevertheless, urges the House to support the enactment of this non-contentious piece of legislation.

As I conclude, Sir, I wish, on behalf of your Committee, to express our gratitude to you for granting us the opportunity to scrutinise the Supreme Court (Amendment) Bill, 2016. Your Committee also wishes to thank the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support rendered to it throughout its deliberations. It is also indebted to all the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Dr Simbyakula: Mr Speaker, I wish to thank all the hon. Members for their support.

I thank you, Sir.

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 5th May, 2016.

THE MINISTERS (PRESCRIBED NUMBER AND RESPONSIBILITIES) BILL, 2016

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

Sir, following the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, Article 116 of the Constitution makes provisions for the President to appoint a prescribed number of hon. Ministers. The Bill before this august House, therefore, seeks to give effect to the provisions of Article 116 of the Constitution by prescribing the number of Ministers.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Ntundu: Mr Speaker, I thank you, once more.

Sir, in accordance with its terms of reference, as provided in the Standing Orders, your Committee was tasked to scrutinise the Ministers (Prescribed Number and Responsibilities) Bill, 2016. In order to acquaint itself with the ramifications of the Bill, your Committee sought both written and oral submissions from stakeholders.

Mr Speaker, following the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2016, there is a need to prescribe the number of Ministers as per Article 116 of the Constitution. Currently, there is no law that prescribes the number of Ministers.

Sir, the Ministers (Prescribed Numbers and Responsibilities) Bill, 2016, brings into effect the provisions of Article 116 of the Constitution. Your Committee, therefore, urges the House to support the enactment of this non-contentious piece of legislation.

Mr Speaker, as I conclude, I wish to express your Committee’s gratitude to you for granting us the opportunity and responsibilities.

Mr Ntundu cleared his throught.
 
Mr Ntundu: Excuse me, Sir. I have a cough.

Laughter

Mr Ntundu drank some water.

Mr Speaker: Can you see how sweet power is?

Laughter

Mr Ntundu: I thank you, Sir. I have a slight cough.

Mr Speaker, once more, as I conclude, I express your Committee’s gratitude to you for granting it the opportunity to scrutinise the Ministers (Prescribed Numbers and Responsibilities) Bill, 2016. Your Committee also wishes to thank the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly for the support rendered to it throughout its deliberations. It is also indebted to all the witnesses who appeared before it for their co-operation in providing the necessary briefs.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Namulambe (Mpongwe): Mr Speaker, from the outset, I have difficulty supporting this Bill, simple as it may look, for the following reasons.

Sir, as much as the provisions of Article 116 of the Constitution talk about prescribing the number of Ministers that should be appointed by the President, one cannot just dream up the number “thirty”. What was the rationale behind arriving at the number “thirty”? Does it mean that we are going to increase the number of ministries to thirty or are we going to maintain the same number of ministries but, have Ministers without portfolio or Ministers who will be in charge of certain departments within the line ministries? These are issues that ought to have been explained in order for us to understand the rationale behind the number “thirty”.

Mr Speaker, the objects of the Bill are very clear, but its contents only talk about its interpretation, that is, the number of Ministers, their responsibilities and its regulations, thereafter. For instance, under part (b) of the Bill, which is to provide for matters connected with, or incidental to the foregoing, I thought that Article 117 of the Constitution should have also been taken into account. Are Provincial Ministers going to hold an equivalent position to Cabinet Ministers or are they going to remain in the same status in which they were in the 1996 Constitution where they were equated to Deputy Ministers?

Sir, as we try to prescribe the number of Ministers, this Bill should have gone further to describe whether a Provincial Minister is equated to a Cabinet Minister or Deputy Minister. For instance, if we are to go by the amended Constitution, by implication, even if we are using the Constitution of Zambia Amendment Act No.1 as a transition from what was in the last Constitution, if there are Cabinet Ministers and Provincial Ministers, then, they should become equivalent to Cabinet Ministers. This ought to have been explained.

Mr Speaker, further, when you look at the responsibilities of Ministers under Section 4 of the Bill, their business is all related to their work in Parliament and their responsibilities in the National Assembly. This, however, contradicts the provisions of Article 116(3)(e) of the Constitution which allows Ministers to remain in office until another President assumes office. In view of this, what are they going to be doing when Parliament is dissolved, for instance? What are they going to be doing when the Bill is not talking about any other function a Minister can perform outside Parliament?

Mr Kapyanga: Awe, tule shala fye!

Mr Namulambe: So, if we are to discuss these issues, …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Namulambe: … we should first of all ask ourselves some of these questions and give the answers to the Zambians. Otherwise, on moral grounds, we should be able to state that this is not the way certain things are supposed to be. 

Mr Speaker, I am cognisant of the fact that the provision of Article 116(3)(e) of the Constitution should have been applicable had the Ministers been appointed from outside Parliament because that is what is stated in the Draft Constitution. We all know that we removed the appointment of Ministers from outside Parliament from the Constitution. This Bill is talking about the responsibilities and functions of the Ministers. These functions are all related to what the Ministers should be doing in supervising their ministries and their work related to the National Assembly. What work will they be doing when the National Assembly has been dissolved,?

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Namulambe: Mr Speaker, it is for this reason that I find it difficult to support this Bill. Time and again, ministries are created for nothing. This should have been the opportune time to define the number and names of ministries so that it equates to the number that we are prescribing now. How do you just dream up a figure? What is it based on? These are questions which beg answers. I am not debating from without. I am debating from the information that is available. I did not draft this Bill. Yes, I participated in the Constitution-making process, but I cannot find the answers to the questions that I am posing. It is for this reason that I suggest that at the time the Government will amend this Bill, …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Namulambe: …. it must also bring amendments that state the names of ministries based on the number of Ministers. Otherwise, just dreaming up the number “thirty” does not make any sense.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Muntanga:  Mr Speaker, Hon. Namulambe has brought up issues that I also thought about. In this House, when we discuss the issue of Ministers, people ‘jump’ as though they will remain Ministers when the House is dissolved.

Interruptions

Mr Muntanga: Please, listen!

Mr Speaker: Hon. Muntanga, take a seat. Let me also provide guidance and I will be very brief.

I appreciate the nature of the subject. Invariably, we may be affected or interested. For the time being, let us approach this from the perspective of what we are as legislatures. When you legislate, you do not just legislate for the moment, but for posterity.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: So, for a moment, let us assume none of us will ever be Ministers …

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: … and design a system that will stand the test of time.

The hon. Member for Kalomo Central may continue.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I am indebted to your guidance. We have been questioning the rationale behind the number “thirty”. I really want the hon. Minister of Justice to take our concerns seriously. What is the size of the Cabinet? What have we said about the Provincial Ministers? If the Provincial Ministers, as the case was in the Draft Constitution, will also be members of the Cabinet, it means ten of those Ministers are Provincial Ministers. When you add the number of the Provincial Ministers to the number of ministries, it will exceed thirty. We are also aware that you cannot create a department unless it is brought here, in the House,.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, before business was suspended, I was questioning the rationale behind the arrival at the number “thirty”. We know that a Minister is responsible for a ministry. Somebody can only be a Minister if he/she is in charge of a ministry or be Minister without Portfolio. Now, we have not prescribed the number of ministries that will be created. The Patriotic Front (PF) Government knows very well that during its five-year term, it changed the ministries whenever it wanted. They increased the number of ministries from twenty-three to twenty-six. If we include the number of Provincial Ministers, the figure will exceed thirty. 

Mr Speaker, I want the hon. Minister of Justice to study this very well. We want a law which has no lacunas. At the moment, we want to make a law …

Interruptions

Mr Muntanga: People are making running commentaries because they do not understand issues. That is why we have a problem with the issue of the Grade 12 qualification. Even when somebody starts to debate, others will keep talking.

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Kalomo Central, you cannot debate and control the proceedings at the same time. Unfortunately, the latter is my prerogative. So, concentrate on the debate. That is what you are entitled to do. I have to listen to your debate and control the others at the same time. That is the dual function I have to perform and it is not easy. By the way, running commentaries are a recurrent problem on both sides of the House.

Continue, hon. Member.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I do not wish to control anybody, but I will respond as I debate.

 Sir, I am saying that we need to know the number of Ministers. We are talking about contentious issues, hence, the question of how many Cabinet Ministers there will be. I am, therefore, free to debate and tell them what I have in mind.

Mr Speaker, the position of Deputy Minister has not been mentioned in the amended Constitution, but the office holders will continue in office until the dissolution of Parliament. This means that after the dissolution of the House, hon. Deputy Ministers who have been making noise will cease to be in office ...

Mr Nkombo: Hear, hear!

Mr Muntanga: … because the Constitution is very clear on that. They are holding on to those positions because the other part of the law allows them to continue operating as long as they were appointed before the amended Constitution. Therefore, they will carry on until the House has been dissolved. When Parliament has been dissolved, they will no longer be Deputy Ministers. So, they should not even smile.

 Mr Speaker: Order!

Take your seat.

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!
 
Mr Speaker: Order!

Hon. Member, the tone that you have assumed and the direction that you have taken are totally unnecessary. It is completely unnecessary to start debating like that and start telling other hon. Members to stop smiling. Just concentrate on the substance. You see, we are doing some engineering here. Therefore, let us do some good business and do so impersonally. We do not want to have experiences like we have had in the past and, afterwards, start wondering how we did what.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: The problem is that you are being personal. Just concentrate on issues. That is all. Concentrate on issues.

You may continue.

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, I would like to emphasise that there is no provision for Deputy Ministers in the amended Constitution. I wish to find out from the hon. Minister of Justice whether there is a provision in the amended Constitution for Deputy Ministers because there is a lacuna.
Sir, the amended Constitution is clear on who is a Cabinet Minister or who is supposed to sit in Cabinet. While the old Constitution is still in effect, people who are not Cabinet Ministers are made to attend Cabinet meetings because that is what the Constitution says. This means that people who are supposed to be Deputy Ministers end up in Cabinet. When a Cabinet Minister is away, another Cabinet Minister acts in that position and not a Deputy Ministers because that is what the law says. I would like the hon. Minister of Justice to clarify that issue because the amended Constitution says that there will be only thirty Cabinet Ministers. There is no mention of Deputy Ministers. We do not want a situation where we will end up with thirty Cabinet Ministers and several Deputy Ministers, and end up with unmanageable number. We need to know the number of Cabinet Ministers as enshrined in the Constitution. Otherwise, I will have difficulty agreeing with the enactment of this piece of legislation because it creates a lacuna.

 Mr Speaker, I would like the hon. Minister of Justice to clarify what is meant by part of the job of the Ministers being parliamentary work. We know that somewhere in the old Constitution, including the amended one, it is stated that once Parliament has been dissolved, Cabinet is also supposed to be dissolved because …

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: … Ministers are appointed from amongst Members of Parliament. Suffice it to say that in the amended Constitution, we left out a Clause, which allows Ministers to continue in office even after Parliament has been dissolved. I am talking about Cabinet Ministers and not Deputy Ministers. According to the new Constitution, Cabinet Ministers are the ones who are going to continue in office. Therefore, we should not think that this includes other positions. If it does, then, it has to be made clear to all of us. It is for this reason that I would like the hon. Minister of Justice to be clear whether the number of Ministers he is referring to was stipulated in the old Constitution which has so far been abrogated. Are Deputy Ministers going to be part of Cabinet? What are we talking about?

Sir, when Parliament has been dissolved, what Parliamentary work will they be doing? This is one of the issues I would like the hon. Minister of Justice to clarify this matter. It would make more sense if he said that Ministers will be in charge of ministries and Government Business, but not that they will be controlling parliamentary business when Parliament will have been dissolved. It simply means that they will no longer be Ministers because they will be ‘dissolved’ Members of Parliament.

Laughter

Mr Muntanga: Mr Speaker, unless those two issues are made clear, we will approve wrong things and the people will start asking us where we were when wrong things were being approved. Even if I do not agree with the decision, we will be blamed collectively.

Sir, I have come to learn that sometimes people who do not want to listen do not understand certain issues. When we talk to them outside this House, that is when they appreciate that what they are proposing may not be completely right. This is why I want the hon. Minister of Justice to clarify whether the number of Ministers being referred to will be appointed from among the Members of Parliament.

Mr Speaker, I hope that will harmonise the issue that once Parliament has been dissolved, Members of Parliament will no longer be Ministers. This should be clarified so that in future, no one, including me, will be interested in being Minister. However, should the Bill be enacted, I will be very happy to be Minister so that I can continue in office even during the elections. However, I am trying to do something right by making sure that there are no lacunas.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I will be brief.

Sir, this is the price we pay for not paying particular attention to detail. If I were the hon. Minister of Justice, I would not bring this Bill at this particular time because when the time for posterity comes, we shall be remembered as a group of individuals that did not care to read.

Mr Speaker, this Bill does not provide any clarity whatsoever on how we are going to design the future of the governance of this country. This Bill is talking about the functions of a Minister three days or so before the dissolution of Parliament, among other things, when we are in the electioneering season. The third function of Ministers is:

“Provision to the National Assembly of Information, reports relating to matters under the ministry’s statutory functions or control as a National Assembly requires.”

Sir, the life of the National Assembly comes to an end on Wednesday. By implication, this function falls away. In any case, those who hold positions of Minister will want to go and get a fresh mandate wherever they got it from. It will not be time for them to come here because if they come here to perform this function, there will be no one in this House.

Mr Muntanga: Yes!

Laughter

 Mr Nkombo: Sir, they will be alone. If I were the hon. Minister of Justice, I would try to carry a little bit of the gift of social shame by simply withdrawing this Bill because it does not add value to our discourse.

Mr Speaker, after the elections, the complexion of this House will be totally different in the next Meeting of the Twelfth National Assembly of the Republic of Zambia. There may be surprises or none. However, it is beyond doubt that some of us may not be here. That is not something that you can argue about.

Interruptions

Mr Nkombo: Sir, when we amended the Constitution in the last Meeting on the eve of the adjournment of the House, some of us argued that there was no need to rush through the process. The hon. Minister of Justice was less honest with the House because he is on record on the Floor of this House as having said that …

Mr Speaker: Hon. Nkombo, take your seat.
Mr Nkombo resumed his seat.

Mr Speaker: I do not think it is fair to say that the hon. Minister was less honest. You see, you may have an opinion but, when you say he was less honest, you are casting an aspersion. The problem is that if he tries to defend his honesty, it will become personal. I counselled on this issue earlier on. I know this is an emotive issue invariably, but let us try to be objective. I said earlier in the afternoon that we are doing this for Mother Zambia.

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Continue, hon. Member for Mazabuka Central.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I apologise to the hon. Minister for sounding personal, but he is bound by collective responsibility. Let me recast my statement that the Patriotic Front (PF) was dishonest because, through the hon. Minister of Justice, they told us on this Floor that a group of stakeholders had made submissions at his office on what they thought were contentious and non-contentious clauses. That is a fact. The Government also further said and it lied that it was going to get a few hon. Members of Parliament to go …

Interruptions

Hon. Government Members: Question!

Mr Speaker: As a whip, you know very well that we do not accept the use of the word “lie” in this House.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I withdraw the word “lie”.

Sir, it was dishonest by saying that it was going to call a group of hon. Members of Parliament, including Hon. Mtolo and me, to go through the Draft Constitution in order …

Ms Mulasikwanda: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: No points of order. I want to control this debate alone.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, it is in the Hansard and I am not fabricating these words. Through the hon. Minister of Justice, the PF said …

Mr Speaker: Order!
Let me guide you hon. Member for Mazabuka Central. You know one of our fundamental rules of debate is relevance. I know we have come from a long Constitution-making process, chequered as it were. Let us focus on the issue at hand and on how we can go about it because I think that is what we need to know.

Mr Nkombo: Thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker, this Bill refers to Article 116(1) of the Constitution. This is the same Constitution that I am referring to. So, I apologise if I seem to be veering off relevance. However, allow me the freedom of my mind …

Mr Muntanga: Yes!

Mr Nkombo: … to remind the PF Government that it was less honest and that is my point. It is difficult for me to support this Bill. All I am simply saying is that it should be withdrawn so that the people who will form Government consider it when Parliament re-opens. That is what would make sense to me. I have the right to debate my feelings and those of the people whose interests and aspirations I represent in Mazabuka and elsewhere.

Mr Mufalali: Hear, hear!

Mr Nkombo: It is simply unfair to tell us that the composition of Ministers shall not be more than thirty without giving specifications. The Constitution that we amended has put us, as a country, in an awkward position. It has presented a mirror image of who we are as a group of people that has not read and has become victims of its own decisions. The point I am making is that some hon. Members have become victims of rushing into legislating.

Sir, Part 4(a) of the Bill states that without prejudice to the generality of Article 116(2) of the Constitution, a Minister is responsible for the business of Government in the National Assembly relating to the Minister’s statutory functions or control, and as assigned. When Parliament is dissolved, my understanding is that the President and, maybe, the Vice-President, are the only people who will continue to enjoy State facilities. That is the point I am driving.

Mr Speaker, we are now discussing the relevance of the issue of Ministers because we did not read. At the time we were amending the Constitution, the PF debated that it would be expensive to appoint Government Ministers from outside Parliament. We are all to blame, especially the hon. Government Members who were driving the process and forgot to raise the issue of Provincial Ministers. That is something that all of us who represent the people are a laughing stock for. We should shoulder that blame. Some of us have done so. If you want to live like an ostrich, bury your head in the sand. I want to say that the people’s power is much greater than the instruments of power that you are playing with.

Mr Livune: Yes!

Mr Nkombo: I am not talking about a power shift here, but that we need to respect the Zambians. That is what we need to do.

Sir, if I were the hon. Minister of Justice, I would simply drop my guard and suffer the consequences of social shame. The PF Government has been driving this process and it is unclear what it wants us to do. It needs to convince us because we do not trust it. That is the starting point. Everything that is going on is pointing to the manipulation of one group by another.

Mr Speaker, I will not participate in the voting for this Bill to go through. Those of you who will be lucky to come back, can sit nicely without rushing and cast this Bill in a manner that will stand the test of time. We are creating another lacuna here. The hon. Member of Parliament for Kalomo Central raised a concern of whether the Provincial Ministers were included or not in the thirty hon. Ministers that are to be appointed. I think that is the question that the hon. Minister should answer.

Mr Mukanga interjected.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, how I wish you could protect me from my brother, Hon. Mukanga, who is talking.

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Mazabuka Central, you may you continue.

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister must come out clearly and tell us that there will be thirty Ministers, including Provincial Ministers. That may comfort us. We are giving him a blank cheque to sign so that tomorrow we can have the size of Government like that of the PF at the moment.

Sir, at the time the PF was campaigning, it promised to have a lean Cabinet, but look at them now (pointing at the hon. Ministers).

Laughter

Mr Nkombo: I thank you, Sir.

Mr Chilangwa (Kawambwa): Thank you, Mr Speaker, I rise to support the Bill.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: Sir, initially, I would have stood here to urge the hon. Minister of Justice to withdraw the Bill if we, as Parliamentarians, were honest with ourselves.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: This is because we have a group of individuals or human beings who do not live by their word. I recall very well the commotion that was caused by a group of individuals in this House that stood up and almost ‘crashed everything’ because it wanted a new Constitution.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: They are talking about reading …

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member, take your seat.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: The trajectory you have taken may lead us into collision with one of our rules, namely that we do not debate ourselves. Let us avoid that. We were the same participants yesterday and today. Therefore, I urge you to concentrate on the Bill. Should we move or not move the Bill, that is the question. Also, state the reasons for and against.

You may continue.

Mr Chilangwa: I thank you for your counsel, Mr Speaker.

Sir, once upon a time, there lived a group of individuals, and those individuals …

Interruptions

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Kawambwa, do not defy my ruling.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: There is no point in doing that.

Hon. Opposition Member: Shame!

Mr Speaker: There is absolutely no point. Just debate the Bill. I am giving you an opportunity to debate the Bill.

Interruptions

Mr Chilangwa: Mr Speaker, we were made to believe that everything that was contained in the new Constitution and the Draft Constitution Bill was the will of the Zambian people.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: We were made to believe by all the advocates, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and all those people who came together and advocated for this Bill that we needed to change certain things in the Constitution …

Mr Speaker: Excuse me, hon. Member of Parliament for Kawambwa, which Bill are you referring to?

Mr Chilangwa: Mr Speaker, I am referring to the Bill on the Floor …

Mr Speaker: Just pose a moment and take your seat.

This Bill has just been presented. It does not have the history that you are referring to.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: This is the last time I am allowing you to continue with your debate. Otherwise, I will curtail your debate.

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: Mr Speaker, thank you very much, I acknowledge your counsel. I am aware that this Bill is being presented for the first time. However, it is premised on the new Republican Constitution.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, Hear!

Mr Chilangwa: The only reason I am referring to the Constitution is that without the new Constitution, we would not be debating this Bill.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: I thank you for your counsel.

Sir, I was saying everything that is derived from the Constitution of Zambia which the President assented to in January, has given rise to a number of issues and challenges. It is against this background that I am saying that when this Constitution was being debated, everybody went round saying that it was a people-driven Constitution and it had such ramification.

Based on that, Mr Speaker, I will support this Bill in particular because it will be consistent with where we started from. We started from advocating that we wanted a new Constitution and that is what the people wanted. Some individuals stood up and said that this is what they wanted and would not stop at anything. His Excellency President Edgar Lungu rose to the challenge by assent to the Constitution.

We need to be consistent. Consistent human beings are a basis of power. If you are not consistent, people will lose faith in you. Today, you say this and tomorrow you say something else or today you jump and tomorrow you run. People want to have consistent leaders.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Chilangwa: Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!
Brig-Gen. Dr Chituwo (Mumbwa): Mr Speaker, I rise to seek clarification from the hon. Minister of Justice.

Sir, Article 116(1) of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment), 2016 states that:

“The President shall appoint a prescribed number of Members of Parliament as Ministers.”

Article 116(2) states that:

“A Minister shall be responsible, under the direction of the President, for the policy and strategic direction of a Ministry, department or other State institution, as assigned by the President.”

However, Article 116(3) states that:

 “The office of Minister becomes vacant if-

(e) another person assumes the office of President.”

Sir, the President will appoint Ministers from among the Members of Parliament, but the Article goes on to say that the position of Minister shall be vacant upon another person assuming the Office of President.

When Parliament is dissolved, it means there are no Ministers. May I seek clarification on how it will be possible for the President to appoint Ministers when Parliament will have been dissolved? This is the clarification I seek because the Constitution does not indicate that the Members shall continue in office until the next Parliament is elected.

I thank you, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Anyway, all those are issues for the Minister of Justice.

Laughter

Mr Speaker: They are tempting to comment on, but we shall leave that to the hon. Minister. My function is to appoint anybody who wants to debate.

The Deputy Minister in the Vice-President’s Office (Mr Chungu): Thank you Mr Speaker. I will be very brief.

Sir, I stand to support the Bill as presented to this House. I am aware that a lot of pertinent issues have been raised with regard to the number of Ministers as prescribed by the Bill, including the issue of the continuation of Ministers in office after the dissolution of Parliament.

It is also clear that the Bill gives the number as prescribed in the amended Constitution. However, we also need to understand that there is a clear distinction between the Constitution of Zambia Act No. 1 and the Constitution (Amendment) Act, No. 2.

Mr Speaker, I just want to quote the provisions regarding Ministers and Deputy Ministers in the Constitution of Zambia Article 7(2) of the Constitution Act No. 1, 2016 states that:

“A person holding the post of Vice-President, Minister or Deputy Minister shall continue to hold that position under the Constitution until that appointment is terminated by the President in accordance with the Constitution.”

This is the provision under which we are functioning as Ministers, Deputy Ministers and Vice-President. It is very clear. This Constitution passed through this Parliament.

Mr Speaker, over and above that, let us look at Article 11 of the Constitution of Zambia Act No. 1 of 2016 which states that:

“A person who is holding or acting in an office established by the Constitution immediately before the effective date shall continue to hold or act in that office as if appointed to that office under the Constitution as amended and shall be considered as having taken any necessary oath required to be taken under the Constitution as amended, unless the President requires that person to take any oath specified by the Constitution as amended or any other law.”

Sir, this must be read together with the Constitution as amended. There is nothing that this Government is doing that is ultra vires, ...

Hon. Government Member: Lawyer Chungu.

Mr Chungu: ... or away from what is provided for in the Constitution.

Hon. Government Member: Counsel.

Mr Speaker: Order!

Mr Chungu: Mr Speaker, if, for some reason, we, as legislators, erred, we must promise ourselves and the Zambian people that this issue will be revisited as soon as the next Parliament is constituted. It is as simple as that. Yes, there are lacunas just like there are a lot of things that are quite unsustainable in terms of the resources that we have. Whether we will manage to sustain everything in the Constitution is something we are yet to see. So, the issue of the number of Ministers has been cleared as it is prescribed by the Bill that is before this House. Whether the number is too big or not, is a matter that needs to be looked at in future. However, we have proposed that the number of Ministers be thirty.

Sir, I thought that I needed to read this particular provision for the public to know. I also needed to let the people know that there was no dishonesty, whatsoever, on the part of the Patriotic Front (PF) when the Constitution was presented to this House. In any case, let me state that the Zambian people wanted the Constitution to come to this House in its raw form. So, we did what we did in the interest of safeguarding this country’s resources. Further, we needed to cut the cloth according to our size.

I thank you, Sir.

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Speaker: Have we exhausted the debate? It looks like the debate has been exhausted.

The Minister of Justice: Mr Speaker, I wish to thank all the hon. Members who have contributed to this important debate. That is what democracy is all about.

Sir, to begin with, we now have an amended Constitution in place. Bills are being brought to this House in order to give effect to the provisions of the amended Constitution. This Bill before us is one of them. This House has debated a number of Bills, which have come here as a consequence of this Constitution. The House will recall that we debated the Constitutional Court Bill, the Court of Appeal Bill, and the Public Protector Bill, among others. These are all new creatures of the new Constitution. The Zambian people had wanted to put a cap on the number of Ministers. This is the provision in Article 116 of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, which simply says:

“The President shall appoint a prescribed number of Members of Parliament as Ministers.”

Sir, to give effect to that provision, this Bill that we are considering, Section 3 of the Ministers (Prescribed Number and Responsibilities) Bill, 2016. Section 3 says:

“For the purposes of Article 116(1), the number of Ministers to be appointed by the President shall not be more than thirty.”

Mr Speaker, note the language. The Act says the number shall not be more than thirty. So, the upper limit is thirty. That means it can be any figure up to thirty. It can be two, ten, twelve or fifteen Ministers, but not more than thirty.

Sir, furthermore, Article 92(2) of the Constitution gives power to the President to establish, merge and dissolve ministries. He can do that subject to the approval of the National Assembly. So, any President who feels that his administration will be more effective by merging certain ministries or dissolving certain ministries is given that power here so long as the number of Ministers remains within that cap, that is, not more than thirty. I hope that answers the question by my hon. Young Brother from Mpongwe. It is not thirty. Not more than thirty simply means that it shall not exceed thirty.
Mr Speaker, Article 266 of the Constitution of Zambia defines a Minister as a Cabinet Minister. The definition of Provincial Minister is on page 109 and Provincial Minister means a person appointed Provincial Minister by the President. I hope that is clear. So, a Cabinet Minister is different from a Provincial Minister.

Sir, I am grateful to the hon. Deputy Minister in the Office of the Vice-President for his contribution. In fact, I will invite him to attempt to study law. I shall volunteer to offer some tutorials.

Laughter

Hon. Government Member: Honorary?

Dr Simbyakula: Not honorary.

Laughter

Dr Simbyakula: Sir, Article 7 of the Constitution of Zambia Act provides for the term for serving in office, as the hon. Deputy Minister rightly pointed out. Article 7 says:

“(1) The President shall continue to serve as President for the unexpired term of that office as specified by the Constitution and in accordance with the Constitution.

“(2) A person holding the post of Vice-President, Minister or Deputy Minister shall continue to hold that position under the Constitution until that appointment is terminated by the President in accordance with the Constitution.”

Sir, under Article 116(3)(e), which the hon. Member of Parliament for Mazabuka Central Parliamentary Constituency referred to, states that the Office of Minister becomes vacant if another person assumes the Office of President. That is what it means.

Mr Speaker, in the past, there was a lacuna where every time the Cabinet was dissolved, the ministries were run by civil servants. So, this Bill is addressing that lacuna. So, whenever, you become Ministers, you continue to be Ministers until another person assumes the Office of President. On the concerns further raised by the hon. Member of Parliament for Mpongwe Parliamentary Constituency, I wish to say that the functions of the Minister are defined in the Constitution. It is not just legislative functions. If you read Article 116(2) of the Constitution of Zambia, you will see what it says. Section 4 of the Bill says:

“Without prejudice to the generality of Article 116(2).”

Sir, Article 116(2) says:

“A minister shall be responsible, under the direction of the President, for the policy and strategic direction of a Ministry, department or other State institution, as assigned by the President.”

This Bill gives more details on the legislative function of a Minister. The legislative function is part of the duties of a Minister. It is not the only function at all. I am sure we all know that it is just an additional responsibility.

Mr Speaker, I think I have responded to some of the concerns that have been raised by my hon. Colleagues. Essentially, this Bill seeks to limit the number of Cabinet Ministers unlike in the past where it could be anything. The Constitution is guiding us and this is what this Bill is all about. There is nothing sinister at all about the Bill. It is actually for our own good, as a nation, to limit the number of Ministers.

Sir, I think this is a very innocuous Bill. We used to have this situation under the Independence Constitution in the First Republic. There was a limit on the number of hon. Ministers in Cabinet until later on when the Constitution was amended to make it limitless. We are now going back to the situation of having a limited number of Ministers of not more than thirty.

Sir, I will be the first one to admit that there are a number of lacunas in the new Constitution. Nothing is perfect. As the hon. Member for Mazabuka Central has stated, when Parliament reassembles in the Twelfth Assembly, if there are areas which will require fine tuning, that can be done. I, therefore, hope hon. Members will take time to go through the Constitution thoroughly so that when we meet again, they can move amendments where it is appropriate and necessary for the good of the nation. As I keep saying, this Constitution is not just for us. It is supposed to stand the test of time for our children and their children.

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

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

Committed to a committee of the Whole House.

Committee on Thursday, 5th May, 2016.

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

[THE DEPUTY CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the
Chair]

THE PUBLIC PROTECTOR BILL, 2016

Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 19 – (Proceedings after Investigation)

Dr Simbyakula: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 19:

(a) on page 15, in line 32, by the deletion of the word “may” and the substitution therefor of the word “shall”; and

(b) on page 16, in line 3, by the deletion of the word “may” and the substitution therefor of the word “shall”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 19, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 27 − (Search without Warrant)

Dr Simbyakula: Mr Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 27, on page 18:

(a) in the marginal note, by the deletion of the word “without” and the substitution therefor of the word “with”; and

(b) in line 19, by the deletion of the word “without” and the substitution therefor of the word “with”.

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

Clause 27, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Title agreed to.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT (Amendment) BILL, 2016

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

Title agreed to.

___________

HOUSE RESUMED

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

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

The Public Protector Bill, 2016

Report Stage on Thursday, 5th May, 2016

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

The Local Government (Amendment) Bill, 2016

Third Reading on Thursday, 5th May, 2016.

THIRD READING

The following Bills were read the third time and passed:

The Income Tax (amendment) Bill 2016

The Mines and Minerals Development (Amendment) Bill, 2016

The High Court (Amendment) Bill, 2016

_____

MOTION

ADJOURNMENT

The Vice-President and Minister of Development Planning (Mrs Wina): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn.

Question put and agreed to.

___________

The House adjourned at 1732 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday, 5th May, 2016.

___________________