Wednesday, 9th November, 2016

Printer Friendly and PDF

Wednesday, 9th November, 2016

 

The House met at 1430 hours

 

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM

 

PRAYER

 

__________

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY MR SPEAKER

 

DELEGATION FROM THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OF MALAWI

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, I have some announcements to make.

 

I wish to acquaint the House with the presence, in the Speaker’s Gallery, of the Clerk of the Parliament of Malawi, Mrs Fiona Kalemba, who is accompanied by the Principal Clerk Assistant and Personal Assistant to the Clerk, Mr Moffat J. Kakande.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: I wish, on behalf of the National Assembly, to receive our distinguished guests and warmly welcome them in our midst.

 

I thank you.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

 

CHANGES IN THE COMPOSITION OF SESSIONAL COMMITTEES

 

I wish to inform the House that in accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of the Constitution and Standing Order No.131, the Standing Orders Committee has made the following changes to the composition of some Committees, following the appointment of Mrs K. C. Mulenga, MP, as a Cabinet Minister:

 

GENERAL PURPOSE COMMITTEES

 

Committee on Estimates

 

Mr M. L. Kafwaya, MP, has been appointed to replace Hon. K. C. Mulenga, MP.

 

PORTFOLIO COMMITTEES

 

Committee on Health, Community Development and Social Services

 

Mr C. Kambwili, MP, has been appointed to replace Mr A. Kasandwe, MP.

 

Committee on Information and Broadcasting Services

 

Mr A. Kasandwe, MP, has been appointed to replace Mr M. L. Kafwaya, MP.

 

Thank you.

 

APPOINTMENT OF THE EXPANDED COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES TO CONSIDER THE ESTIMATES OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE FOR 2017

 

Hon. Members, in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic of Zambia, the hon. Minister of Finance will, on Friday, 11th November, 2016, deliver the Budget Speech to Parliament on the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure for the Year 2017. In line with our established practice, the Estimates will be committed to the Expanded Committee on Estimates for consideration. In this regard, I have constituted the Expanded Committee on Estimates to consist of the following:

 

  1. all the members of the Committee on Estimates; and

 

  1. the Chairpersons of General Purposes and Portfolio Committees.

 

I also wish to inform the House that the Chairperson of the Committee on Estimates will preside over the proceedings of the Expanded Committee on Estimates.

 

I thank you.

 

POST-ELECTION SEMINAR FOR MEMBERS OF THE TWELFTH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY

 

Hon. Members, I wish to inform the House that the Post-Election Seminar for hon. Members of the Twelfth National Assembly will be held at Parliament Buildings from Saturday, 12th to Monday, 14th November, 2016, in the Chamber. The seminar will provide hon. Members with the opportunity to learn about Parliamentary Practice and Procedure.

 

Registration for the seminar will start at 08:00 hours, and hon. Members of Parliament are requested to be seated in the Chamber by 08:45 hours.

 

All hon. Members of Parliament are encouraged to attend this important seminar.

 

I thank you.

 

__________

MOTION

 

AMEND THE CONSTITUTION OF ZAMBIA SO AS TO PROVIDE FOR MEMBERSHIP OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT TO LOCAL COUNCILS

 

Mr Mwewa (Mwansabombwe): Mr Speaker, I beg to move that this House urges the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for membership of Members of Parliament to local councils and to remove the lacunas therefrom.

 

Mr Speaker: Is the Motion seconded?

 

Mr Kabanda (Serenje): Mr Speaker, I beg to second the Motion.

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, I thank you for according me the opportunity to move a Private Member’s Motion that seeks to urge the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for membership of hon. Members of Parliament to local councils and  to  remove the lacunas therefrom.

 

Sir, Article 153(2) Cap 1 of the Constitution of Zambia sets out the composition of the council. Hon. Members of Parliament are not part of the council for the district under which the constituency he/she represents falls. Article 153(2) of the Constitution has rendered Section 9 of the Local Government Act Cap 281 void.

 

Further, Sir, Section 9 of the Local Government Act provided for the composition of councils that includes Members of Parliament. It will be noted that the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Bill, 2015 was amended on the Floor of this House and the provisions for the formation of Provincial Assemblies were removed from the said Bill. It will be recalled that the proposed Provincial Assemblies were, among other things, going to provide a link between Members of Parliament and councils. Under the current Constitution, there is no link between the Members of Parliament and councils. Therefore, it is necessary and befitting to amend the Constitution in order to include Members of Parliament in the membership of the councils, as this will ensure a well co-ordinated approach to development at district, constituency and ward levels within the context of decentralisation.

 

Mr Speaker, you will agree with me that the Local Government is a sphere of the Government that is closest to the people we represent. Many basic services are provided by the various municipalities and ward councillors, as they are the politicians who are closest to the communities. Therefore, as people’s representatives at constituency level, we cannot afford not to be involved in the decision-making that directly affects our people. We need to have an input in the decisions that are made by councils, as they have a direct impact on the people we represent.

 

Sir, according to Article 152(1)(a), one of the functions of the local authorities is to oversee programmes and projects in the districts. This connotes that our presence in the council, as the representatives of the people, need not to be over emphasised. The exclusion of Members of Parliament from the membership of the council cannot be allowed to continue because it is detrimental to the development of the constituencies we represent.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, we were elected on the premise that we would help facilitate development in the constituencies we represent, in addition to our parliamentary responsibilities which include, among others, the following:

 

  1. making laws;

 

  1. voting money for public expenditure and approving taxation measures;

 

  1. approving public debt before it is contracted;

 

  1. overseeing Government activities and subjecting them to scrutiny; and

 

  1. approving international agreements and treaties before they are acceded to or ratified.

Mr Speaker, as elected representatives of the constituencies, we are also charged with responsibilities in the constituencies, which are to:

 

  1. participate in and assist the local council in planning development projects in the district which can be funded by the council, help in soliciting funds from the Government for developmental projects and influence non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and donor agencies to fund such projects and help to interpret Government policies to councillors;

 

  1. study the needs and anxieties of our constituencies irrespective of their political affiliation so that they can be included in developmental programmes; and

 

  1. encourage and lead constituents in the social and local development of their localities. This demands holding regular meetings, mobilising resources for developmental projects and maintaining other contacts throughout the constituency.

 

Mr Speaker, like councillors, we are also representatives of the people. Therefore, our exclusion from the council will deprive us of the opportunity to make our voices heard in the decision-making processes of the councils. As you are aware, councils come up with policies, make by-laws and decide on development plans and service delivery for their areas as approved in Article 152(1) of the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, let me now talk about other lacunas that are in the Constitution.

 

Article 154 – Mayors and Council Chairpersons

 

Sir, according to Article 154 of the Constitution, mayors and council chairpersons are elected during elections for councillors. Having been elected in that manner, they are expected to serve on a full-time basis. From the consultative process that took place after the release of the First Draft Constitution by the Technical Committee on Drafting the Zambian Constitution, it was envisaged that the Constitution would empower Parliament to enact legislation to provide for the functions of Executive Mayor and Executive Council Chairperson. However, the Constitution does not expressly refer to them as executive mayors and executive council chairpersons, neither does it set out their functions. This has resulted in varying interpretations of the status of the offices. In view of this, there is a need to amend the Constitution so that the issue is put beyond doubt or contention. The Constitution should be clear about mayors and council chairpersons being executives and, if possible, clearly spell out their functions.

 

Article 47 – Majoritarian System of Electing President

 

Mr Speaker, Article 47(1) of the Constitution provides for a majoritarian system for electing the President, which requires that a winning candidate obtains more than 50 per cent of the valid vote cast in an election. Where no candidate obtains more than 50 per cent of the valid votes cast in an election, Article 101(3) of the Constitution provides that a run-off be held between the top two candidates within thirty-seven days of the initial ballots. This is quite a costly electoral system if the second ballot were to be held. The first-past-the-post system of electing the President is appropriate as it avoids the costs associated with running two elections within a space of thirty-seven days. The resources spent on holding a second ballot would be better spent on other areas of need in the economy such as health and education.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Mwewa: The Government is urged to revert to the first-past-the-post system of electing the President.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, further, I acknowledge that the choice of the current system of electing the President was informed largely by the desire of the Zambian people to have a President who enjoys support across the country. However, it will be recalled that our Presidential candidate in the last General Election won in seven of the ten provinces. Subsequently, the largest Opposition party won only in three provinces.

 

Mr Livune:  Question!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, if the said Opposition party had won in another province, there would have been a likelihood of Zambia being led by a President who won in only four of the ten provinces. Apart from it being a costly system, it does not guarantee the election of the President who would enjoy nationwide support because it is possible for a few provinces with higher voter turnout to determine who becomes President. It follows, therefore, that the candidate who shall get the highest number of votes cast be declared duly elected President.

 

Article 105 – Swearing-in of President Elect

 

Mr Speaker, Article 105 provides that the President shall be sworn into office on the Tuesday following the seventh day after the declaration of Presidential Election results, if no petition has been filed in or the seventh day after the date on which the Constitutional Court declares the election valid. This means that a candidate who has been duly elected President has to wait, at least, for a week after being declared winner before he/she can assume office. This is a recipe for anxiety and possible instability and a threat to national security and peace, as we saw from the violence that rocked some parts of the country after the 11th August, 2016 Elections. It is necessary that the person declared President-elect is sworn into office within 24 hours of the declaration ...

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Mwewa: ... if we are to avoid the kind of instability and threat to national security and peace that we witnessed soon after this year’s General Elections.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Hon. PF Member: Rodgers, naukula!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, the violence that erupted in the past elections leaves much to be desired. We saw some Zambians being displaced by fellow Zambians.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Mwewa: People scampered in all directions, running for their lives.

 

Hon. PF Member: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Some ended up spending nights in the bush while others sought refuge in classrooms. Most parent victims did not know where their children where. Others ended up in hospital with wounds.

 

Mr Speaker, I give credit to His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces for his composure.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Sometimes, I tend to think that if I were the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, I would have resorted to deploying the armed forces in Namwala and other areas where there was violence.

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: However, the God-given President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, remained calm even when he could have sent armed forces to the affected areas because he knew that could have led to bloodshed.

 

Mr Livune interjected.

 

Mr Speaker: Order, Hon. Member for Katombola!

 

The hon. Member on the Floor may continue.

 

Mr Mwewa: Rather, he chose to go the path of peace as an ultimate and lasting solution for this country. Mr Speaker, some sons of the soil would have engaged in combat with the perpetrators of violence.

 

Mr Speaker, my gratitude also goes to the President’s Running Mate, Her Honour the Vice-President, who heeds the advice of the Republican President. She helped us to remain calm and steadfast on the path of peace. Indeed, she is the mother of the nation. Your Honour the Vice-President, I salute you.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Where I come from, you would be referred to as nankoko iyifukatila abana. Mr Speaker, it means that she is like a hen that safeguards its chicks under its wings in the real face of danger. This is what she did.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mwiimbu: She is a hen!

 

Mr Mwewa: She kept the nation on the pathway of peace. It is for this reason that I feel very strongly that the waiting period for the Constitutional Court to decide who should be President should be reduced. Sir, election petitions still remain the provision or avenue for unsatisfied parties to contest the election, but they should not bring the country to a standstill.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, I say so because His Excellency the President, who has divine and infinite wisdom from above, ...

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Mwewa: ... and has been bestowed with scarce self-restraint qualities, may not be there to give guidance in 2026.

 

Mr Speaker, I am saying that what caused the turmoil and instability that was witnessed was the long waiting period which created a vacuum.

 

Mr Speaker, those of us who elected Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu knew that he was the duly-elected President and anxiously waited for his inauguration when he was declared winner. Likewise, those who voted for Mr Hakainde Hichilema also hoped that the Constitutional Court would rule in his favour, hence the anxiety and violence that we witnessed.

 

Mr Speaker, this calls for the amendment of the Constitution. For one to know the challenges a particular pathway pauses to its users, one must first walk that path. We say that ukusuusha ilungu kwendamo.

 

Hon. UPND Member: Meaning?

 

Mr Mwewa: I have already translated it. It means that one has to walk through the swampy path for one to know the dangers and challenges that it pauses. We walked through the ‘swamp’ and saw that there are certain things that need to be changed for the betterment of Zambia our motherland.

 

Mr Speaker, those who are aggrieved by the election of the President can petition whilst the swearing-in is going on in order to avoid the strife and anxiety that the country experienced after the just-ended General Elections.

 

Mr Speaker, it was not clear whether it was your office or that of the incumbent that was supposed to lead the nation during the period of the petition.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Question!

 

Hon. PF Member: Hammer!

 

Mr Mwewa: Such lacunas should be cured to avoid suspicion, confusion and instability. We should not accuse the Speaker of wanting to act as President when there is a lacuna in the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, Articles 103 and 104 should be amended.

 

Mr Speaker, let me conclude by emphasising that the participation of Members of Parliament in the development programmes of the communities is essential for them to fulfil their obligations. As such, it is important for them to use every available avenue and platform of dialogue like the council meeting. That is why we wish to call upon the Government and all hon. Members of this House to support this non-controversial Motion that seeks to urge the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for the membership of Members of Parliament to local councils and remove the lacunas therefrom.

 

Mr Speaker, I beg to move.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

Mr Kabanda: Now, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Speaker, may I begin by thanking you for giving me the opportunity to second this important Motion moved by Hon. Rodgers Mwewa, Member of Parliament for Mwansabombwe Constituency. In so doing, allow me to commend the mover on the manner in which he has moved and articulated issues pertaining to the Motion.

 

Mr Speaker, I second this Motion because I have a strong conviction in the importance of collaboration between hon. Members of Parliament and councillors, particularly in the involvement of Members of Parliament in the policy cycle.

 

Mr Speaker, as a former local Government practitioner with thirty-three years’ unbreakable experience, you will agree with me that Local Government is the sphere of the Government that is closest to the people whom we represent.

 

Many basic services are delivered by local municipalities, and ward councillors are the politicians closest to the communities. In fact, we refer to local authorities as institutions that carry human beings from the cradle to the grave.

 

Therefore, we cannot afford not to be involved in making decisions that directly affect our people. We need to have a say in the decisions that are made by councils as these have a direct impact on the people. According to Article 152, Clause (1)(a), one of the functions of local authorities is to oversee programmes and projects in the district. This means that our presence in councils as people’s representatives needs not to be overemphasised. However, contrary to the established practice of hon. Members of Parliament participating in council business as councillors, the Amended Constitution has excluded all Parliamentarians from participating in the affairs of councils, as can be seen from the prescribed composition of the council. Article 153 (1) and (2) state that:

 

  1. “A councillor shall be elected in accordance with Article 47(3) by registered voters resident within the district.

 

  1. A council shall consist of the following councillors −

 

  1. persons elected in accordance with Clause (1);

 

  1. a mayor or council chairperson elected in accordance with Article 154; and

 

  1. not more than three chiefs representing chiefs in the district, elected by the chiefs in the district.”

 

Mr Speaker, hon. Members of Parliament in a district are not included in the composition of councils. Article 153(2) of the Constitution of Zambia has rendered Section (9) of the Local Government Act Cap 281 of the Laws of Zambia void. Section (9) of the Local Government Act provided for the composition of the council and included Members of Parliament in the membership of the council. The exclusion of Members of Parliament from the membership of councils limits their involvement and voice in the development programmes of their constituencies, especially that the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) is established under Part XI of the Constitution, relating to Local Government. As an elected representative of the people of my constituency, I want to have a voice in the development programmes on which the monies disbursed under the CDF are spent. In the current Constitution, it is not clear whether Members of Parliament will participate in making decisions pertaining to development.

 

Sir, the rules of interpretation clearly state that the express mention of one thing, is the exclusion of another. The fact that hon. Members of Parliament are not mentioned means that they have been excluded. The only solace lies in the fact that they can be invited. However, councils are not obliged to invite hon. Members of Parliament to their meetings. Hon. Members of Parliament are an integral part of constituency development. As such, they must be seen to participate in decisions relating to the constituency, particularly the administration of the CDF, which was originally supposed to be disbursed under the guidance of the area Member of Parliament.

 

Mr Speaker, from the foregoing, it is apparent that the exclusion of hon. Members of Parliament from the membership to councils is detrimental to the development of the constituencies. We are elected on the premise that we will help to facilitate development in the constituencies we represent. In addition to our parliamentary responsibilities which include, inter alia:

 

  1. making laws;

 

  1. voting money for public expenditure and approving taxation measures;

 

  1. approving public debt before it is contracted;

 

  1. overseeing Government activities and subjecting them to scrutiny; and

 

  1. approving international agreements and treaties before they are acceded to or ratified.

 

Sir, we are also charged with constituency responsibilities. Therefore, as elected representatives of constituencies, it is our responsibility to, among other things:

 

  1. participating in and assist the local councils in planning developmental projects in the district which can be funded by the council, helping in soliciting funds from the Government for intended developmental projects or influencing non-governmental organisations (NGOs) or donor agencies to fund such projects and helping in explaining Government policy to councillors;

 

  1. studying the needs and anxieties of our constituencies, irrespective of their political affiliations, so that they can be included in developmental programmes; and

 

  1. encouraging and leading our constituencies in the socio-economic development of their localities. This demands holding regular meetings, mobilising resources for development and maintaining other contacts throughout the constituency.

 

Like councillors, we are also representatives of the people. Therefore, our exclusion from the councils will deprive us of the opportunity to make our voices heard in the decisions that are made and implemented by the councils. As you are aware, Mr Speaker, councils approve policies and by-laws, and decide on developmental plans and service delivery for their areas, as provided for in Article 152(1) of the Constitution.

 

Sir, the Constitution, particularly Article 153(2), which talks about the composition of councils, needs to be amended so as to include hon. Members of Parliament in the membership of councils. Members of Parliament should be members of councils because they are authorised to administer the disbursement and utilisation of the CDF in accordance with the Local Government Act Cap 281 of the Laws of Zambia. The District Development Co-ordinating Committee (DDCC), through the planning sub-committee, receives project proposals from the Constituency Development Committees (CDC) …

 

Mr Chiteme: Tatuleumfwa!

 

Mr Kabanda: … and advise the council on their suitability for funding.

 

Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kabanda: Mr Speaker, if we, the Parliamentarians, …

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Kabanda: … are to make an impact on the development process in our respective constituencies, …

 

Mr Chibanda: Ema seconder, aya!

 

Mr Kabanda: … – I am now audible – we need to take part in the decision-making processes on the utilisation of the CDF and other programmes that border on the welfare of our constituencies.

 

Mr Speaker, while acknowledging that Members of Parliament are not directly responsible for implementing developmental programmes in their constituencies, it is, however, their duty to facilitate, lobby and support development initiatives in their constituencies, with councils being one of the avenues.

Sir, other pertinent areas of responsibility include the recognition of chieftaincy, as stipulated in Article 165(2)(a) of the Constitution. Traditional leaders have a key role to play in the governance of this country. While succession or ascendance to traditional leadership, particularly chieftaincy, is governed by applicable customs in various chiefdoms, the succession wrangles that have been witnessed following the amendment of the Constitution this year are a source of concern. Unfortunately, some of the wrangles have resulted in a loss of lives.

 

Mr Speaker, Article 165(2)(a) of the Constitution prohibits Parliament from enacting legislation which authorises a person or authority to recognise or withdraw the chieftaincy. With the wrangles we have heard and read about in the media lately, it is necessary to revisit this provision. There is a need to come up with a system for the recognition and withdrawal of recognition for chiefs akin to what obtained before the amendment of the Constitution. In addition, the Government bears the responsibility of paying allowance for chiefs. The absence of a system of recognising and withdrawing the chieftaincy will be costly to the Government because it is difficult to tell how many chiefs are in the country and whether or not all of them have ascended legitimately to the chieftaincy. So, the introduction of a system of recognising and withdrawing the chieftaincy will assist the Government in managing costs associated with the chieftaincy.

 

Mr Speaker, there is also a need to look at Article 266 on the definition of a child. In the Constitution, the definition of a child is at variance with that under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, as it defines a child as a person who has attained or is below the age of eighteen. The Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child as a person who is below the age of eighteen. It is necessary to revisit and revise the definition so as to be clear about who a child is.

 

Sir, this is a non-controversial Motion which needs the support of all well-meaning Members of the House.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Kabanda: Mr Speaker, in his address to the House, the Republican President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, acknowledged the fact that the Amended Constitution has lacunas that need to be cleared. Therefore, as the hon. Minister of Justice draws up a list of areas that need to be revisited or amended, the exclusion of Members of Parliament from councils should be on the list, as it needs to be addressed with dispatch.

 

Sir, with these remarks, I beg to second the Motion.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr A. Mumba (Kantanshi): Mr Speaker, it is true that the Government needs to urgently look at some of the lacunas that are in our Constitution. Our Constitution is not supposed to be a deterrent to our work. As we look at some of the clauses in the Constitution, it is important that we do not disadvantage the Zambian people because of our political positions or beliefs of political parties. A lot happened when we had elections, some of which has never happened in our country.

 

Sir, I would like to talk about the rotation of Ministers when Parliament has been dissolved, bearing in mind the Constitutional Court ruling on the same. When the debate on Ministers being appointed outside Parliament was going on, no Member in this House said that he/she would not desire to be part of the Executive. No wonder that was thrown out. When you come to Parliament, apart from serving your people at community level, it would be an added advantage to be appointed to the Executive. I have not come to this Parliament to be of service in Kantanshi Parliamentary Constituency only, but also to serve the nation through the Executive.

 

Laughter

 

Hon. Opposition Members: You want to be a Minister?

 

Mr A. Mumba: Sir, hon. Members who are serving their fourth terms and do not want to join the Executive only have themselves to blame. It is their problem because chances of them coming back to this House are slim. We need the experience they have in the Executive.

 

Mr Speaker, when Parliament was dissolved on 9th May, 2016, we had no Government until 13th September, 2016. Which country can function effectively for four months without Ministers in office? Therefore, I wish to urge the Government to quickly amend this clause so that Ministers can remain in office even after Parliament is dissolved so as ..

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah!

 

Mr A. Mumba: ... to ensure the smooth running of the country.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, ...

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Hon. Member for Kantanshi, hold on. I will give as many people as possible a chance to debate. So, let us not drown the hon. Member on the Floor. I think this House would be more efficient if we debated in silence. I have repeatedly said that you should be ready to hear things that you do not like. That is what democracy entails.

 

You may continue, hon. Member.

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, thank you for your guidance. There are many lacunas in the Constitution because people do not want to hear opposing views. If you (looking at the Opposition Side) formed Government, you would inherit this problem. That is why we need to sort it out now. That way, the country will move forward. Had the Constitution been properly dealt with, we could have been discussing other issues now.

Sir, I wish to propose that when Parliament is dissolved, Ministers should continue in office. It is not good enough to say allowing them to continue in office will be costly. In any case, democracy is costly. Since we are part of the global village, we should just accept that fact.

 

Mr Speaker, let me now talk about payment of pension benefits. There is a need to look at Article 189(1)(2) of the Constitution. How does someone who has retired remain on the payroll until the Government finds money to pay his/her pension benefits? We know that pension schemes do not function properly anywhere in the world. There are always lapses in to pension schemes. Keeping retirees on the payroll will stifle employment. What this entails is that they will continue drawing salaries even when they are not working. So, there will be no one to do the work that they were doing. This has to be reviewed. There should be a timeframe for the payment of pensioners so that the Government can continue providing employment to the people. If you look at the lead time for a contract, you will find that it includes maintenance time, interest rates, and eventualities. We have had situations where the country imports a lot of stuff from countries like South Africa and Kenya without looking at our circumstances. It is a fact that pension benefits are not paid on time. So, why put clauses in the Constitution that will result in a drain on Government resources? This is another expenditure item that will be a drain on Government resources.

 

Sir, I now wish to talk about the appointment of Permanent Secretaries (PSs). I am sure the hon. Opposition Members can agree with me that my position is above that of Permanent Secretary.

 

Hon. Opposition Members interjected.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hammer, hammer!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, I am saying that my position is above that of Permanent Secretary. Article 184(1) of the Constitution is about appointments of Permanent Secretaries by the President. Why should the President get advice from the Public Service Commission only? He needs to have a mix of advice. Some of us have travelled around the world, meeting experts from various organisations. If someone qualifies for a certain position, why can the President not consider appointing such a person? After all, we need the best people to build this country and its economy. Therefore, the President should be given the flexibility to choose the people to work with. After all, he has been given the mandate to do so. So, he is not expected to appoint people who will fail to deliver.

 

Sir, in conclusion, I wish to talk about hon. Deputy Ministers.

 

Hon. Opposition Member interjected.

 

Laughter

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, this was a serious omission. The Hon. Mr Speaker has two Deputies. I am not comparing the Office of the Speaker, but ...

 

Mr Speaker: The House has two Deputies.

 

Laughter

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, why should the hon. Ministers of Finance, Commerce, Trade and Industry or Tourism and Arts not have someone to deputise them? They have functions to perform internationally and locally. How can we put so much pressure on one person?

 

Interruptions

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, I wish to propose that the Government considers putting a cap on the number of hon. Deputy Ministers for ministries whose functions are critical to the development of the country.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mumba: How can we talk about agriculture, livestock and fisheries enabling us to achieve a double-digit growth when there is only one individual per ministry doing all the running around?

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr A. Mumba: Mr Speaker, in addition to limiting the number of Deputy Ministers, their responsibilities should be stipulated so as to avoid debate on the same matter in future as is the case now with hon. Ministers. In fact, it is good that we are having this debate now because this proposal would not have gone through at the time the Constitution was being amended. Nonetheless, we are all cognisant of the fact that the country needs to move forward and develop.

 

Mr Speaker, governance is about opportunities. Our being here is also an opportunity. So, there is nothing wrong with anybody being appointed Deputy Minister. Therefore, we should now critically look at what the roles should be for certain positions in the Government instead of using financial constraints as an excuse. I can highlight the many benefits that we, as Members of Parliament, enjoy that can be questionable. However, I am restrained because we are not supposed to debate ourselves. Nonetheless, this is a progressive Motion that I hope will be supported by those who were earlier opposed to the inclusion of such clauses in the Constitution. By now, amending the Constitution should have been a closed matter so that we progress to other issues.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Mwiimbu (Monze Central): Mr Speaker, thank you for according me the opportunity to rise in opposition of the Motion that has been moved by the hon. Member of Parliament for Mwansabombwe. First and foremost, I wish to say that this Motion is flawed, frivolous, vexatious, tainted and hazy.

 

Hon. Government Members: Question!

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: The mover of the Motion has asked this House to make amendments to the Constitution so as to allow hon. Members of Parliament to sit in council meetings and to remove the lacunas in the Constitution. You do not remove lacunas. Lacunas are a void. You cannot remove a void.

 

Mr Nkombo: How?

 

Mr Mwiimbu: You fill a void and cure a lacuna.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: This Motion should not have appeared on the Order Paper because it is flawed and misleading. According to the Order Paper, the Motion is talking about amending the provisions relating to the membership of councils and remove the lacunas therefrom. Perhaps, a little interpretation is necessary.

 

Mr M. K. Tembo: We are not in court!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Among the mistakes that are in the Motion should have been a suggestion to fill the vacuum relating to the position of councillor. However, what we have noticed as the Motion was being raised is that the mover is at sea whilst the seconder is in the ocean.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: There is no direction as to what they want done.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: One critical issue that all of us wanted to hear from the mover of the Motion was an apology to this House and nation at large.

 

Hon. PF Members: For what?

 

Mr Mwiimbu: When the Amended Constitution was brought on the Floor of the House, we debated the proposed amendments and advised our colleagues on your right who were in the House then that the process was flawed. There were problems pertaining to the drafting of the Constitution and the Draft Constitution was mutilated. There were no connections in the provisions of the Constitution …

 

Mr Ngulube interjected.

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Kabwe Central, I have noticed that you have this penchant to run commentaries. Please, desist. You do that conspicuously so.

 

Mr Ngulube: Most obliged, Mr Speaker.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, we advised that the amendments to the Constitution be withdrawn so that members of the public and us could review the Draft Constitution. Our colleagues stood firm and voted against whatever we said and advised. They also said that this is the best Constitution ever to be given to the people of Zambia.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Yes!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That is what they told us. What has changed today? This goes to show that there is a poor reading culture among our colleagues on your right.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: They should have read the Amended Constitution at the time and realised that there were lacunas that were supposed to have been cured and not removed. When we tried to advise our colleagues on your right on this same matter, they said that we do not read or understand the Constitution. They claimed to have the wisdom required to pass a constitution. They even had the audacity to challenge us to leave the house if we did not want the New Constitution enacted.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Shame, shame!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: When the Draft Constitution was debated, the current Republican President was an hon. Member of this House and challenged us go to night school and start reading if we did not know how to read the Constitution. Alas, what has happened? The provisions in the Constitution of Zambia that is in force now have caught up with him and the hon. Ministers who served in the previous Cabinet. We advised them that according to the Amended Constitution, a Minister cannot continue in office after the dissolution of Parliament. However, they ridiculed us and said that we did not know how to read and interpret the Constitution. What has happened is that the Constitutional Court has found them wanting because illegally occupied ministerial offices.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, as hon. Members from the Opposition we came to debate this Motion on the understanding that it was specifically to do with the issue of councillors. However, the line of the debate has been shifted. This just shows the mischief on the part of our colleagues on your right.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: They have even gone to the extent of debating the much-cherished notion of 50 per cent plus one majority vote which has been supported by all Zambians in all the constitutional review commissions. The provision of 50 per cent plus one majority vote has never been opposed by anybody. However, we now hear that the Patriotic Front (PF) Government does not want this clause. No wonder there are now surrogates in the PF who are going round advocating for an extension to the term of office for the Republican President.

 

Mr Livune: No!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: This just shows the amount of mischief on the part of our colleagues on your right, Mr Speaker…

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … because they are not sincere. They did not disclose the real intent and purpose of this Motion.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: They hid that from us. The Government has raised issues, which are not part of this Motion, on what transpired during the last General Elections.

 

Mr Sing’ombe: Yes!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Since they have been allowed to debate and raise issues, we now wish to respond.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, there is no ‘vachum’ after a contested election.

 

Hon. Government Members: Vachum!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: There is no ‘vachum’. The Constitution of Zambia is specific that once there is a petition filed in in the Constitutional Court, the Speaker of the National Assembly …

 

Interruptions

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … assumes the Presidency.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That is what the Constitution of Zambia says.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Sing’ombe: E lawyer wama lawyer, uyu!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: What ‘vachum’ are you talking about? There is no ‘vachum’.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, as for the issue of Deputy Ministers, we have heard someone say that he is here because he wants to be a Minister.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kabamba: That is not what he said!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: The motive behind supporting this Motion is that someone wants to be a Minister.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That is not the reason we are here. We are here to serve the people of Zambia, …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … and not for us to be Ministers.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That is not the import of being a Member of Parliament.

 

Ms Tambatamba: Shame!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, when the Patriotic Front (PF) ‘mutilated’ the Constitution of Zambia Amendment Bill, 2016, …

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: ... we pointed out that the amendments they were making were misconceived, unco-ordinated and were not in line with the Constitution Amendment. The then hon. Minister of Justice …

 

Mr Sing’ombe: Who?

 

Mr Mwiimbu: – I will not mention his name – ... stood, with a posture, on the Floor of this House, giving the impressing that this is the best Constitution Zambia has ever  had but, alas, we have seen the lacunas. The PF did not look at the various provisions. The issue of not including Members of Parliament in the membership of councils was very clear. There were some provisions in the Draft Constitution which secured the interests of hon. Members of Parliament but, without looking at the Constitution, the PF decided to leave them out like a Grade 1 child who erases things which are good from a book.

 

Laughter

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: The PF, removed the provision relating to the creation of Provincial Assemblies which were in the interest of every Zambian. Those who were Members of Parliament at the time participated in the approval of the Draft Constitution at district, provincial and national levels. Due to various interests at play at the time, the PF overlooked the interests of the people of Zambia. Now that you think your interests are being violated because you are being threatened by District Commissioners and Council Chairpersons in your constituencies, you want to go back to the councils. That should not be the motivation. If you want any meaningful amendments to the Constitution, take it back to the people.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Give an opportunity to every stakeholder to make comments. Consult widely. Once the people of Zambia say, “yes, we want Constitutional amendments,” we shall support that because the people have spoken.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: However, because of the personal interests that we have seen here, …

 

Mr Chibanda: Ah!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … we are not going to support the amendments.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: We are not going to do that.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu:  We know that because of the arrogance of numbers …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu:  Hon. Simukoko, you are making running commentaries.

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Monze Central, that is not your function.

 

Hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security, …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: … please, desist from making those running commentaries.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Nominated!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Let us have order in the House.

 

This is a very important subject.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Yes!

 

Mr Speaker: Since this is a very important subject, we must debate it in earnest. The Zambian people are watching and listening.

 

I am not stopping anybody from debating. So, if you want to debate, you should indicate. You cannot debate whilst seated.

 

Mr Lumayi: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: The rules do not permit that.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

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

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, the provisions that require amendments have been cited. One of them is the one proposed by the hon. Member for Serenje Central relating to the recognition and removal of chiefs.

 

Mr Speaker, we are all aware that chiefs in this country have insisted that they do not want Presidential recognition because the Executive has nothing to do with chieftainship. Now, we have a Member of Parliament saying that the chiefs of Zambia want Presidential recognition and that they also want the President to dethrone chiefs. That is not what the chiefs have been saying.

 

Mr Speaker, the other amendment, being proposed by the hon. Member for Kankoyo, …

 

Dr Imakando: Kantanshi!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … – Kantanshi –, implies that civil servants and other employees in this country should not be protected by constitutional provisions. Where an employer fails to pay an employee his/her benefits, he would rather he/she languishes and die without being paid his/her benefits.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That provision was put in the Constitution of Zambia after thorough consultations, having taken note of the suffering that the Zambian retirees had been subjected to.

 

Mr Speaker, I have no doubt that the Zambian workers are disappointed that some of our colleagues want the hardworking employees who retire to be subjected to destitution.

 

Mr Sing’ombe: Mm!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: When the provision was passed, there was celebration amongst the Zambian workers but, now, it is dununa reverse,

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: What do you mean now?

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Dununa reverse, Mr Speaker, means do not go forward, but dance backwards as you celebrate what you have done and usually do to the people.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, all of us are aware that in our various constituencies many people have suffered as a result of the non-payment of terminal benefits after retirement. In Kantanshi, the miners have been calling for a saviour, a Moses, to come and liberate this country.

 

Mr Sing’ombe: Mm!

 

Mr Kasonso: He wants to be a Minister.

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Some people just want to be Ministers because that was the intention of coming to this House.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mwiimbu: That is not what we want.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Let us be sensitive to the people we serve in this House. We do not come here to speak for ourselves, but for the people we serve in the constituencies.

 

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, there is no way responsible hon. Members of Parliament can support this Motion, which is vague and has intensions that are void.

 

Sir, the African in us is retrogressive. That is why Africa is backward. There are economic refugees in developed countries because of our being democratically retrogressive. Instead of advancing, we want to do dununa reverse. Everything in this country is going in reverse.

 

 Hon. Colleagues, I know you have the numbers and you can do whatever you want, but bear in mind that the people of Zambia are listening. I will not support this Motion even if I am the only one to do so. There is no way I can support this Motion. The Constitution was assented to less than a year ago and we are already bringing some amendments. We have not even ‘tested’ the mischief and flaws in it, yet we want to amend it.

 

Sir, the Presidential Election and the violence thereafter that we are talking about have nothing to do with the Constitution, …

 

 Hon. Government Members: Ah!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: … but have a lot to do with the leadership we have.

 

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Mwiimbu: Mr Speaker, hon. Members should all know that the worst dictators this world has ever had always used the law to suppress the people. There is no dictator who does not use the law.

 

 Mr Lufuma: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Even Hitler used the law. He passed laws to get at people. There is no dictator who does not use the law. They always carry the Constitution, use the Bible, and are always pious.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Lastly, Mr Speaker, I wish to appeal to all of us in this House to search our consciences and souls, and reflect on what we want for the good of this nation. Let us reflect and seek the indulgence of our integrity before we make any decision. The people on your right used to say that if we did not support the Constitution, posterity would judge us harshly. I also wish to tell them that posterity will judge them harshly if they support this Motion.

 

 Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Sir, with these few remarks, I wish to say that I am totally opposed to this ambiguous, unco-ordinated, un-thought-of-properly Motion. I urge all hon. Members to reject the Motion.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

 Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Bwalya (Lupososhi): Mr Speaker, I would like to thank you for giving me the opportunity to support the Motion.

 

 Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Bwalya: Sir, the events of this country after the 11th of August, 2016, Elections gave us an opportunity to ‘test’ the Constitution. It gave us the opportunity to realise that there are lacunas in the Constitution

 

 Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Bwalya: Mr Speaker, what worsened matters was that the learned lawyers contributed to the misinterpretation of the Constitution.

 

 Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Bwalya: Sir, I will soon demonstrate that because the hon. Member of Parliament for Monze Central has just referred to one part of the misinterpretation of the Constitution. The dark cloud that overshadowed this country during the time of the petition may take many years to clear because of what I may call constitutionally- induced economic shocks which affected this country.

 

 Mr Speaker, at the time, many people did not know whether or not to go ahead with their programmes because of the uncertainties relating to the Constitution. In fact, most of the investors withheld their investment into Zambia because of this. It is our responsibility to ensure that we clean up the Constitution.

 

Sir, I would like my hon. Colleagues to listen carefully as I refer to Article 101 of the Constitution in my debate. There is the first ballot and the second ballot. In simple language, the second ballot is the rerun, whereas the first ballot is the first election.

 

Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

 Mr Bwalya: Therefore, the petition that was taken before the Constitutional Court was as a result of the first ballot. The first ballot does not call for the Speaker of the National Assembly to take over the Executive powers. The hon. Member for Monze Central said that the Speaker was supposed to take over the Executive powers. That is not true.

 

 Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Bwalya: This is where this country almost ended up with problems.

 

Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

 Mr Speaker: Order, on the right! 

 

Mr Bwalya: Mr Speaker, Article 101(4) of the Constitution says:

 

“A person may within seven days of the declaration made under Clause 2, petition the Constitutional Court to nullify the election of the presidential candidate who took part in the initial ballot on the ground, that …”

 

There are a number of grounds, but this is the first one.

 

Sir, His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, was petitioned in the first rerun which does not talk about the Speaker taking over the Executive powers. Let us go to Article 103(1) which states:

 

“A person may, within seven days of the declaration of a President-elect, petition the Constitutional Court to nullify the election of the President-elect on various grounds.”

 

Sir, this Article is clear about the Speaker taking over Executive powers. Despite the interpretation by the learned lawyers, this country was on standstill, resulting in the economic shocks that have affected all of us. This uncertainty will be with us for a long time to come.

 

Mr Speaker, I was also wondering why we should wait for seven days to swear in the President after the ruling by the Constitutional Court because its decision is final. There is no other court that can preside over the matter. Why should we wait for a further seven days before the President can be sworn in? If the court has made a ruling, why can the President not be sworn in in the next twenty-four hours?

 

Sir, I do not have a problem waiting for seven days after the returning officer has declared the winning candidate in the Presidential Election. People can be given an opportunity to complain and petition, but I have every problem waiting for seven days after the Constitutional Court has decided that this is the winner before the President can be sworn in.

 

 Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear! 

 

Mr Bwalya: Why do we have to wait for seven days after the last court has spoken, subjecting the Zambian people to further anguish and anxiety? By waiting for another seven days, we are creating loopholes in the economy of the country. Hon. Member for Monze Central, this must be cured by this House.

 

Mrs Simukoko: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Lupososhi, there is really no need to focus your debate on the hon. Member for Monze Central. You are addressing the House.

 

You may Continue.

 

Mr Bwalya: I thank you for your guidance, Sir.

 

Mr Speaker, Article 9(2) of the Constitution stipulates that:

 

“the President shall, once in every year, report to the National Assembly, the progress made in the application of the values and principles specified under this Part.”

        

Again, there are lacunas that need to be cured in this Article. What should necessitate the President’s coming here to give a report or account on the progress made in the application of values? What parameters will he use? We may have the Ministry of Religious Affairs and National Guidance, but I am pretty sure that it will be difficult for any individual to measure the moral performance of the country.

 

I think that we would be asking for too much if we expected the President to come and report on the moral performance of the country. What parameters is he going to use? So, we need to do away with this Article. I propose that we do away with such provisions because they are not measureable and are difficult to quantify.

 

Mr Speaker, I now wish to talk about Articles relate to chiefs. Like the seconder of the Motion said, on one hand, we are saying that no institution or person should recognise or dethrone chiefs, but on the other, we are required to pay chiefs. Article 264 states:

 

“A public officer, chief and Member of the House of Chiefs shall be paid such emoluments as recommended by the relevant authority or commission and determined by the Emoluments Commission.”

 

 So, if the Governemnt is not involved in the recognition or dethroning of chiefs, on what basis should it pay them?

 

Mr Speaker, what would happen if one day a senior chief decides to elevate all the sub-chiefs in his chiefdom who have been fighting to be made chiefs and gives the list of names to the Government for paying emoluments? As Article 264 provides for payment of emoluments to chiefs, will the Governemnt afford to pay all the chiefs? These are some of the lacunas in the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, almost seventeen if not twenty commissions with full-time employees have been created. The National Treasury is already overstretched, yet we want to maintain a Constitution such as this one. Yes, we may have debated the amendment of the Constitution in the previous Parliament, but that Parliament is no more.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Bwalya: It is not right for us to continue with a wrong. If we have identified a wrong, let us deal with it. Let us correct that which needs to be corrected. In fact, the Constitution is dynamic ...

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Bwalya: … because the aspirations of the Zambian people change almost everyday.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Mm!

 

Mrs Simukoko: It is dynamic!

 

Mr Bwalya: So, let us not stick to what was decided before.

 

Mr Speaker, I am glad that some hon. Members of Parliament in this Parliament were there in the previous one, including myself. A certain political party sung a song on the Floor of this House for a good one hour, demanding for a new Constitution, ...

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Bwalya: … to the extent of disrupting the Business of the House. They wanted the Constitution to be passed and given to the Zambian people in its raw form, with no exceptions.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Bwalya: The Patriotic Front (PF), being the responsible Government that it is, thought that a bit of ‘surgery’ and removal of certain clauses would be the way forward in order to start a process that it could manage. Now, we have seen that there is a need for more amendments.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Bwalya: That is the truth.

 

The Zambian people, who felt the brunt of the amendments during the petition, have spoken. We are not the only people who interface with the Zambians. We are not the only ones who relate with the electorate. The Constitution needs revision. We need to review it so that we can run the country within the provisions of the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, Article 59 of the Constitution states:

 

“The Electoral Commission shall, in delimiting the boundaries of constituencies and wards, take into account the history, diversity and cohesiveness of the constituency or ward.”

 

The Article is asking the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) to look at the progression and the cohesiveness of the people in a given area when delimitating the boundaries of constituencies and wards. In my view, the issue that needs to be seriously looked at is the sizes of the population and households or vastness of the area. Whether or not the people in an area are cohesive or are not living in peace, should not be an issue to be considered when the ECZ is delimitating constituencies. I propose that this also be looked at as we amend the Constitution.

 

I think that it is difficult to measure diversity and cohesiveness. Why do we want to make life difficult for the ECZ? Delimiting should simply be about the boundary, population and other issues that may have arisen so as make the constituency governable and manageable. To expect such nitty-gritty to be considered in the delimitation of constituencies is asking too much and putting a lot of pressure on the ECZ.

 

Mr Speaker, as we endeavour to amend the Constitution, we must look at it in totality. Doing it piecemeal may not be a good approach.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Bwalya: Let us look at the clauses that have posed a lot of challenges, those that will put pressure on the fiscal space of this country and those that do not add value to the well-being of the Zambians. That way, we shall be doing a good service to the Zambian people. It should be looked at it in totality by a small committee, since we are not re-inventing the wheel. We need to polish up this document for the good of the people.

 

Mr Speaker, the Constitutional Amendment Act No. 1 was a precursor to the Constitutional Amendment Act No. 2. If the Constitutional Amendment Act No. 1 had failed, the Constitution that we are debating now would not have taken effect. Constitutional Amendment Act No. 1 expressly stated that the Ministers and Deputy Ministers shall continue in office until the President-elect assumes office.

 

There was reference to the matter in the Constitutional Court and judgment over the continued stay of hon. Ministers in office after the dissolution of Parliament. Whether it was the correct judgment or not is not for me to say, but I found that judgment difficult to believe because I seriously doubt whether all the relevant clauses of the Constitution were considered. This is still being contested. I only hope that it shall be concluded properly. This is an issue for interpretation by our colleagues, the learned lawyers and the Judiciary.

 

Mr Speaker, it is also true that the dissolution of Parliament is not one of the reasons given in the Constitution for the office of the hon. Ministers to fall vacant. Maybe, it is something we need to consider here so that we know that once Parliament is dissolved, then, hon. Ministers should also vacate office. In the current Constitution, the dissolution of Parliament is not one of the reasons for the office of the hon. Ministers to fall vacant. Where our lawyers got from that is an issue that I will leave to the Zambian people to decide.

 

Mr Speaker, I thought I needed to contribute to this Motion and urge this House to support it so that we can commence the process of amending the Constitution. I wish to urge the Government to include the hon. Members of Parliament in the membership of councils and cure some of the other lacunas in the Constitution.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo (Mazabuka Central): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to debate.

 

Sir, I looked at the wording of the Motion and, for a moment, I thought that it was an innocent Motion, until I listened to the contents of the debate by the mover, seconder and other hon. Members who debated in favour of it. Let me start by saying that I show no appreciation whatsoever to the mover for moving this frivolous Motion.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: Therefore, I do not support it even one bit.

 

Sir, I will begin with the substantive wording of the Motion. The removal of the hon. Member of Parliament from participating in council affairs has a history. I think that my colleague from Monze Central tried to explain where this came from. There were some justifications for that which we appreciated at the time. The justifications included, inter alia, the fact that this country was going to work towards a general principle of devolved governance, that is, taking power from the centre to the people. This is the reason the Constitution of Zambia Amendment Bill, 2015 remains sacrosanct to me. The Patriotic Front (PF) mutilated this document in order to serve their interest and not that of the people.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: They claimed that Members of Parliament should cease being part of the councils because they were going to be part of the provincial assemblies. It would not be a good idea for a Member of Parliament to belong to both the provincial assembly and the local authority and superintend over the local authority in which he/she would participate. It was decided, with ‘eyes wide open’, that a Member of Parliament should not be part of a council because he/she was going to be part of the provincial assembly which was going to deal with the issue of proportional representation and public participation. The membership of provincial assemblies would include three chiefs, two religious organisations, two youths and three women. These were going to be the members of the legislative assemblies at provincial level with full legislative powers for as long as whatever laws they made would not contradict the main law of the land.

 

Mr Speaker, the hon. Member for Lupososhi has decided to have amnesia over this issue by saying that people sang songs. We never sang songs. We went there to demand for the Constitution, and not the one that was mutilated. The then hon. Learned Minister of Justice told the House that there were contentious and non-contentious clauses in the Draft Constitution. We asked him straight questions and, with a straight face, he said that there were certain interest groups who advised the PF against passing the Draft Constitution as it was. I went to his office and asked him not to embarrass himself by changing the people’s document. This document is sacrosanct …

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Mazabuka Central, maybe, you can spare us those details about your private communication because the former hon. Minister of Justice will not be able to respond. He will not have any opportunity anywhere to say whatever transpired.

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, that is fair. It is safer to say on the Floor of the House that the then hon. Minister of Justice, who was representing the PF, said that there were interest groups who said that the Draft Constitution, it its form, could not work for the Zambian people. With you in the Chair, we demanded that the hon. Minister tell us who the interest groups were, but he failed to do so.

 

Sir, in his report, the mover of the Motion said that the violence that we saw during and after the elections was as a result of the Constitution. I wish to say that the violence that we witnessed in this country was a build-up to the behaviour of us, the leaders in this House, and I will give you a catalogue of that. Violence, in any form, should be abhorred. In Rufunsa, a cadre was murder and somebody has been jailed for committing that murder. In Mtendere, one of our members, Fraziar Mutapa, was murdered by cadres who are serving a jail sentence. Mapenzi Chibulo is no longer alive and she was killed during the election campaign and not after the election. So, it is frivolous for the mover of the Motion to suggest that the contents of the Constitution and the window period for which aggrieved people can seek court action is what caused the violence. We know that Malesu Mukonka was murdered before the election. The violent culture of some of our leaders who hide in sheepskin is what has caused all that. We know that from as far back as 2013, most elections were characterised by violence. I served some time in jail after PF cadres killed each other in Livingstone. That was violence associated with elections, and not the Constitution.  I think that we should all understand that some people threw stones at an aeroplane during the last elections. This had nothing to do with the Constitution.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: We know that some people in here shot at political cadres during a by-election in the Western Province before the Constitution was enacted. That had nothing to do with the Constitution. So, let us not hide behind our fingers.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: President Lungu has failed to apologise ...

 

Mr Ngulube: Question!

 

Mr Nkombo: ... to the Zambian people for wasting their resources by calling them from all the corners of Zambia to the Independence Stadium on 5th of January, 2016, to witness him assenting to this mutilated document only to come back and say that it should be amended.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member, I do not know where, but somewhere on Page 23 of the Members’ Handbook it states:

 

“While on the Floor of the House, Members should not (d) reflect upon the conduct of persons in high authority i.e. the Head of State or the Chair, unless the discussion is based on a substantive Motion drawn on proper terms.”

 

Hon. Member, bear that in mind.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, the President, His Majesty of the Republic of Zambia, ...

 

Hon. Government Members: Question!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Member for Mazabuka Central, we are a Republic. This is the Republic of Zambia. We do not have the title of ‘His Majesty’, but His ‘Excellency’. So let us use the right form of address.

 

Further, – I am now addressing the whole House, – I know this is an emotive issue. As a nation, we have gone through a difficult period, and many of the issues you have catalogued reflect that very assertion that I am making. However, we need to approach this subject with an appropriate temperament. We should not lose our temperament over this. We are supposed to be designers of solutions here. That is why we are hon. Members of Parliament. I know that we carried out a similar exercise not so long ago but, fortunately or unfortunately, we are back at it. So, let us seize the opportunity to ensure that what eventually ensues from this process does not compel us to go back in the near future. I know that there are a lot of emotions and so on and so forth but, please, bear that in mind as we debate.

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I was saying that the violence that I described was not in any way connected to the content of this mutilated document that the PF arrogantly brought here. Using the same arrogance of the majority of numbers ...

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

I have a difficulty there ...

 

Mr Nkombo: Now, what do I do?

 

Mr Speaker: Just a moment.

 

Mr Nkombo resumed his seat.

 

Mr Speaker: When you say, “the PF Government arrogantly brought”, referring to a group of persons, and you take into account the definition of arrogance, which means foolish pride, you begin casting aspersions on your colleagues.

 

Look, let us debate issues and avoid casting aspersions. I think it is possible for us to do that. So far, from my observation, all the previous speakers from both sides of the House have been debating issues. That is what we should do. I think it is possible.

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, through the then hon. Minister of Justice, the PF vehemently and stubbornly insisted that this document was the best Constitution that Zambia would ever see. So, it is surprising that the moment the Head of State, His Excellency ...

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

Business was suspended from 1615 hours until 1630 hours.

 

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Mr Speaker: When Business was suspended, the House was considering the Motion moved by the hon. Member for Mwansabombwe that this House urges the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for membership of Members of Parliament to local councils and to remove the lacunas therefrom. The hon. Member for Mazabuka Central was debating. However, before he continues, I would like to provide some guidance.

 

Hon. Members, relatively speaking, we have a loaded Order Paper and a short day. This being a Wednesday, we would like to dispose of the business on the Order Paper. One way of proceeding with dispatch is to prevent me from intervening. However, I am being compelled to intervene because the debates tend to drift away from issues. Let us have an issue-based debate. If we have an issue-based debate, I would like to equally enjoy it.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: However, if we try to play the blame game, we can be here up to midnight. As we proceed, let us avoid clashes of personalities.

 

Mr Nkombo: I treasure your guidance, especially the initial one when you said that we should absorb even things that do not sound good to our ears.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Nkombo: On 5th January, 2016, the PF Government held a huge event in a hundred-seater stadium ...

 

Hon. Members: 100,000

 

Mr Nkombo: ... to exalt this document which they now want us to amend through this Motion. This is what I am against. I am sure about what I am about to say. We have advised the PF before, and we are going to advise them now that this attitude of doing the exact same thing over and over again, expecting to get a different outcome will not work. We said that cherry-picking this document because the Member of Parliament is scared that the mayor is going to ‘uproot’ him/her in the next election and he/she should be seen to be the one controlling the council, is not right.

 

Sir, the functions of a Member of Parliament are threefold, and they are clear. These are to legislate, provide oversight on the Budget and to represent. Now, why are our colleagues worried about being uprooted? They must ask why I have been a Member of Parliament for Mazabuka Central Constituency for so long. It is because when I go to campaign, I do not tell the people things I am unable to do. That is not my job, and I want to be categorical because that is what this Motion seems to suggest. Where will I find the money to take development to my constituency? I am supposed to initiate developmental programmes. The ‘person’ whose responsibility is squarely in liaison with me to take development to the constituency is the Government.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: Whether you like what I am saying or not, those are the three functions of a Member of Parliament, and not to squeeze and elbow each other with the mayors and councillors. Some colleagues, I am told, have been ‘tsunamied’ by members of the council. We appreciate that members of the council are the ones closest to the communities that we serve, but people should just be diligent, true and honest. Hon. Members of Parliament should not go to the constituencies and say that they will construct tarred roads because they cannot do that, not even in their individual capacities. Although they have been building roads leading to nowhere in order to get positive election results, …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Nkombo: … it is not the job of the Member of Parliament to sit in the council. I should be shown where it says that a Member of Parliament must sit in the council. There should be no apprehension. What I detest the most is the manner in which the Motion has been brought. It is clad with a few diabolic things. I wish the mover of the Motion had shown his text to you before he presented it because some of the issues raised in the Motion are totally divisive and that is what you have been discouraging us to discuss here. These are issues such as the wounds of the post-election violence which had nothing to do whatsoever with the Constitution. It was like the appetite of two different groups of people competing to remain in power, but there is no tolerance. That is what it is. It will not work for Members of Parliament to go and sit in the council. Under the current law, this will result in Members of Parliament fighting with the mayors and council chairpersons.

 

Mr Mwiimbu: Yes!

 

Mr Nkombo: They will want to pull the rank and engage in power politics. I agree with the hon. Member of Parliament for Lupososhi in his last sentiment where he was clear. I have told the hon. Minister of Justice that, “Hon. Minister, your predecessor did not so good a job. He did a shoddy job of this, but you are together, anyway.” In trying to ameliorate the negative effects of the Constitution, they should get the new Constitution and attach it to the old one, which the people put together, and send it back to them. The old Constitution is a sacrosanct document and not this write-up (waving the Constitution) that they were celebrating for nothing. It was just a waste of people’s time.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!
 

Mr Nkombo: The Hon. Mr Speaker has just said that we have a lot of business to conduct on behalf of the people of Zambia. One of the ways in which you can save face is to withdraw the Motion. If we vote now, you will win, using what the Hon. Mr Speaker refuses me to mention.

 

Laughter

Mr Nkombo: You will win but, should you dare bring the amendment here, you will lose because we have resolved that we are not going to do it. If the word, “rubber stamp” was parliamentary, I would have used it. We are not going to work at your will and allow you to bring this and that. You will find us standing and will tell you which direction to go. I think the time has come for our colleagues to stop behaving like they are in the Opposition. They must show leadership. This exercise that we are conducting is a demonstration of a lack of leadership. We cannot do something over and over again and expect a different result. It will not work.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, there is a saying that goes, “once beaten, twice shy”. We sat here and broke the morning, from 1430 hours until 1000 hours the following day. Some people were even sleeping on the couches. I urge the new hon. Members to get the benefit of what some of us who have been here slightly longer are saying. It simply will not work to work in a group. They should show their resoluteness to do the right thing on behalf of the people whose interests and aspirations they chose to serve. To simply come and say that the Member of Parliament should be a member of the council and then bring through the window, the first-past-the-post system of electing the President must be tolerated. It does not work like that. My foot, I have great respect for my colleague, the hon. Member of Parliament for Kantanshi, but wheat he has said does not change anything. In the United Party for National Development (UPND), we believe in the absolute Doctrine of the Separation of Powers ...

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: … and it is written in our documents that Ministers of the Government will come from outside Parliament. So, what he was insinuating that people come here in order to become Ministers is not right. If we had formed Government, …

 

Mr Ngulube: God forbid!

 

Laughter

 

Mr Nkombo: Do I have a problem? Yeah, I have a problem because I will turn this way just now …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

You know I have a dual function. I have to listen to you and control the House, but your business is to debate.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, if we had formed Government, I can assure you that the nineteen Cabinet Ministers would not come from …

Mr Mwiimbu: The House!

 

Mr Nkombo: … the House. That is what we have written to the people of Zambia because it serves for the actual Doctrine of the Separation of Powers. Look at what is going on at the moment. We hear of Cabinet Ministers being corrupt and fired. 

 

Laughter

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, the Cabinet Ministers belong to the Executive and they are also members of the Legislature. At the rate we are going, tomorrow, they will bring a Judge of the High Court to be an hon. Member of Parliament in this House …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member, …

 

Mr Nkombo: … and serve dual functions.

 

Laugher

 

Mr Speaker: Again, I cannot give you an immediate reference, but one of our rules of debate is the avoidance of sarcasm.

 

Hon. Government Members: Yes!

 

Mr Speaker: It is in here (waving the Constitution), if you give me a few minutes, I can put my fingers on it. There is no way a Judge can be brought here and be made Member of Parliament. Even me, as a former Judge, …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: … had to go through an election. I cannot be imposed on this House. So, let us avoid sarcasm. This sarcasm also erodes mutual respect because when other people rise, they will want you to have a taste of what you are saying and, in the process, we will run into a pandemonium, which is counterproductive.

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, I take your guidance but, for avoidance of doubt, I meant to say that at the pace the PF is going, it is possible to bring a person from the Judiciary to serve a dual function and I plead it was with no reference to the Chair.

 

Mr Speaker: No, you are missing a point. Take a seat.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: The point is that constitutionally, what you are saying is untenable. That is all that I am saying. There is no way a Judge can be brought here to be a Member of Parliament. Let me give an example of my situation. When I was elected Speaker, I had to resign from the Judiciary. So, please, let us avoid this sarcasm.

 

Mr Nkombo: Mr Speaker, we are debating the proposal by the PF to bring amendments to this House. I am beginning to think that they will not stop at anything. They have shown that they can bring any form of amendment to this House. There are no limits in the group that is on your right hand side, the PF.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Nkombo: Believe me, this is basically my way of doing things. If I sound sarcastic, I can only apologise. However, I am going to say things as they are and as I see them. This is how I talk. If it is coming with a taste of sarcasm, I can only apologise and try to tone down just to please the Chair.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: You do not have to please the Chair. You just have to conform to the rules of the House. The Chair does not want to be pleased by your debate. You can see how much time is being wasted. Please, let us conclude.

 

You may continue.

 

Mr Nkombo: Sir, the amendments to the Constitution that gave birth to the mutilated and lame baby, which is the Amended Constitution, is squarely blamed on the PF. My advice to the PF is that each time it wants to bring amendments, it should engage us. It should hear us out. God is not sleeping.

 

Mr Speaker, there are people who were on the right side but, because of that word you refused me to use, they are not here today. That is the route that these people are taking. Let us sit down and talk and then reach consensus which will be beneficial to the people whom we represent. They cannot ‘sneak’ in a bad Motion such as this one because we shall not accept it. Today, we shall vote against the Motion, but they will win and, then, what next after that? They will have killed a dead horse.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Malanji (Kwacha): Mr Speaker, I would like to commend the mover for raising this Motion at an appropriate time.

 

Mr Speaker, my casual acquaintance with hon. Members on the left has given me an indication that there is no way they would leave the councils to the councillors alone.

 

Mr Nkombo: On a point of order, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

I am sure that my tradition over these matters is clear. In matters of this nature, I do not allow points of order. I should have stated this for avoidance of doubt, but that is my position.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mung’andu: Long live, Chair!

 

Mr Malanji: Mr Speaker, when debating issues like the one we are debating today, we really need to be sober minded. Let us not trivialise what is at stake in the councils because some of us  in this House carry the vision of the President and having good performance in our constituencies is an integral part of it.

 

Mr Speaker, in any given set-up, there must be an apex office. The buck must fall on someone. When you look at the setup of the council, a Member of Parliament has got a chunk, which is the constituency that falls under the council. The constituency has segments which are all under the Member of Parliament. To use this House as a reference, a Member of Parliament is the Chief Whip of the constituency.

 

Where development needs to be taken to a constituency, whether lobbied outside or within the country, there may be a need for land to be given to an investor to develop something which the Member of Parliament envisions will create employment for members of that community. Where the councillors might not share the same vision, the Member of Parliament needs to be part of the council to justify why a certain move should be taken by the council.

 

Sir, if a Member of Parliament submits something to a council which he/she is not a part of, it would not be easy to justify it from the outside because he/she has no locus standi to be part of the council proceedings.

 

Mr Speaker, we have seen in most councils buildings perceived to have been built, for example, at a cost of K700,000, are not worth that cost. Even a Grade 5 pupil who does not have statistical measures of how buildings are constructed cannot believe the expenditure. How much worse will it be if the hon. Member of Parliament is not a member of the council?

 

Mr Speaker, this is why in the past Members of Parliament were also members of councils. They could justify the status quo.

 

Mr Speaker, councillors have to take acre of the day-to-day business of the council when a Member of Parliament is not in the constituency. At the end of the day, they have to justify every decision they take. As members of Parliament, our membership in the council is basically to legalise what has been performed outside the council. Therefore, I find it difficult to appreciate any argument to the contrary because the bone of contention is not for Members of Parliament to go into the councils and protect their next point of election, but to spearhead development.

 

Mr Speaker, considering the submission by the earlier speaker, it will not be prudent to bring sections of the Constitution to Parliament piecemeal. The mover has already brought one Article in the Constitution for amendment.

 

Even those of us who were not in Parliament saw the rationale behind not outsourcing Ministers as opposed to them being Members of Parliament. The reason is very simple. There is a cost implication. When a Member of Parliament is Cabinet Minister, there is only a difference of about 2 or 3 per cent in their emoluments. Where would be the loss if we were to have Members of Parliament restricted to the House and Ministers from outside Parliament?

 

Mr Speaker, like I said earlier, we are here to deliberate and when the deliberations are effected, they become law. So, we must not trivialise them.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Ngulube (Kabwe Central): Mr Speaker, allow me to thank the mover of the Motion for raising pertinent issues relating to the lacunas in the Republican Constitution.

 

Sir, allow me to begin by saying that the Constitution almost brought this country to a standstill. We had situations where those heading the Constitutional Court did not seem to know what they were doing because the Constitution was not very clear.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, we also had a situation where our electorates did not know who the President was because the Constitution was not properly written or there are some explanations that need to be fine-tuned.

 

Sir, allow me now to go into the specifics. I hope I will not argue like I do in court.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, Article 138 creates the Office of the President of the Constitutional Court. It states:

 

“(1)      There shall be a President of the Constitutional Court who is the head of the Constitutional Court.

 

 (2)       The President of the Constitutional Court shall be responsible for the administration of the Constitutional Court under the direction of the Chief Justice.”

 

Sir, however, Article 136(1) states:

 

“(1)      There shall be a Chief Justice who is the head of the Judiciary.”

 

Mr Speaker, Articles 136(1) and 138 need to be fine-tuned. When it comes to decisions of the Constitutional Court, we are told that it is a court of finality while Article 138(2) states that the President of the Constitutional Court shall be responsible for the administration of the Constitutional Court under the direction of the Chief Justice. These two Articles must be harmonised in order to give direction to the country.

 

Sir, let me move to Article 142 of the Constitution, and I believe all these have been very contentious and people want to get clarification. Articles 142(1) and (2) state that:

 

“(1)       A Judge shall retire from office on attaining the age of seventy.

 

 (2)        A Judge may retire, with full benefits, on attaining the age of sixty-five.”

 

Mr Speaker, Article 145(3) and (4) contradicts Article 142(1) and (2) and it states:

 

“(3)   A judicial officer shall retire on attaining the age of sixty-five.

 

 (4)   A judicial officer may retire, with full benefits, on attaining the age of fifty-five.”

 

Sir, the Constitution states that a person may retire at seventy, sixty-five or fifty-five. In the event that the President retires a Judge at sixty-five or fifty-five, he/she can argue that the Constitution says that he/she can retire at seventy. So, some provisions need clarification.

 

Mr Speaker, as regards the argument that when we become members of the council, there shall be no separation of powers, I have a different view. We have heard that – unless we do not live here – there is rampant corruption in the administration of land in almost all the cities in this country. We have heard of how councillors in Lusaka, Kabwe, Ndola, Kasama, Solwezi, Livingstone, Kitwe, Chipata and everywhere else take advantage of their positions. When there is a full council meeting, all the councillors do is share the plots amongst themselves because there is no one to veto whatever they do. I believe our membership to the local authorities will bring sanity and help us fight the corruption that is now almost being institutionalised because some people are saying that they have been doing that for years and no one can stop them.

 

Sir, allow me to move to Article 159(4). The Article provides for local Government elections, tribunals and petitions and it states:

 

“(4)      An election petition shall be heard within thirty days of the filing in of the petition.”

 

Mr Speaker, this provision has become problematic in court because some people have argued that the wording, “it shall be heard within thirty days” does not mean determination as well. So, we have a situation where lawyers and Judges fail to arrive at a conclusion. Therefore, we need to fine-tune the Constitution. I propose that it clearly states that the petition shall be heard and determined within thirty days so that it is easy for people, who take cases to court, to know when the case would be disposed of. We saw how somebody whose name I will not mention for fear of victimisation, …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Ngulube: … struggled with his petition in the Constitutional Court. The other time I was called the boy from Makululu because I mentioned his name. After fourteen days, he was told …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Ngulube: … that his time on the Floor was up, but he still insisted on talking. So, we want the Constitution to be clear about this.

 

Hon. Government Members: Ema Lawyer, aya!

 

Mr Ngulube: Does the Constitution say that the petition must be heard and determined within fourteen days or it simply says that it shall be heard. Further, at what point shall the decision be made? Is it within or outside the fourteen days?

 

Sir, allow me to move to Article 154(1) states:

 

“(1)      There shall be a mayor and deputy mayor or council chairperson and deputy chairperson for every council, as prescribed.”

 

Those of us who are in the Legal Department of the Ruling Party saw how the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) was at pains to manage the August, 2016 Elections.

 

Mr Speaker, the Article does not specify the qualifications for mayors. For hon. Members of Parliament, it says that they shall have a Grade 12 Certificate or must have some training in welding, but they are deemed to have a higher qualification than Grade 12.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Ngulube: However, Mr Speaker, for mayors the qualifications are not specified. So, in the event that a person who has never been to school wants stand for be a mayoral position, it will be difficult for the ECZ not to include them on the list of candidates because the Constitution does not provide for the qualifications of mayor.

 

Mr Speaker, Article 60(2) talks about political parties and their democracy. It states:

 

“A political party shall-

 

  1. promote the values and principles specified in this Constitution;

 

  1. have a national character;

 

  1. promote and uphold national unity.

 

Sir, there are political parties that have never held conventions. So, the provisions in the Constitution must be applied. We need to know whether we should have life presidents in certain political parties or they must also do what the Constitution says and hold convention.

 

Hon. Government Member: Ema lawyers, aya!

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, the Constitution, in Article 73(1):

 

“A person may file an election petition ...”  

 

When it comes to the petition of a Member of Parliament, the Constitution allows anybody to petition an election of a Member of Parliament even when that person did not stand as a Member of Parliament. This should be clarified because we know that a person who has not been a candidate in an election would have no locus standi to challenge the election of a Member of Parliament.

 

Sir, the Constitution should state that only a losing candidate may file an election petition. I say so because not everyone, including the non-governmental organisations (NGOs), should go to court every now and then. At the moment, there are more than five parliamentary election petitions. So, how do you defend yourself in such an instance? You may win one case and lose another. This will also be an embarrassment to this House.

 

Mr Speaker, Article 101 of the Constitution has brought about a lot of apprehension. Clearly, it was intended that a losing presidential candidate could petition the election of the President-elect. However, the wording in this Constitution says:

 

         “A person may petition ...”

 

Sir, that gives room to the busy bodies, who have nothing to do with the election, to disrupt the country. Some people are of the view that once they petition the election of a presidential candidate, the President-elect will not be sworn in while others say that he can be sworn in. From my understanding of the provisions of Article 101(3), we have about three scenarios. Article 101(3) provides for an initial ballot. It states:

 

“if, at the initial ballot, a presidential candidate does not receive more than fifty per cent of the valid votes cast, a second ballot shall be held within thirty-seven days, ...”

 

Sir, there is nowhere in this Article where it says that the moment a petition is lodged, then, the President-elect cannot be inaugurated. We all saw how people rushed to the Constitutional Court to seek its interpretation of this provision. Article 103 also clearly states that there has to be an election petition.

 

Mr Speaker, I think that Article 103 provides for a situation where the President-elect does not meet the 50 per cent plus one threshold. In that instance, according to Article 104(3), the Speaker of the National Assembly can assume office.

 

Sir, it is also clear that there can be a repeat of the confusion that this country witnessed in the interpretation of the provisions. We are also aware that the Constitution, which is the Supreme law of the land, has timeframes that appear to be nothing but mathematical. If you look at the provisions of the Constitution, you will see that Article 101 says that a re-run must be held within thirty-seven days. Article 103 says that it must be held within thirty days. We also have a situation where the Constitution says where a Presidential election has been challenged, a petition must be filed within seven days. The Constitutional Court has fourteen days within which it should hear that petition.

 

Mr Speaker, this gives us an impression that the country will have no President for the next twenty-eight days. This is because in the first seven days, a petition is lodged and then the Constitutional Court will have to make its decision in the fourteen days that follow. Then, another seven days must pass. The President shall then be sworn into office on the Tuesday after that. According to my calculation, that is thirty days of not having a President.

 

Mr Speaker, I do not think that the people of Zambia anticipated that there will be a vacuum in the Office of the President arising from a petition.

 

Sir, allow me to move to Article 101(6) which sates that:

 

                     “The Constitutional Court may, after hearing an election petition-

 

  1. declare the election of a presidential candidate valid;

 

  1. nullify the election of a presidential candidate; or

 

  1. disqualify the presidential candidate from being a candidate in the second ballot.”

 

Mr Speaker, it is not clear which second ballot is referred to. If these provisions were fine-tuned, we would not have the doubts that we have had in determining these matters. I also know that Article 101(8) states:

 

“The presidential candidate who obtains the majority of the valid votes cast in the second ballot shall be declared President-elect.”

 

Sir, Articles 101, 103 and 104 talk about the second ballot. So, I believe that this Constitution must be cleaned up in such a way that the people of Zambia know when the second ballot is going to be held. Is it when the President fails to meet the 50 per cent plus one threshold or is it when the Presidential election result has been petitioned? Further, is it after the Constitutional Court has declared the election invalid?

 

Sir, I also wish to comment on the issue of the powers given to the Constitutional Court. If the President of the Constitutional Court works under the direction of the Chief Justice, I find it difficult to say that the decisions of the Constitutional Court should be final. We saw the voting that took place on that day where five Judges failed to reach consensus, as three of them voted for the petition to be dismissed while two voted for it to be heard before the Constitutional Court.

 

Mr Speaker, I wish to state that in the event that we have a problem, the decisions of the Constitutional Court must be subjected to a test. The Constitutional Court has been tested, and I am of the view that it has failed the test of being the final court.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: Sir, we need to place the Constitutional Court under the Supreme Court because, previously, Presidential and all other election petitions fell under the Supreme Court. It is dangerous to have a first and final court. This is so because the rights of the people taking matters to the court are being violated. Therefore, if a mistake is committed in the Constitutional Court, it cannot be corrected. We saw this in the interpretation of Articles 116 and 117 where, in its interpretation, the Constitutional Court believed that Cabinet Ministers should vacate office the moment Parliament is dissolved.

 

Mr Speaker, the provisions of Article 116, which I have in front of me, do not provide for the offices of Cabinet Ministers or Provincial Ministers falling vacant. The previous Constitution was very clear. The current Constitution must state whether or not Ministers should vacate office the moment Parliament is dissolved. That must be put in the Constitution and not assumed. Now we have a situation where the transitional provisions in Act No 1 are defeated. I say so because if the law says all those who are in office shall remain in office until such a time when the new President is elected, then, I see no reason the Constitutional Court should fail to interpret the provisions. There were also a number of attacks from all directions on the Constitutional Court because people acted based on their emotions. I saw how some hon. Members of Parliament attacked the Constitutional Court for sticking to the fourteen days within which it should hear and dispose the Presidential election petition.

 

Mr Speaker, in supporting the Motion, I would like to state that the provisions should be cleaned-up in the interest of the country and all the political parties that are vying State House.

 

Mr Speaker, before I conclude, allow me to talk about the independence of hon. Members of Parliament. According to the Constitution, Members of Parliament cannot be taken to court for whatever they say in here. I am, however, also aware of the Statutory Provisions Act and Official Oaths Act, which require all Members of Parliament, the moment they come here, to take Oath of Allegiance to the President of Zambia before the Hon. Mr Speaker.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: We have seen some people here fail to refer to His Excellency the President. I wish to state that they are abusing the provisions of their immunity.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, as I conclude, allow me to say that all those who do not accept the current President as the Head of State of Zambia must tender their resignation. Otherwise, they are committing an offence.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

The Minister of Local Government (Mr Mwale): Mr Speaker, I wish to thank you for the opportunity to debate. I will debate this non-controversial Motion moved by the hon. Member for Mwansabombwe for a few minutes.

 

Sir, as the Minister responsible for local government, I wish to say that my ministry finds this Motion progressive. We have no problem with Members of Parliament being councillors. They used to be councillors before and we all know the benefits we derived from their being members of various councils. There were many times when councils would go astray in the allocation of land and Members of Parliament were always there to provide guidance.

 

Mr Speaker, even on matters of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF), councillors thought that they could use the money on projects anyhow. At times, councils wanted to make procurements without following appropriate procedures and Members of Parliament were always there to provide guidance to the councillors who could not understand the procedures and why they were there.

 

So, what is being proposed in this Motion is not new. All we are trying to say is that we should reinstate the membership of Members of Parliament to councils. Moreover, now that we have embarked on a journey of decentralisation, most of the activities will be taking place in councils. The Government will better deliver services through the councils. Everything will be happening at council level.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwale: So, it will be good for Members of Parliament to be members of councils where things will be happening so that they can be part and parcel of the delivery of services, especially those that they promised the people during election campaigns. It is only fair that Members of Parliament take part in the sharing of the national cake.

 

Mr Speaker, the mover and seconder of the Motion have explained why the membership of Members of Parliament to the councils has to be reinstated. I do not want to dwell much on this issue. However, I wish to say that if this is the desire of all of us in this House, the ministry is ready to help with the process of taking this to the next step in liaison with the Ministry of Justice so that we the membership of Members of Parliament to the councils is reinstated.

 

Mr Speaker, when I gave a ministerial statement on the status of town clerks, councillors and mayors, I got a feeling that all of us wanted Members of Parliament to retain their seats in the Constituency Development Committee (CDCs). I got a feeling that all of us wanted to retain our positions in the councils. I saw from the questions that came from the United Party for National Development (UPND), Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) and Patriotic Front (PF) that the common position was that all of us wanted to go back to the CDCs and councils. Therefore, I am now confused that the tone seems to have changed.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Mwale: Sir, I am the one who actually challenged hon. Members of Parliament in here to take a step forward and move a Motion like this one. I thought we needed to progress from the talk that we had last time to the level that we are at the moment. I am confused now that some hon. Members would like to take us backwards. Nonetheless, we will not relent and will support this …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr Mwale: Mr Speaker, I sense that the majority of the hon. Members of Parliament would like us to go back to the councils and become councillors and members of CDCs. If this is the wish of the majority of us, the ministry is ready to partner with hon. Members and take this to the next step.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Ah!

 

Mr Mwale: Mr Speaker, I will leave the issues relating to other constitutional amendments for other hon. Members to elaborate. For now, I have dwelt on matters that relate to local government. As for the issues that relate to mayors that were raised by the mover of the Motion, we are also ready to take them to the next step.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

The Minister of Home Affairs (Mr Kampyongo): Mr Speaker, thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to also contribute to debate on the Motion on the Floor, moved by the hon. Member of Parliament for Mwansabombwe, the number one councillor for Mwansabombwe, and seconded by the number one councillor for Serenje.

 

Mr Speaker, I stand here a proud hon. Member of this august House to have been part of the collective effort to pass this document (waving the Constitution). This document was not a making of the Patriotic Front (PF). It came from the people of Zambia.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: I want to say to my brother, the hon. Minister for Local Government and Housing, that he should not be surprised with the hypocrisy he is witnessing today. We have seen it before. The changing of positions or goal posts with regard to the Constitution-making process …

 

Mr Mwiimbu: The word, “hypocrisy” is unparliamentary.

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Just wait a minute. Give me time to consult the Clerks-at-the-Table. Well, the consultation has been concluded. Please, withdraw that unparliamentary term.

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, I withdraw that term and replace it with “inconsistent behaviour” of some hon. Members, and senior hon. Members of this august House for that matter.

 

Mr Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, we have people participating in this process …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Sir, the nation spent huge sums of money to craft a Constitution that people had been requesting for. We are grateful for the guidance of our former learned hon. Minister of Justice and remain v proud that we listened to the people. That is why we are back today on this side of the House. As people’s representatives, we were voted for to listen to them. Those who did not listen to the people are on your left hand side today.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, the only goodness now is that this document (waving the Constitution) has been tested and people are now making submissions through their representatives. We do not expect the whole of Mwansabombwe to come here and ask why their hon. Member of Parliament does not appear in council chambers. They have petitioned their hon. Member, whom they voted for not so long ago, to come to the House and say that they are missing his services in the council. I am sure he has explained that the law we passed prohibits him from being part of the council. Therefore, they have requested him to move this Motion.

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, my hon. Colleague, the Learned Counsel and Member of Parliament for Kabwe, has referred to some of the lacunas in the Constitution. This is all emanating from the test that this document has been subjected to. So, we did our part on behalf of the people of Zambia and, through them, we have got every right to revisit the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, when I debated the other day, I mentioned that we should be proud, as a nation, to have a President who does not work with self preservation. He signed a document that would take away some of his powers. Some people who were aspiring to go to State House came to camp here (pointing at the Public Gallery).

 

Mr C. Zulu: Yes!

 

Mr Kampyongo: They were duped by their Members that they were going to ‘shoot down’ the Constitutional Amendment Bill.

 

Laughter

 

Mr C. Zulu: They came!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Sir, they came here thinking that we did not do our homework and would end up in the same trap as our colleagues, the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD). We had done our homework that is why today, we have this document (waving the Constitution).

 

Hon. Government Members: Yes!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, I was happy to see senior citizens go to one of the products of the Constitution, …

 

Mr Yaluma: Yes!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … the Constitutional Court, with a band of learned counsels …

 

Hon. Government Members: Yes!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … carrying boxes …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: … and the nation was made to believe that the suitcases contained prima facie evidence.

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: I think …

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … my dear …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Order! Order!

 

Hon. Minister, just wait a moment.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members and the hon. Minister debating, I provided guidance earlier on …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Let us be issue-based in our debates.

 

You see, from my experience on the Floor of this House, sarcasm does not pay. If anything, you lose a lot of time as a result of sarcastic debate. I do not want to give examples at the risk of embarrassing those who are issue-based, but I think you know them. I do not intervene. Let us emulate those who debate issues, points, staccato, in a very cool manner, one after the other and free of sarcasm, and avoid all these interventions. Fortunately, there are a few in here. Let us emulate them. They debate logically and in a composed manner. Just look out for them. I do not want to embarrass them.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, thank you for your guidance.

 

Mr Speaker, the call to have the Constitution revisited will lessen the misinterpretation of the Constitution that we witnessed. We saw clients being abandoned by their lawyers in the courtrooms …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: … because of the lacunas in the Constitution.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: So, let us all be responsible representatives of the people in our various constituencies so that through the Constitution, they can access justice.

 

Mr Speaker, the Motion moved by the hon. Member for Mwansabombwe is well intended and we still have a responsibility to get back to our people with honesty just as we did when we gave them the Constitution. We have no regrets at all …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … because the Constitution was not of our making, but that of the people. After listening to the submissions, the hon. Minister of Justice will look at the process of revisiting the Constitution which cannot be done through one Motion. We have to acknowledge the challenges the Constitution, which was genuinely given to the people of Zambia, has brought about.

 

Mr Speaker, I wish to thank his Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, whom the people still love so much, …

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: … and they call him Mr Walk the Talk ...

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: Mr Speaker, the Constitution contains progressive provisions.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kampyongo: It makes me feel great to sit next to Her Honour the Vice-President who was the Running Mate and who came into office through an election …

 

Mr Speaker: Now, you are debating Her Honour the Vice-President.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Please, steer off that line of debate.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Kampyongo: Finally, Mr Speaker, I wish to say that the Motion moved by the hon. Member for Mwansabombwe is not ill intended. It is only urging us to think about how we can make the Constitution more progressive than it is now. It is not a bad document, but certainly requires our attention.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

The hon. Minister of Justice (Mr Lubinda): Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to contribute to debate on this important Motion.

 

Sir, I would like to ‘un-package’ the Motion which urges the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for membership of Members of Parliament to local councils and remove the lacunas therefrom. I would like to refer to the three aspects of the Motion. The first one is to amend the Constitution with two intentions. The first intention is to allow for Members of Parliament to be members of local councils. The second amendment is with the effect of removing the lacunas that are in the Constitution. The third one is the process which the Motion proposes that it be lead by the Government.

 

Mr Speaker, the question that ought to be addressed is whether there is any law written or otherwise which stops the country, Zambia, from amending its Constitution. Article 62 of the Constitution vests legislative authority in this House.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Secondly, Article 79 is even more instructive in so far as amending the Constitution is concerned. There is no law, written or otherwise, explicit or implied, that stops the country from revisiting any of its laws, including the Constitution, the supreme law of the land.

 

Mr Mwale: Mwamvela, imwe?

 

Mr Lubinda: According to Article 79 of the Constitution, Parliament is the one that has the authority, on behalf of the people of Zambia, to alter the provisions of the Constitution using the process that is provided for in that said Article. The question that arises is why are Constitutions available for amendments? Why are Constitutions not cast in stone? All Constitutions provide for ways of amending them.

 

Sir, firstly, it is important to remove whatever ambiguities that may be discovered in the Constitution because the authors of Constitutions are fallible, as they are human beings. Therefore, they are capable of overlooking certain facts, issues of consistency, and the lack of it when writing the Constitution.

 

Mr Speaker, secondly, it is important to update the provisions of the Constitution and bring them in tandem with the aspirations of the people. It has already been stated that society is dynamic and, because of that, the rules that govern the engagement of the various wings of Government must also be allowed to be dynamic. Therefore, the five-fold question that is before the House today is:

 

  1. are there any inconsistencies that have been identified in our Constitution;

 

  1.  are there any lacunas in our Constitution;

 

Sir, to borrow the learned council’s words:

 

         (c)        are there any vacuums in the Constitution;

 

Hon. Government Members: Vachum!

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Let him speak the Queen’s language.

 

 Laughter

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, that is mother tongue influence on the part of my colleague.

 

Sir, the third one is:

 

(d)        are there any challenges with regard to the interpretation of the articles of the Constitution; and

        

(e)        are there any articles that are not in conformity with the aspirations of the Zambian people?

 

Mr Speaker, I am sure listening to the debates this afternoon from the vantage point where you are, you will agree with me that it is easy to discern the fact that the answers to all those questions are in the affirmative. There are lacunas which have been identified by some colleagues on either side of the political divide.

 

Sir, there are some challenges with the interpretation of some clauses. I would not like to refer to the glaring issue of interpretation or misinterpretation. However from the debate of the Learned Counsel, Hon. Jack Mwiimbu, and the Member of Parliament for Lupososhi, Mr Chungu Bwalya, I could discern that there was a difference in interpretation between the two lawmakers, one who spent years at the university to read law and the other who has never read law at university, but he is from Lupososhi.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, there was a difference in their interpretation. Therefore, for me, and many others, this means that there is or there may be a need for us to look at this document.

 

Mr Speaker, the Constitution is ours, but what is even more important is that it is a document that is only allowing us to pass to the next generation, a country that they will be proud to belong to. This is what must drive whatever we say about this matter?  I do not think it should be used, like we have done in the past, to settle scores, demean each other or portray ourselves as though we know it all and others are totally incompetent, and therefore, are irrelevant to the governance equation. I do not think that is the reason.

 

Sir, I also do not think we, the representatives of the people of Zambia, should dwell so much on the past and make history become our slave driver. We should not be enslaved by history. Had that been the case, there would be no progress in this world. All of us must accept that life is nothing, but a series of lessons.

 

Mr Speaker, again, to borrow Hon. Gary Nkombo’s words, to do the same things over and over again and expect a different result is obviously not the best thing to do. We have passed this route before. I, therefore, do not think we should spend precious Zambia’s time going back and say who said what and why; who protested when and where; who made money from the Constitution-making process; …

 

 Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda:  … who shouted question the most; …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Lubinda: … who came to Parliament with blankets; and who came to Parliament with a bottle of whisky?  I do not think that is necessary.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Ah!

 

Mr Lubinda: It is totally unnecessary.

 

Sir, we ought to be saying that we have brought ourselves to where we are.

 

Interruptions

 

 Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, wanting to appear like one knows it all does not help society. One thing that all of us must bear in mind is that a show of egocentrism to a level where you are not willing to listen to others is an illness in itself. We must be willing to listen.

 

Sir, when my colleagues on your right and I saw this Motion, I briefed my colleagues in Cabinet that this is the matter that Cabinet and myself responsible for this sector have already been thinking about. However, we should be open to ideas. Therefore, we said we should let hon. Members debate this matter so that we listen to their wise counsel. Each one of us is in this House, representing a constituency carry with us a positive aspiration for this country. I do not think there is any one person who is in this House, who means ill for Zambia.

 

Mr Speaker, all of us mean well. Therefore, we must engage positively. This is the reason I would like to say that the issues that have been raised have been ‘caged’ together. I listened very carefully to the debate by some of my colleagues who are ‘un-packaging’ the Constitution, quoting specific Articles and talking about how best clauses should be amended. I do not think that is the intent at this stage. At this stage, the intent of the Motion is to urge the Government to start the process by which we shall amend our Constitution to ensure that it meets the aspirations of the Zambian people and that it is less problematic in its interpretation.

 

Sir, all those views that were raised about the specific Articles are just an indication of the fact that there is a need for this to be done. I do not want to respond to the specific issues that were raised such as the catalogue of violence. I will not dwell on that. However, let me say that Hon. Gary Nkombo has the ability to remember the discussions he holds outside the House and brings them into the House. I do not mind him making reference to the corridor chat I had with him before this Motion was brought before the House.

 

Sir, I want to acknowledge that I had a corridor chat with the Whip of the Opposition.

 

 Mr Speaker: Order!

 

 In fact, hon. Minister of Justice, I do not think you should allow your mind to be exercised by that reference. I have already provided guidance. So, can we make progress.

 

You may continue.

                     

Mr Lubinda: I thank you for your guidance, Sir.

 

Mr Speaker, the Government is aware that the people on your right cannot manage to amend the Constitution to the satisfaction of the majority of Zambians. For us to do this, we ought to engage. I would like to request my colleagues in the House to support this Motion.

 

I would like to inform the House that today, I feel encouraged by the debates I have listened to, from both the left and right. No one in this House said that this document is sacrosanct or that it is the best. I heard some of my colleagues say that we ‘mutilated’ what the people wanted. Fine, then, we ‘mutilated’ this document together as a House.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: No!

 

Mr Chibanda: Collective responsibility!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Continue, hon. Minister.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, with a lot of humility, I would like to state that with the encouragement that I have received today, I will appeal to my colleagues in Cabinet to authorise me to start, in earnest, the process of amending the Constitution. This process will include consulting with various stakeholders. I would like to assure the House that by consulting, I mean just that. If there are institutions that will take priority on my list of consultations, it is certainly the hon. Members of Parliament and the political parties that are represented in this House. I will not go out and consult outsiders before I consult the ones who have been entrusted with the responsibility, by the Zambian people, to perform the legislative function on their behalf.

 

With those words, Sir, I would like to appeal to all of us, today, to build consensus, be unanimous and ensure that, together, we revisit this document and that it is less problematic in future than it has proved to be thus far. 

 

Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I would like to thank the mover and seconder of the Motion for the courage they have exhibited in moving this Motion in that manner. It required some introspection and a lot of commitment. I wish to thank them for moving it and assure them that they have the support of the Government and all well-meaning Members of this House.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwewa: Mr Speaker, I would like thank, most sincerely, the hon. Ministers of Local Government and Housing, Home Affairs and Justice. I wish to thank hon. Members who debated in support of the Motion. I also wish to thank those who did not air their views on the Motion and those who opposed it.

 

Mr Speaker, I am saddened by one thing though. I had a long chat with Hon. Gary Nkombo …

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: I will not allow you to go that direction. If you have wound up, you may take your seat.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Take your seat, if you are through.

 

Mr Mwewa:  Mr Speaker, I thank you very much.

 

Laughter

 

Hon. Opposition Members called for a division.

 

Question that this House urges the Government to amend the Constitution of Zambia so as to provide for membership of Members of Parliament to local councils and also remove the lacunas therefrom put and the House voted.

 

Ayes – (91)

 

Mr C. R. Banda

Mr W. Banda 

Mr Bwalya 

Mr Chabi

Mr Chali

Ms Chalikosa

Mr Chama

Mr Chansa

Mr Chibanda

Mr Chilangwa

Dr Chilufya

Mr Chisopa

Mr Chiteme

Mr Chitotela

Mr Chiyalika

Mr Chungu

Mr Daka

Mr Hamukale

Mr Hamusonde

Mr Imbuwa

Mr Jamba

Mrs Jere

Mr Kabamba

Mr Kabanda

Mrs Kabanshi

Mr Kafwaya

Mr Kalaba

Ms Kalima

Mr Kalobo

Mr Kampyongo

Ms Kapata

Mr Kapita

Mr Katambo

Ms Katuta

Mr Kopulande

Mr Lubinda

Mr Lusambo

Mr Mabumba

Dr Malama

Mr A. B Malama

Mr Malanji

Mr Mbulakulima

Mr Miti

Ms Miti

Mr Mubukwanu

Mr Mukosa

Mr Mulenga

Mr Mulusa

Mr D Mumba

Mr A. C. Mumba

Mr Mundubile

Mr Mung`andu

Mr Munkonge

Mr Mushanga

Mr Musonda

Mr Musukwa

Mr Mutaba

Mr Mutale

Mr Mutati

Mr Mwakalombe

Mr Mwale

Mr Mwamba

Mrs Mwansa

Mrs Mwanakatwe

Princess Mwape

Mr Mwewa

Mr Mwila

Mr Ng`ambi

Mr Ngulube

Mr Nkhuwa

Mr Nyirenda

Ms Phiri

Mr P. Phiri

Mr Sampa

Mr Sichalwe

Mr Sichone

Mr Sikazwe

Mr Simbao

Mr Simfukwe

Mrs Simukoko

Mr Siwale

Rev. Sumaili

Mr S. Tembo

Mr M. K. Tembo

Mr L. N. Tembo

Dr Wanchinga

Mrs Wina

Mr Yaluma

Mr Zimba

Mr M. Zulu

Mr C. M. Zulu

 

Noes – (52)

 

Mr Belemu

Mr Bulaya

Mr Chaatila

Mr Chikote

Ms Chisangano

Mrs Chinyama

Mr Fungulwe

Mr Jere

Mr Kakubo

Dr Kalila

Mr Kambita

Mr Kamboni

Mr Kamondo

Mr Kasonso

Princess Kasune

Mr Kintu

Princess Kucheka

Mr Kufakwandi

Mr Kundoti

Mr Lihefu

Mr Livune

Mr Lufuma

Mr Lumayi

Prof. Lungwangwa

Mr Machila

Mr Mandumbwa

Mrs Mazoka

Mr Mbangweta

Mr Michelo

Mr Miyanda

Mr Miyutu

Mr Mubika

Mr Muchima

Mr Mukata

Mr Mukumbuta

Mr Mulunda

Mr S. Mulusa

Ms Mulyata

Mr Mutelo

Mr Mwene

Mr Mwiimbu

Mr Mwiinga

Mr Nanjuwa

Mr Ndalamei

Mr Nkombo

Mr Samakayi

Evangelist Shabula

Mr Sialubalo

Mr Sing'ombe

Gen. Sitwala

Mr Syakalima

Ms Tambatamba

 

Abstention – (1)

 

Dr Imakando

 

Question accordingly agreed to.

_________

 

BILLS

 

SECOND READING

 

THE SECURITIES BILL, 2016

 

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

 

Mr Speaker, before 1991, the economy was mostly Government-controlled. After 1991, however, the country became a free-market economy, which meant that private entities took the lead in economic activity. With these changes, reforms were necessary to facilitate the set up of the right structures for the dispensation. The measures included the establishment of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Lusaka Stock Exchange (LuSE) to facilitate private sector financing. This was done around 1993. The Securities and Exchange legislation has not been amended since its enactment in 1993 despite the new developments that have occurred in our capital market, including the coming on board of new products that were not there in 1993.

 

Mr Speaker, we require legislation in the capital market in order to:

 

  1. ensure that the markets are fair;

 

  1. ensure that the capital market is efficient and transparent; and
  2. reduce systemic risk.

 

Mr Speaker, there is  a need for investor protection to ensure that investors are protected from misleading, manipulative or fraudulent practices such as inside trading. This is mainly attained through full disclosure of all material information by companies operating in the securities market.

 

Mr Speaker, in order to ensure that the capital markets are fair, efficient and transparent, we need to have regulation that compels operators in the capital markets to provide information to market players.

 

Mr Speaker, lastly but not the least, to avoid systemic risks, the regulation of the securities market ensures effective management of risk. The capital market requires prudential requirements which should be presented to address and check excessive risk taking. This is generally the practice in the financial market worldwide.

 

Mr Speaker, as I conclude, let me reiterate that we need to amend the Securities Act in order to:

 

  1. include topical issues and developments that are not in the current Act. This includes regulation of areas not adequately covered in the current legislation;

 

  1. comply with the requirements of international organisations which regulate securities markets; and

 

  1. ensure enhanced compliance with the requirements of the capital markets by enhancing punitive measures.

 

Mr Speaker, ultimately, all these measures are aimed at deepening our capital markets while protecting the investors.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Simfukwe (Mbala): Mr Speaker, your Committee considered the Securities Bill, National Assembly Bill, 2016. The Bill seeks, among other things, to:

 

  1. regulate the capital market in order to foster fair and efficient trading;

 

  1. ensure the financial integrity of transactions and avoidance of systemic risk in the capital market;

 

  1. continue the existence of the Compensations Fund; and

 

  1. establish the Capital Market Tribunal.

 

Sir, your Committee notes that in modern economies, capital markets play a pivotal role in fostering economic development by providing organised market services for raising long-term capital. This happens through the mobilisation of savings necessary for investment. Capital markets also act as a platform for the distribution of wealth. These important functions of capital markets necessitate the need for a robust piece of legislation which provides for strict rules and regulations. Your Committee is, therefore, of the view that the proposed legislation has made an attempt to ensure that gaps and areas of potential abuse in Zambia’s capital markets are in keeping with internationally-accepted standards.

 

Sir, there have been a lot of developments in Zambia’s securities market from the time the Securities Act was last amended in 1993. It is hoped that the proposed piece of legislation will ensure the financial integrity of transactions and avoidance of systemic risks in the capital market, especially in view of the 2008 financial crises. The crises, which have had adverse effects on the global economy, have all but pointed to laxities in regulations leading to low levels of integrity in financial transactions.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee sought information from various interest groups and experts in this subject before it came up with recommendations. It is convinced that these views are a fair representation of some of the measures that the stakeholders want implemented. These recommendations are highlighted in the report of your Committee. I will only comment on a few of them, knowing very well that hon. Members took time to read through your Committee’s report.

 

Sir, your Committee is of the view that the establishment of the Capital Market Tribunal is important for the efficient operation of the capital market. However, it is concerned that the provision points to the fact that the tribunal will operate on a full-time basis. Since Zambia has a small and nascent capital market, this will render the tribunal dormant for most parts of the year. Therefore, this will make it an unnecessary cost to maintain.

 

In this regard, your Committee recommends that the proposed tribunal operates on a part-time basis. However, as a long-term measure, the Government should move towards the establishment of one tribunal in the financial sector to avoid small and fragmented tribunals within the same sector in order to minimise costs.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee observes that the proposed legislation provides for the commission to approve auditors to provide auditing services to a listed company or a company whose securities are registered with the commission. It is concerned that the proposed provision may grant similar powers to the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Zambia Institute of Charted Accountants (ZICA) under the Accountants Act. This may potentially lead to a conflict in the application of the two pieces of legislation. Admittedly, ZICA, through the Accountants Act, is the rightful body with the responsibility to approve auditors. Therefore, your Committee recommends that the proposed provision be amended to ensure that it is not in conflict with the Accountants Act.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee notes the provision on the self regulatory organisations to whom the commission may delegate some of its powers. The formation of an association of capital markets is one such activity that may be delegated to self-regulated organisations as opposed to compelling them to form an association to which all capital-market operators are required to affiliate. Your Committee is aware that capital-market operators are diverse and may include dealers, stock exchanges, clearing and settlement agencies, credit-rating agencies and every person who is licensed under the Act. In light of the above, your Committee recommends that the provision for the establishment of a capital market association should be struck off while maintaining the provision of the establishment of self-regulatory organisations.

 

Sir, your Committee is aware that one of the statutory requirements of the Bank of Zambia (BoZ) is to implement monitory policy. Your Committee, however, observes that the proposed Bill prohibits the trading of securities in a market other than the securities exchange. It is aware that currently, Government Bonds are listed on the Lusaka Securities Exchange (LuSE) although trading occurs in the over-the-counter market where buyers and sellers directly interact. The enactment of the proposed legislation will make the trading in Government Bonds by the secondary market, through an exchange, mandatory, thereby eliminating the over the counter market.

 

Mr Speaker, your Committee is concerned that compelling public debt securities, which encompass both Treasury Bills and Government Bonds to be traded on an exchange in the secondary market, will adversely affect the implementation of monetary policy by the BoZ. In light of the above, your Committee recommends that a specific provision be included in the Bill, exempting Government Securities and all money-market transactions relating to monetary policy from the regulatory ambit of the commission.

 

In conclusion, Sir, I wish to record your hon. Members’ indebtedness and gratitude to you for according them the opportunity to serve on this important Committee. I also wish to thank all the stakeholders who appeared before your Committee and contributed to the work of your Committee. My gratitude also goes to the Clerk of the National Assembly and her staff for the services rendered to your Committee.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Mutati: Mr Speaker, I wish to thank your Committee for the good work that it has done on the Bill. I wish to acknowledge the submissions and the requirements that have been submitted by the Chair of your Committee which are directed towards making capital markets efficient and effective fair and to reduce systemic risk. We shall carry out appropriate amendments because at the end of the day, we want the private sector to be the beneficiaries of whatever systems and commissions that we put in place.

 

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 Tuesday, 15th November, 2016.

__________

 

HOUSE IN COMMITTEE

 

[THE FIRST CHAIRPERSON OF COMMITTEES in the

Chair]

 

THE PATENTS BILL, 2016

 

Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 2 – (Interpretation)

 

The Minister of Commerce, Trade and Industry (Mrs Mwanakatwe): Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 2:

 

  1. on page 11, in lines 23 to 24 by the deletion of the words “including the person granting the licence” and the comma; and

 

  1. on page 13, in lines 6 to 7 by the deletion of the definition of “micro-organism”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

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

 

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

 

The First Chairperson: Order!

 

Business was suspended from 1815 hours until 1830 hours.

 

 

[THE FIRST CHAIRPERSON in the

Chair]

 

Clauses, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 17 – (Exclusions from Patentability)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 17, on page 19, in line 17 by the deletion of the definition of “micro-organism”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 17, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clauses 18 and 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clause 32 – (Disclosure of Description of Invention)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 32, on page 24 by the deletion of paragraph (e).

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

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

 

Clauses 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 56 – (Opposition to Grant of Patent)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 56, on page 37:

 

  1. in line 29 by the deletion of the word “or”;

 

  1. after line 31

 

  1. by the deletion of the full stop and the substitution therefor of a semi-colon; and

 

  1. by the insertion of the word “or” after the semi-colon; and

 

  1. in line 32 by the insertion of the following new sub-paragraph:

 

“(s) that the application is for an invention which is traditional knowledge”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 56, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 57 – (Opposition Procedure for Grant of Patent)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 57, on page 38, in line 9 by the deletion, immediately after the words “grant of a patent” and the comma,” of the words “within three months of receiving the decision” and the comma.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 57, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clauses 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 and 64 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 65 – (Date and Duration of Patent)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 65, on page 41,

 

  1. in line 7, by the insertion of a full stop immediately after the words “grants of a patent”; and

 

  1. in lines 7 to 9 by the deletion of the words “and may be renewed for a period of five years subject to the advertisement of the application in a prescribed manner and payment of a prescribed renewal fee”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 65, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 66 – (Publication of Grant)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 66, on page 41 in line 11 by the deletion, immediately after the word “grant” of the words “or renewal”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 66, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 67 – (Extension of Term of Patent)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 65, on page 41, in line 15 by the insertion immediately after the words “term of patent” of the words “for a further term not exceeding two years”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 67, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clause 68 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

CLAUSE 69 – (Lapse of Protection of Patent on Non-payment of Maintenance Fee)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 69, on page 41, in line 15 by the insertion immediately after the words “term of patent” of the words “for a further term not exceeding two years”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 69, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clauses 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96 and 97 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clause 98 – (Exclusive Licence)

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Chairperson, I beg to move an amendment in Clause 98, on page 55, in line 7, by the insertion immediately after the word “person” of the words “subject to contract”.

 

Amendment agreed to. Clause amended accordingly.

 

Clause 98, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Clause 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, …

 

The First Chairperson of Committees: Order!

 

Hon. Members, you will note that “unicorporated” is a wrong spelling. The correct spelling is “unincorporated”.

 

 … 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140 and 141 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

 

Title agreed to.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

 

HOUSE RESUMED

 

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

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

 

The Patents Bill, 2016

 

Report Stage on Thursday, 10th November, 2016.

 

______

 

MOTIONS

 

MOTION OF THANKS

 

(Debate resumed)

 

The Minister of Housing and Infrastructure Development (Mr Chitotela): Mr Speaker, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to debate the Motion that was moved by the hon. Member for Milenge.

 

Mr Speaker, allow me, first and foremost, to congratulate His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, on his re-election as President of the Republic of Zambia and Her Honour the Vice-President, Madam Inonge Mutukwa Wina.

 

Sir, I would also like to join many others in congratulating you on your re-election as the Speaker of this august House.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

 

Mr Chitotela: Allow me, Sir, to congratulate your two Deputy Speakers on their nomination and subsequent election to their positions. I also wish to congratulate all the hon. Members of Parliament who have been elected to this august House. In the same spirit, I wish to take this opportunity to recognise all those who contested but lost the elections, both in the mighty Patriotic Front (PF) and Opposition political parties, for putting up a spirited fight. Such is the nature of politics and democracy.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Chitotela: In the end, only one person emerges winner. 

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Chitotela: Sir, allow me to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the people of Pambashe Constituency in the Kawambwa District of Luapula Province and the PF Central Committee for giving me the opportunity to contest as the Pambashe Seat on the PF ticket in the last election.

 

Mr Speaker, I must hasten to say that I am the first person to be elected for two consecutively terms in Pambashe Constituency.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Chitotela: Mr Speaker, let me take this opportunity to pledge to the people of Pambashe Constituency that I will be their servant. I will speak for them and defend their integrity, bearing in mind that they have deposited their authority in me. I wish to assure them that their trust and confidence is not misplaced. To this effect, I commit myself to being Pambashe’s number one humble servant, to represent its people effectively and to efficiently speak on their behalf and champion their cause. I also commit to ensuring continued infrastructure development and improved service delivery to Pambashe Constituency whose people I owe my being here. I promise to serve them above myself.

 

Mr Speaker, allow me to thank the people of Zambia for overwhelmingly voting for the PF in the just ended General Elections. I sincerely thank the people of Zambia for overwhelmingly re-electing His Excellency Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu as President of the Republic of Zambia and his Running Mate, Madam Inonge Mutukwa Wina as the Vice-President.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Chitotela: It is my conviction that under the able leadership of His Excellency President Edgar Chagwa Lungu, Zambia shall rise to the occasion and continue with its development agenda. The country continues to be a mono economy heavily dependent on copper whose price on the international market is volatile and unreliable. It is with this in mind that His Excellency President Edgar Chagwa Lungu has given a policy direction on the industrialisation and diversification of our economy. Owing to these challenges, the PF vision is to enhance economic growth and translate that growth to real gains and improved welfare for every Zambian. To this effect, the PF Government has, in the last five years, pursued pro-poor policies that have included, among others, accelerated infrastructure development in order to enhance the growth potential of the economy which will lead to wealth creation and employment opportunities, thereby significantly impacting the unrelenting high poverty level.

 

Mr Speaker, I wish to commend His Excellency the President for outlining, in his Inaugural Speech to this august House, a clear vision of where this country should be headed economically in the next five years with a emphasis on industrialisation and economic diversification.

 

Sir, His Excellency the President’s vision of an industrious and diversified economy is timely and was well received. It not only reminds us where this nation should be headed economically, but also provides the basis upon which our economic policies shall be anchored. The President’s vision and guidance brings into focus the country’s main economic thrust and gives impetus to the country’s economic development agenda and poverty reduction.

 

Mr Speaker, I need not emphasise the benefits of industrialisation and economic diversification which include reducing the country’s economic dependency on mining and importation of agriculture and other finished products. However, it will suffice to say that in order to achieve industrialisation and economic diversification, as guided by His Excellency the President, resources permitting, there is a need to maintain the momentum of infrastructure development embarked upon by the PF Government in the last five years, especially targeting key-endowed areas with a view to opening these areas for economic exploration and utilisation of untapped natural resources, including the human resource.

 

Mr Speaker, there is also a need to enhance the process of transferring technical and entrepreneurial skills information to the people and the youth in particular so that more productive techniques and modern technologies are acquired and domesticated. To this end, it is my sincere hope that the PF Government, …

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Chitotela: … with the backing of this august House, shall continue with the momentum of infrastructure development as the main anchor and the …

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

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

 

Question put and agreed to

 

________

 

The House adjourned at 1916 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday, 10th November, 2016.