Wednesday, 21^st March, 2018

 

The House met at 1430 hours

 

[MR SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

NATIONAL ANTHEM

 

PRAYER

 

____

 

RULINGS BY MR SPEAKER

 

ON THE POINT OF ORDER RAISED BY MR S. KAMPYONGO, MP, MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS, ON DR C. KAMBWILI, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR ROAN CONSTITUENCY, ON HIS ALLEGATIONS THAT MR KAMPYONGO HAD RECEIVED THREE MOTOR VEHICLES AS GRATIFICATION FOR AWARDING MR SOKO’S COMPANY THE CONTRACT TO SUPPLY FORTY-TWO FIRE TRUCKS TO THE GOVERNMENT

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, on Wednesday, 8^th November, 2017, my office received a letter of complaint from Hon. S. Kampyongo, Minister of Home Affairs, against Hon. Dr C. Kambwili. Hon. Kampyongo’s complaint was that on Tuesday, 19^th September, 2017, when the House had been considering a ministerial statement issued by the Minister of Local Government, Hon. Vincent Mwale, Hon. Dr C. Kambwili had alleged that Hon. Kampyongo, while serving as Minister of Local Government, had corruptly received three motor vehicles from Mr Bokani Soko as gratification for awarding Mr Soko’s company, Grandview International, a contract to supply forty-two fire trucks to the Government.

 

In his letter, Hon. Kampyongo referred to Order 53(1) of the National Assembly Standing Orders, 2016, which requires hon. Members to provide only factual and verifiable information to the House is. In addition, the hon. Minister stated that Hon. Dr Kambwili had, from the time he made the allegation, failed to provide any evidence to substantiate his claim. The hon. Minister further submitted that the utterances by Hon. Dr Kambwili had the effect of injuring his reputation, as he was considered corrupt and not fit to hold public office.

 

The following is an excerpt from the Parliamentary Debate of 19^th September, 2017, of Hon. Dr Kambwili’s debate, which gave rise to the complaint:

 

“Mr Speaker, the Government experienced a severe recession in 2015. Was it important to procure forty-two fire engines worth US$42 million when our economy was in dire straits?”

 

“Sir, further, is the hon. Minister aware that the person who was the hon. Minister of Local Government at the time received three vehicles from Mr Bokani Soko? The Minister received a Toyota Hilux 2016, a Range Rover Vogue and a Toyota ZX, which was later involved in an accident.” 

 

In line with parliamentary practice and procedure, and the rules of natural justice, the Office of the Clerk of the National Assembly wrote to Hon. Dr C. Kambwili requesting him to tell his side of the story regarding the complaint lodged by Hon. Kampyongo.

 

In response, Hon. Dr Kambwili stated that he would not comment on the matter, as it was under investigation by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), and that he could not adduce the evidence to anybody not mandated to investigate corruption. He also stated that he had made the statement in the public interest and in the exercise of his privilege as an hon. Member of Parliament based on information he had. He added that the hon. Minister of Home Affairs had not denied having been involved in the purchase of the fire tenders either in the house or outside it.  He, then, counter-alleged that the complaint by the hon. Minister of Home Affairs was an attempt to stifle his privilege. I accordingly referred the matter to the Committee on Privileges, Absences and Support Services for consideration.

 

Hon. Members, Hon. Kampyongo’s complaint raises the issue of an hon. Member’s freedom of speech and debate in the House vis-à-vis his or her duty to ensure that the information he or she provides to the House is factual and verifiable. The relevant authorities on the matter are as set out below.

 

Hon. Members, Article 76(1) of the Constitution of Zambia Act, Chapter 1 of the Laws of Zambia, provides as follows:

 

“76(1). A Member of Parliament has freedom of speech and debate in the National Assembly and that freedom shall not be ousted or questioned in a court or tribunal”.

 

Further, M. N. Kaul and S. L. Shakdher, in their book titled Practice and Procedure of Parliament, Seventh Edition, on pages 244-255, state as follows:

 

“Speech and action in Parliament may be said to be unquestioned and free. However, this freedom from external influence or interference does not involve any unrestrained licence of speech within the walls of the House. The right to freedom of speech is circumscribed by the constitutional provisions and the Rules which also guard against making of unwarranted allegations against a person”.

 

Additionally, Order 53(1) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2016, states as follows:

 

“A member shall, in debating any matter, ensure that the information he or she provides to the House is factual and verifiable”.

 

Further, hon. Members, Chapter 3 of the National Assembly Members’ Handbook, 2006, states as follows at page 13:

 

“Members must not allege specific matters of fact as being true unless they are able to substantiate them”.

 

Hon. Members, the Committee on Privileges, Absences and Support Services considered the complaint, and both Hon. Kampyongo and Hon. Dr Kambwili appeared before it. Hon. Kampyongo restated his complaint and further informed the Committee that since he had not included the motor vehicles when he declared his assets, which would be required by the law were they his, the allegation had suggested that he had breached the law. He emphasised that he took great exception to the allegation. In response, Hon. Dr Kambwili insisted that his allegations were factual and that he had evidence that the hon. Minister had received gratification from Grandview International. However, when he was requested to present the evidence to the Committee, he reiterated his position that he could not give the evidence to the Committee because the mandate to investigate the matter lay in the ACC, not the National Assembly.  He also advised the Committee to deal with him as it deemed fit, as he was ready to suffer the consequences of his non-production of the evidence to prove the allegations.

 

Hon. Members, upon deliberation on the matter, the Committee found that although Hon. Dr Kambwili insisted that the allegations were true, he had refused to adduce evidence to substantiate them as required by Standing Order 53(1). In that regard, the Committee found Hon. Dr Kambwili in breach of the Standing Order and parliamentary privilege by making a false statement on the Floor of the House. The Committee noted that the offence was very serious and resolved that Hon. Dr Kambwili be reprimanded.

 

Hon Members, before I address Hon. Dr Kambwili in absentia, allow me to emphasise the position regarding hon. Members’ privilege of freedom of speech. In so doing, I wish to draw your attention to the case to which I referred yesterday, of Hon. R. Musokotwane Vs Hon. M. L. Kaingu. In that case, Hon. Kaingu had raised a point of order on the Floor of the House accusing Hon. R. Musokotwane of requesting him to remove some settlers from the Sichifulo Game Management Area (GMA), which was in her constituency. However, it turned out that the statement was false, and the hon. Member was found in breach of parliamentary privilege for making a false statement on the Floor of the House and admonished by the House. In rendering a ruling on the matter, my predecessor stated, and this is quoted from the Parliamentary Debate of the Third Meeting of the First Session of the Ninth National Assembly, from 16^thJanuary to 27^th March, 2009, at page 3111, as follows:

 

“Hon. Members, while freedom of speech and action in the House are said to be unquestioned and free, there are certain restraints on the use of the right within the walls of the House. The rules of the House demand that any information provided to the House must be factual. It is an offence punishable by the House for any person to wilfully mislead the House”.

 

Hon. Members, evidently, by his defence and counter-claim that Hon. Kampyongo’s point of order was an attempt to stifle his privilege, Hon. Dr Kambwili was operating under the mistaken belief that the freedom of speech of hon. Members of the House was limitless. However, as was clearly illustrated in the case of Hon. Kaingu and Hon. Musokotwane, the freedom is not unlimited, but subject to the rules of the House.

 

I will now address Hon. Dr C. Kambwili in absentia.

 

Hon. Dr Kambwili, the House is extremely displeased with your conduct of making allegations on the Floor of the House and, then, failing to adduce evidence to substantiate them. The privilege of freedom of speech is there to ensure that hon. Members debate freely without fear of reprisals. This privilege, however, is not unlimited, as it requires the information brought to the Floor of the House to be factual and verifiable.

 

Hon. Dr Kambwili, as a senior Member of this House, you are expected to know that anything you say on the Floor of the House is supposed to be factual and verifiable. You cannot, therefore, wantonly make unfounded and unwarranted allegations against persons and, then, plead the privilege of freedom of speech. The rules and procedures the House has put in place are intended to ensure that hon. Members only bring to the House information that is factual and verifiable. This is intended to ensure that the House and the public at large are not misled. You were, therefore, out of order to use the Floor of the House to damage another person’s reputation and, thereafter, plead privilege. I, therefore, strongly reprimand you and direct that you desist from exhibiting such conduct in future.

 

  Hon. Members, as you are aware, an hon. Member who is reprimanded for breach of parliamentary privilege is required to apologise to the House. In this regard, Hon. Dr Kambwili will render his apology to the House on the day that he will be available.

 

ON THE POINT OF ORDER RAISED BY HON. J. J. MWIIMBU, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR MONZE CENTRAL CONSTITUENCY, ALLEGING THAT THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HAS TREATED MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FACING VARIOUS COURT CASES IN A DISCRIMINATORY MANNER

 

Hon. Members, you will recall that on Wednesday, 7^th March, 2018, when the House was considering the second reading stage of the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Bill No. 2 of 2018 and Hon. C. Mweetwa, Member of Parliament for Choma Central, was on the Floor, Hon. J. J. Mwiimbu, Member of Parliament for Monze Central, raised the following point of order:

 

“Madam Speaker, I rise on a very serious point of order on the conduct of this House vis-à-vis discrimination.

 

 “Madam Speaker, I would like you to take judicial notice that Parliament has today, 7^th March, 2018, written to the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) declaring the Chilanga Parliamentary Seat vacant. We are all alive to the traditions and customs of this House. Whenever there is a matter that is pending in court, this House does not take any action.

 

“Madam Speaker, the letter, which I have mentioned, gives the reasons of declaring the seat vacant based on Article 70(2)(f) as follows:

 

‘A person is disqualified from being elected a Member of Parliament if that person is serving a sentence of imprisonment for an offence under a written law’.

 

“Madam Speaker, we are all aware that our colleague, the Member of Parliament for Chilanga, Hon. Mukata, has appealed against the sentence and conviction. We are also aware that there are people here who are serving, but lost their cases in the High Court. Without any stay of the decisions, they are still serving because they have appealed the decisions, and Parliament has never declared their seats vacant.

 

“Madam Speaker, is this House in order to discriminate against its hon. Members on issues of parliamentary privilege, which privilege has been accorded to them? Is your office in order to declare the Chilanga Parliamentary Constituency Seat vacant when the area hon. Member of Parliament has appealed to a higher court and others are still serving? Is your office in order to do that?”

 

Mr Speaker drank water.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, let me begin by reminding the House that a point of order cannot be raised against the House or the Office of the Speaker. However, given the important Constitutional issues raised, I have elected to address the subject issues raised in the point of order.

 

Hon. Members, this point of order alleges bias in the manner in which my office treats hon. Members of Parliament who lose their parliamentary seats based on court decisions and appeal against the court decisions to a higher court. 

 

Hon. Members, you may wish to note that prior to the amendment of the Constitution through the enactment of the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, the Constitution provided as follows:

 

“71(2)(e). A member of the National Assembly shall vacate his seat in the Assembly if he is sentenced by a court in Zambia to death or to imprisonment, by whatever name called, for a term exceeding six months;”

 

“(3). Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (2), where any member of the National Assembly has been sentenced to death or imprisonment, adjudged or declared to be of unsound mind, adjudged or declared bankrupt or convicted or reported guilty of any offence prescribed under Clause (4) of Article 65 appeals against the decision or applies for a free pardon in accordance with any law, the decision shall not have any effect for the purpose of this Article until the final determination of such appeal or application:

 

Provided that –

 

1. such member shall not, pending such final determination, exercise his functions or receive any remuneration as a member of the National Assembly;”…

 

That was the old law. The import of this provision was that where an hon. Member of Parliament was sentenced to death or imprisonment and appealed against the conviction, they retained their seat pending determination of the appeal. However, during that time, they did not receive any remuneration or carry out any functions of the National Assembly. Hon Members may recall that was the basis upon which Mr Steven Masumba, former Hon. Member of Parliament for Mufumbwe Constituency, retained his seat when he was convicted and appealed against his conviction.

 

Hon Members, you may further wish to note that following the amendment of the Constitution by the Constitution of Zambia (Amendment) Act No. 2 of 2016, the preceding provision has been repealed and replaced with the following provision:

 

“72(2)(b). The office of Member of Parliament becomes vacant if the member becomes disqualified for election in accordance with Article 70;”…

 

Article 70(2)(f) goes on to provide as follows:

 

“A person is disqualified from being elected as a Member of Parliament if that person is serving a sentence of imprisonment for an offence under a written law”.

 

Hon Members, it is self-evident from the preceding provisions that the law no longer permits hon. Members who have appealed against their conviction to retain their seats pending the determination of their appeals. The combined effect of Articles 72(2)(b) and 70(2)(f) is that a parliamentary seat falls vacant when an hon. Member of Parliament holding it is serving a sentence of imprisonment.

 

At this juncture, it is instructive to interpolate a definition of imprisonment. Bryan A Garner, Editor-in-Chief of the Black’s Law Dictionary, Ninth Edition, at page 825, defines imprisonment in the following terms:

 

“Imprisonment – 1.The act of confining a person, especially in prison. 2. The state of being confined”.

 

Hon Members, it is noteworthy that Section 19 of the Court of Appeal Act No. 7 of 2016 provides as follows:

 

“19. A sentence of death shall not be executed until –

 

“(a)      after the expiration of the time within which a notice of intention to        appeal may be given or, as the case may be, an application for leave may be submitted;

 

“(b)      where a notice of intention to appeal is given, the appeal has been    determined or abandoned; and

 

“(c)      where an application to appeal is submitted, the application, which shall be determined as soon as practicable, has been refused or the appeal has been determined or abandoned, as the case may be”.

 

Additionally, Section 305(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC), Chapter 88 of the Laws of Zambia, provides as follows:

 

“As soon as conveniently may be after sentence of death has been pronounced by the High Court, if no appeal from the sentence is preferred, or if such appeal is preferred and dismissed, then, as soon as conveniently may be thereafter, the presiding Judge shall forward to the President a copy of the notes of evidence taken on the trial, with a report in writing signed by him containing any recommendation or observations on the case as he may think fit to make”.

 

From the preceding provision, it is clear that the stay of execution envisaged under Sections 19 of the Court of Appeal Act, and 305 of the CPC relates to staying the execution of the death sentence. This means that a death sentence cannot be carried out until the appeal has been determined. It does not, however, mean that a person sentenced to death is not confined or serving a sentence of imprisonment. This proposition that I have made is supported by Section 304 of the CPC, which provides as follows:

 

“A certificate, under the hand of the Registrar or the Clerk of the Court, as the case may be, that sentence of death has been passed, and naming the person condemned, shall be sufficient authority for the detention of such person”.

 

Hon Members, you are all aware that on Wednesday, 28^th February, 2018, the High Court delivered a judgment in the criminal matter between The People v Mukata and another, Cause No. HP/180/2017. In that judgment, the High Court found Mr Mukata guilty of murder, contrary to Section 200 of the Penal Code, Chapter 87 of the Laws of Zambia, and convicted him accordingly. The certificate of death sentence was issued on the same day. As clearly indicated in Section 304 referred to above, a certificate of sentence of death is sufficient authority for the detention or imprisonment of a person who has been sentenced. In this regard, the certificate of death sentence is sufficient evidence that Mr Mukata is serving a prison sentence, and that necessarily means that his seat fell vacant by operation of Article 72(2)(f) of the Constitution. Since the Constitution no longer permits an hon. Member serving a prison sentence to remain in the House pending appeal, the fact that he has appealed against his conviction cannot enable him to retain his seat.

 

Furthermore, hon. Members, you may wish to note that Article 72(8) of the Constitution stipulates as follows:

        

“Where a vacancy occurs in the National Assembly, the Speaker shall, within seven days of the occurrence of the vacancy, inform the Electoral Commission of the vacancy in writing and a by-election shall be held in accordance with Article 57.”

 

It might be observed from the foregoing that once a seat falls vacant in the National Assembly, the Speaker must notify the Electoral Commission of Zambia (ECZ) of the vacancy within seven days. To this extent, I was obliged by the Constitution to notify the ECZ of the vacancy in the Chilanga Parliamentary Constituency Seat not later than 7^th March, 2018, which I obliged.

 

Hon. Members, I will now address the question of why Mr Mukata’s case has been treated differently from the other cases in which hon. Members of Parliament who lost their seats and appealed are still in the House today. In that regard, I draw your attention to the manner in which the amended Constitution treats cases relating to election petitions and the expulsion of hon. Members from the political party that sponsored them to the House.

 

Article 73(4) provides as follows:

 

“A Member of Parliament whose election is petitioned shall hold the seat in the National Assembly pending the determination of the election petition”.

 

Additionally, Article 72(5) provides as follows:

 

“Where a Member of Parliament is expelled, as provided in Clause 2(e), the member shall not lose the seat until the expulsion is confirmed by a court, except that where the member does not challenge the expulsion and the period prescribed for the challenge lapses, the member shall vacate the seat in the National Assembly”.

 

Lastly, Article 72(2)(h) provides that:

 

“The office of Member of Parliament becomes vacant if the member is disqualified as a result of a decision of the Constitutional Court”.

 

Hon. Members, the import of the foregoing provisions is that where hon. Members of Parliament appeal against a decision of the High Court nullifying their seat, or challenge their expulsion from the political party that sponsored them to the House in a court of law, they retain their seat until the appeal has been ultimately determined and the expulsion is confirmed by the courts of law. The preceding position was confirmed by the Constitutional Court in the case of Mwanakatwe v Scott and Others, Cause No. 2016/CC/A018, in which the appellant, Hon. Mwanakatwe, had applied to the Constitutional Court for a stay of execution of the High Court’s decision to nullify her election in Lusaka Central Parliamentary Seat. The Constitutional Court dismissed her application on the ground that it was irrelevant or redundant. Relying on Article 72(h) of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court held that it was clear that the seat would only fall vacant upon the final determination of the matter by the Constitutional Court.

 

Hon. Members, from the foregoing, it is crystal clear that the Constitution treats appeals relating to election petitions and the expulsion of hon. Members from political parties that sponsored them to the House differently from convictions relating to criminal offences. In the case of an election petition or expulsion from the sponsoring party, an hon. Member is entitled to retain his or her seat pending final determination of the matter by the Constitutional Court. However, in the case of a criminal matter, the Constitution does not permit an hon. Member to maintain the status quo pending determination of the appeal. The seat falls vacant when an hon. Member begins to serve a sentence of imprisonment.

 

Hon. Members, I hope it is clear and obvious that the decision to notify the ECZ of the vacancy in the Chilanga Parliamentary Constituency Seat was founded on the Constitution. It was not prompted by a discriminatory practice, as alleged in the point of order.

 

I thank you.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

__________

 

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

 

POWER OUTAGE AT THE UNIVERSITY TEACHING HOSPITALS

 

The Minister of Health (Dr Chilufya): Mr Speaker, thank you for granting me this opportunity to inform the House and the nation at large on the power outage that occurred at the University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs) on 18^th and 19^th March, 2018.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order, on the right!

 

Dr Chilufya: Sir, the House may wish to note that there was a planned maintenance by the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) at Main Sub-Station 1 located at the Main Gate of the UTHs. The maintenance works, which were meant to minimise disruptions to key strategic and critical services at the UTHs, were executed as planned by ZESCO and our technical staff at the UTHs. This strategic effort necessitated power rationing in less critical areas beginning at 0800 hours on Sunday, 18^th March, 2018. Unfortunately, ZESCO exceeded the planned duration of the maintenance works and that resulted in the rationing of power in non-critical areas continuing beyond 1800 hours.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order, Hon. Minister!

 

Just pause. Wait for your colleagues on the right to support you by maintaining some silence.

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, the rationing of power in non-critical areas continued until 2100 hours when full power was restored to the entire hospital. During the maintenance works, the UTHs were powered by the installed generator set capacity. The wards that were deemed to be non-critical at the time were E and G Blocks, which are the medical and surgical wards, respectively.

 

Sir, no life was lost due the power outage in E and G Blocks at the UTHs.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, you are now free to ask questions on points of clarification on the statement issued by the hon. Minister of Health.

 

Mr Ngulube (Kabwe Central): Mr Speaker, if the maintenance of the sub-station was planned, as the hon. Minister has told the House, why were the people in the hospital and the nation at large in shock when they noticed that the biggest hospital in the land was being load-shed to that extent?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, probably, when power rationing started in the morning, it was not evident to the public because the E and G Blocks did not have any critical equipment. So, the natural light of the day was sufficient. However, beyond 1800 hours, when it became dark and apparent that there was power disruption, it was certainly surprising to the members of the public.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr A. Mumba (Kantanshi): Mr Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for that short statement.

 

Sir, I am troubled by the hon. Minister’s response. Maintenance works are undertaken everywhere, including at the Lusaka Water and Sewerage (LWSC), where there has been erratic supply of water, but we have not heard of the hon. Minister of Water Development, Sanitation and Environmental Protection being summoned by the President. Can the hon. Minister clearly tell us why the President summoned him, the hon. Minister of Energy and another hon. Minister I do not know? A note was circulated that indicated that the President had instructed the two hon. Ministers to investigate what had happened. If it was just routine maintenance work, why the Presidential summon?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, the hon. Member of Parliament brings out one very key attribute of the President of this country, namely that he is caring and concerned about the health of the people of Zambia. The hospital is a critical installation, and disruption of power in any hospital should worry any responsible leader.

 

Mr Speaker, the disruption of power in a hospital is a source of concern not only to the Presidency, but also to all his stewards and the public because lives are potentially put at risk.

 

Sir, information is very important. Indeed, we were notified of the disruption of power up to 1800 hours and we ensured that all the critical areas were secured. However, the disruption went beyond the planned time. So, the President did the right thing to demand a report, which showed that he is concerned about the health of the people who are well and those who are unwell in hospitals. So, he was on terra firma in doing that.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Dr Chanda (Bwana Mkubwa): Mr Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for his brief and concise statement.

 

Sir, Zambians complain a lot about the erratic services provided by public utility companies like the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) and Lusaka Water and Sewerage Company (LWSC). The hon. Minister rightly stated that ZESCO exceeded the planned time for the outage. Did ZESCO notify the Ministry of Health or University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs) Management about exceeding the stated time?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for Bwana Mkubwa for that question. During the works, there was communication at the technical level. Our technicians and the technicians on the ground were communicating and estimating times. No wonder, they were able to continue rationing power in less critical areas.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Jere (Livingstone): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister stated that during the blackouts, there were standby generators at University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs). Why was there a blackout? Is it because the generator sets (gensets) were not enough or had they run out of fuel?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, the blackout was due to rationing of power in less critical areas. So, in E and G Blocks, only the lighting was affected. All the other parts of the hospitals’ life-saving equipment and critical areas had power throughout.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Mung’andu (Chama South): Mr Speaker, a power blackout at the University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs), I believe, is a bigger problem to do with the Ministry of Energy. What measures has the hon. Minister and his colleague in the Ministry of Energy put in place to ensure that such a thing does not happen again?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, the UTHs have installed capacity of seven automated gensets that are able to provide power in times of outages if there is a very clear agreement on the duration of the outage. With effective communication and good planning, we are able to run without any disruption throughout power outages.

 

Mr Speaker, in the medium to long term, we are considering installing solar panels in some parts of the hospitals to reduce the demand on the gensets. Further, we are working with the Ministry of Works and Supply, and ZESCO to upgrade the network for electricity in the UTHs.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Kakubo (Kapiri Mposhi): Mr Speaker, does the Government have any intention to discipline the management or technicians at the Zambia Electricity Supply Corporation (ZESCO) for inconveniencing patients beyond the hours that were initially planned for the blackout?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, we are reviewing the incidence and those who will be found wanting will certainly be disciplined. The President has directed that we thoroughly investigate the matter.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Mweetwa (Choma Central): Mr Speaker, on another day, I will ask why load-shedding has reduced despite the Patriotic Front (PF) Government telling this country and its citizens that load-shedding would only reduce…

 

Mr Speaker: What is your question …

 

Mr Mweetwa: … after three rainy seasons.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: … to the hon. Minister of Health?

 

Mr Mweetwa: Sir, that was a preamble.

 

Sir, the hon. Minister, who is also a former Deputy Minister of Health, has said that there are standby generator sets (gensets) at University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs). I have been approaching his ministry, since 2011, to install backup gensets at Choma General Hospital, which the ministry has elevated to a tertiary hospital status. Why has the ministry not procured gensets for hospitals like Choma General?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, it is a priority of the Government to provide hospitals with backup power in order to support consistent operation of equipment, such as the life-support equipment. That is the reason we are investing in gensets. As we speak, there is an active procurement of eighteen gensets for all the provincial and second-level hospitals that do not have backup.

 

Mr Speaker, further, there are interventions involving solar power. So far, we have powered St. Paul’s Mission Hospital using solar with the support of co-operating partners. We have also decided to integrate solar power into the scope of works in our development of infrastructure in order to forestall power outages and support consistent operations of our hospitals, and Choma General is certainly on the list of hospitals that will receive gensets in the on-going procurement.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Mweetwa interjected.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: Order hon. Member for Choma!

 

You will engage him during tea break.

 

Mr Nanjuwa (Mumbwa): Mr Speaker, is this the first such an incident has occurred at the University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs) or are there other incidents about which we do not know?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, there have been power outages, but our automated gensets have kicked in. So, we have not had any incidents worth reporting on.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Mr Chisopa (Mkushi South): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has indicated that as a short-term measure, the ministry intends to put install solar panels at some selected general hospitals. How soon will that programme be implemented?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, some scoping works have been undertaken. In due course, we will inform the House on the phased manner in which solar power will be installed in some health facilities. However, for newly-constructed health facilities, particularly district hospitals and primary healthcare facilities, we have included solar power as part of the scope of works. We have already done that at St. Paul’s Mission Hospital in Luapula because it was supported by donors. There are also primary healthcare facilities where works have been completed as part of a pilot project.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Kabanda (Serenje): Mr Speaker, I just want to ride on the question asked by the hon. Member for Kantanshi. If His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, had been kept in the loop at every stage of the maintenance works at the University Teaching Hospitals (UTHs), would it have been necessary for him to ask for a report?

 

Dr Chilufya: Mr Speaker, the Government has systems for reporting from one level to another. So, the President was informed at an appropriate time, hence, his quick reaction.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

THE CONFERENCE OF STATE PARTIES TO THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

 

The Minister of Justice (Mr Lubinda): Mr Speaker, on Wednesday, 14^th March, 2018, the hon. Member of Parliament for Mwembezhi, Mr Jamba, raised the following point of order:

 

“Madam Speaker, some people have been saying that there are some corrupt people, and the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has also been investigating some of them. Recently, the hon. Minister of Justice went to the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) in Vienna. Since corruption is a very serious vice that takes the country in the wrong direction, is the hon. Minister of Justice in order not to tell the House how the outcomes of the conference in Vienna will benefit the Zambian Government in the fight against corruption?”

 

Sir, in her ruling, Madam First Deputy Speaker said the following, in part:

 

“I encourage the hon. Minister of Justice to find time before the House adjourns sine die to issue a statement to this House and the people of Zambia on what the meeting he attended was about and how the people stand to benefit from his participation in it”.

 

Mr Speaker, I took heed of the counsel and I am ready to inform the people of Zambia what the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) Conference of State Parties (COSP) held in Vienna, Austria, in November, 2017, was all about and how Zambia stands to benefit  from it.

 

Mr Speaker, let me start by underscoring the undeniable fact that corruption undermines development by diverting public resources and distorting the provision of goods and services. It is also a well-known fact that corruption corrodes the rule of law, and destroys public confidence and trust in Government institutions and the country’s leadership. It is also a well-recognised fact that the war against the scourge must be fought at various levels of society, including the national and international levels. It is in recognition of this fact that the United Nations (UN) in Resolution No. 57/169 decided to adopt a legally-binding instrument to fight corruption at the global level. Thus, the adoption of the UNCAC in Merida, Mexico, in December, 2003, was a remarkable milestone in the global fight against corruption.

 

Sir, Zambia jointed the global fight against corruption in December, 2007, when she acceded to the UNCAC. Further, the country was among the first nine African countries selected to undergo the UNCAC review during the first year of the first review cycle in 2010. It was reviewed by the State parties of Italy and Zimbabwe on its implementation of Cap 3 – Criminalisation and Law Enforcement and Cap 5 – International Co-operation. The House may further wish to know that in 2014 and 2015, Zambia was selected to peer review Bolivia and the Bahamas. The country has, yet again, been selected to peer-review France in conjunction with Liechtenstein following the commencement of the Second Cycle of the UNCAC Reviews on Chapter II ‒ Corruption Prevention, and Chapter V ‒ Asset Recovery. It is worth noting that Zambia is scheduled for the second review in 2019. From the above, it is clear that Zambia is an active member of the global movement against corruption.

 

Mr Speaker, the Government of Zambia, under President Lungu, appreciates the paramount role that the UNCAC plays in combating corruption. It also recognises the fact that if Zambia is to win the fight against corruption, it ought to contribute to and learn from best practices and experiences of other countries. As all may know, corruption knows no political borders. It also knows no geographical borders. On the contrary, the proceeds of corruption have a high tendency of crossing borders in much a similar manner as corrupt people tend to establish linkages in a multiplicity of countries. This is the reason His Excellency Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu nominated an hon. Minister to lead a Zambian delegation to the Seventh Session of the COSP of the UNCAC held in Vienna, Austria, from 6^th to 10^th November, 2017.

 

Sir, the COSP was established under Article 63 of the UNCAC to improve the capacity of, and co-operation between, State parties to achieve the objectives set forth in the convention and, specifically, to promote and review its implementation. Pursuant to Article 63, paragraphs 5 and 6, of the convention, the COSP is, among other things, mandated to gather information on the measures taken by State parties in implementing the convention and the difficulties encountered in doing so. Each State party provides the COSP with information on its programmes, plans and practices, as well as the legislative and administrative measures taken to implement the convention.

 

Mr Speaker, the COSPs are held bi-annually. As I have already stated, the seventh was held in Vienna, Austria, in November, 2017. The conference was attended by 166 countries and several UN entities, including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). It was also attended by intergovernmental bodies like the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and several international, regional and national non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Let me hasten to report that several national parliaments and parliamentarians were also in attendance.

 

Sir, in my speech to the plenary session on 6^th November, 2017, I stated how, in Zambia, the fight against corruption had been institutionalised way back in 1982 and how it had remained institutionalised over the years through a number of statutes, including the Leadership Code, the Parliamentary and Ministerial Code of Conduct Act, the Corrupt Practices Act and the Anti-Corruption Commission Act. I also reported how Zambia had, over the years, worked under the realisation that fighting corruption required the involvement of all stakeholders, including civil society organisations (CSOs), faith-based organisations (FBOs), the private sector, academia, and policy and law makers. The conference was further informed of the positive impact that the UNCAC had had on Zambia’s governance and anti-corruption legislation.

 

Mr Speaker, I reported that in our resolve to adhere to the UNCAC provisions, the Abuse of Office Clause, which is Article 19 of the convention, which had been struck out of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Act by the previous Government, had been reinstated in the Anti-Corruption Commission Act No. 3 of 2012 in a constitutionally compliant manner. Further, I informed the conference about the:

 

1. enactment into law of the Forfeiture of Proceeds of Crime Act No. 19 of 2010 and the Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act No. 4 of 2010;

 

1. the introduction of a case management system; and

 

1. the development of a national policy on corruption prevention.

 

Sir, these are some of the positive measures taken by the Government to meet the goal and aspirations of the convention. The measures have not only enhanced the fight against transnational crime, but also strengthened our fight against corruption.

 

Sir, I also informed the conference that countries like Zambia had lost large amounts of money that were stacked away in financial capitals that Zambian law enforcement agencies could not reach. I further pointed to the fact that some countries had been complicit in encouraging and facilitating corruption by enacting laws that created safe havens in which proceeds of corruption had been hidden. I indicated further that for the fight against corruption to be won, all countries had to  be prepared to put in place measures that allowed for transparency in their banking and financial systems, and sign up to and participate in international efforts on stolen assets recovery.

 

Mr Speaker, a host of countries that attended the conference reported on the measures they had taken to fight corruption. The measure most highlighted was the enactment, revision and updating of anti-corruption and anti-money laundering legislations. Some speakers bemoaned the challenges they faced in seeking mutual legal assistance in criminal matters and called upon requested State parties to take cognisance of the fact that the recovery of stolen assets was a fundamental principle of the convention.

 

Sir, the following are some of the resolutions adopted by the conference:

 

1. Resolution 7/1, which calls for strengthening of mutual legal assistance for international co-operation and asset recovery. The return of assets derived from acts of corruption is a fundamental principle of the convention, and State parties are obliged to afford one another the widest measure of co-operation and assistance, including freezing and seizing with the aim of returning such assets to countries of origin;

 

1. Resolution 7/2, which is on preventing and combating corruption in all its forms more effectively, especially when it involves vast quantities of assets;

 

1. Resolution 7/3, which is on promoting technical assistance to support the effective implementation of the UNCAC;

 

1. Resolution 7/4, which is on enhancing synergies among relevant multilateral organisations responsible for review mechanisms in the field of anti-corruption; and

 

1. Resolution 7/5, which is on promoting preventive measures against corruption.

 

Mr Speaker, if fully implemented, the UNCAC and the resolutions of the Seventh COSP will make a real difference to the quality of life of millions of people around the world. The convention introduces a comprehensive set of standards, measures and rules that all countries can apply to strengthen their legal and regulatory regimes to fight corruption, and resolutions focused on appealing for positive actions by member States.

 

Mr Speaker, pursuant to paragraphs 4 and 6 of the convention, the conference created the Implementation Review Group (IRG) to carry out five-yearly periodic reviews to assist in the implementation of the provisions of the convention. Thus, the Second Cycle of the Convention Reviews Chapter II ‒ Corruption Prevention and Chapter V ‒ Asset Recovery was actually launched in St Petersburg, Russia, in 2015.

 

Sir, the country will start preparations for its peer review this year, including by taking the necessary measures to implement the recommendations of the First Cycle UNCAC Report, which made, among others, the following recommendations:

 

1. that Zambia considered amending Section 61 (the Presumption of Corrupt Intention) of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act in order to make it consistent with the Constitution and adhere to international human rights obligations by upholding the presumption of innocence as a State party to the international Covenant on Civil and Political Rights;

 

1. to consider establishing procedures for the disqualification of persons convicted of UNCAC-related offences from holding office in an enterprise owned in whole or in part by the state;

 

1. to set up an Asset Recovery Unit, and consider establishing rules and procedures for the physical protection of witnesses, noting that an independent body specifically responsible for implementing the Whistleblowers Act might be advantageous, and that such a body could be linked to the Witness Management Fund;

 

1. that measures are taken to ensure the independence of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) from undue influence and harassment; and

 

1. to expedite the creation of an asset recovery and witness management unit.

 

Sir, in addition to these recommendations, the Government of President Edgar Chagwa Lungu is concerned about the provisions of the 2016 Constitution, which exclude State officers and other constitutional office holders from the definition of “public officers.”

 

Mr Speaker, I trust that the above clearly illustrate the various ways in which Zambia stands to benefit from both her membership to this important body of member States of the UN and from participating in the COSPs.

 

Sir, the Government will continue to refine our domestic anti-corruption laws to bring them in line with UNCAC provisions. In addition, it will continue to appeal to the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) for technical assistance in addressing challenges identified in the first cycle of the Country Review Report for Zambia. We shall also appeal for international co-operation in following up and recovering unexplained assets of individuals that are stashed away in safe havens around the world.

 

Mr Speaker, under the Patriotic Front (PF) Government, and especially under the Presidency of Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, Zambia is, and shall continue to be, fully committed to achieving the UNCAC objectives and fight the scourge of corruption. This was stressed by His Excellency the President at paragraph 65 of his address to this House last Friday, 16^th March, 2018, when he said:

 

“One of the major challenges to good governance and integrity is the issue of corruption. Corruption is a cancer which requires concerted and continuous effort to eliminate. We all have a moral duty and obligation to fight corruption in order to achieve accelerated and all inclusive development”.

 

Sir, it is truly the moral duty of each citizen, and particularly of all of us in our various positions of leadership, be they in the private sector or, more so, in the public sector, in churches or FBOs and CSOs, in the Ruling Party and in opposition political parties, in our social clubs and in our families, to fight the vice using the most effective tool of ‘practising what we preach’, instead of only being rhetorical. We must all live in accordance with our national theme, namely “A corrupt-free Zambia begins with me”. Together, we are determined we shall win the fight. We all owe it our dear Zambia.

 

I thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Members, you are now free to ask questions on points of clarification on the statement issued by the hon. Minister of Justice.

 

Mr Michelo (Bweengwa): Hon. Minister, look at me.

 

Mr Lubinda faced Mr Michelo.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Michelo: Thank you.

 

Sir, how does the hon. Minister rate his Patriotic Front (PF) Government under the leadership of President Edgar Chagwa Lungu and the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) Government under the good leadership of the late President, Dr Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, SC, may his soul rest in peace?

 

Mr Mwiinga: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: I do not know whether the question is clear to the hon. Minister.

 

Mr Lubinda indicated dissent.

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member of Parliament for Bweengwa, …

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: … could you clarify your question. The hon. Minister of Justice did not get it.

 

Mr Mwiinga: Because he was not looking at him!

 

Mr Michelo: Mr Speaker, my question is: How does the hon. Minister rate the PF Government under the leadership of President Edgar Chagwa Lungu and the MMD Government under the good leadership of the late President, Dr Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, SC, may his soul rest in peace, in the fight against corruption?

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Minister, I think he is trying to elicit a comparison between the two regimes ...

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Speaker: ... in terms of performance in the fight against corruption. He wants you to do some assessment.

 

Mr Lubinda: Thank you, Mr Speaker.

 

Sir, I have stated before, on the Floor of this House, that there are two things one should never do in leadership. One, you never compete with your predecessor. Two, you never compete with your successor. That is because leadership is incremental.

 

Mr Kampyongo: Yes!

 

Mr Lubinda: All the Governments, starting from that of Dr Kenneth David Kaunda’s, played their role in the fight against corruption. President Chiluba also played his role as did President Mwanawasa, SC, President Rupiah Banda and President Michael Chilufya Sata. They all added to the fight against corruption.

 

Mr Speaker, when I represented Zambia at the UNCAC, I did indicate, like I said, that the fight against corruption in Zambia was institutionalised before the world came up with the Convention in 2003. We institutionalised the fight against corruption way back in 1982.

 

Sir, all I can say is that the PF Government, upon assuming office, did one thing that has been appreciated worldwide, namely the reintroduction in the Anti-Corruption Commission Act of a provision that had been removed by the previous Government. I have referred to it in this House. However, this is not to say that one Government did not perform and that only one is performing. All I can say is that His Excellency the President, Mr Edgar Chagwa Lungu, is very determined …

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: … to fight the scourge. That is the reason, when he came to this House, he appealed to all of us to join him in the fight against it.

 

Sir, let me just add that the administration of the late President, His Excellency Dr Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, SC, received a lot of support from the people who were  on the left of this Chamber. As active fighters against corruption, they assisted him to amend laws and turn the country into a shining star in the fight against corruption. Therefore, I have no doubt that if the people on the left of this Chamber were to do what their predecessors did, …

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: … Zambia would be a shining star again.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Ngulube: Mr Speaker, I am aware that many allegations of corruption have been levelled against the Government, hon. Ministers and, in some instances, the Head of State. What efforts is the ministry making to ensure that the institutions that fight corruption, such as the African Parliamentarians Network against Corruptions (APNAC) and the Anti-Corruptions Commission (ACC), are strengthened so that people do not just raise allegations of corruptions, but substantiate them and that the institutions empowered to raise alarm on corruption do not just sleep and wait until even the good people are painted with the same brush?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, the Anti-Corruption Commission Act has provisions for punitive measures to be meted out against those who make unsubstantiated allegations against others. I suppose this is the reason those who make the allegations shy away from lodging official complaints to the ACC.

 

Sir, the hon. Member of Parliament for Kabwe Central might recall that, not too long ago, I appealed to the ACC to not wait for people to go and lodge formal complaints, but to also follow up on complaints made through the press so that those who have the tendency of calling others corrupt are also made to prove their allegations.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, on the issue of the African Parliamentarians Network against Corruption (APNAC), an institution about which I think with a lot of nostalgia, I would like to report that at the conference in Vienna, a number of countries from Africa that have chapters of APNAC were represented. Having served as President of the chapter in Zambia for ten years and having represented APNAC members in Zambia at UNCAC Conferences, I was taken aback to notice the absence of the Zambian Chapter from the conference. It was not only a worry for me, but one also expressed by the Global Organisation of Parliamentarians against Corruption (GOPAC), which also noticed that Zambia had become very quiet in the fight against corruption. Therefore, I appeal to Hon. Tutwa Ngulube, if he is as concerned as I am about APNAC, that time has come for us to revive its activities.

 

Mr Ngulube: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, when we were on the left, especially when I was President of APNAC, I am sure that those who were with me know that we had several workshops during every meeting of Parliament to enlighten one another on the fight against corruption and proposed Bills to impact the fight against corruption. Unfortunately, the last time I heard about an election was seven years ago, yet if the Constitution of APNAC Zambia, if it has not been amended, says that the elections should be held every two-and-a-half years.

 

Ms Siliya: Wamuyayaya! 

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, we have to stop this phenomenon of holding on to leadership against the will of the constitution.

 

Ms Siliya: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: We should stop the wamuyayaya or forever and ever syndrome.

 

Sir, some of the members who were elected to APNAC have since left Parliament. For instance, the one who was elected treasurer is no longer an hon. Member of Parliament, yet the reports still reflect his name as a members of the chapter. So, I appeal to all my hon. Colleagues that the fight against corruption is ours and, especially mine, because it starts here. If it cannot start with us in the House, then, we should not expect it to start elsewhere. We owe it to the people to be champions of the fight against corruption.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Lufuma (Kabompo): Mr Speaker, the hon. Minister has eloquently indicated that Zambia has reported good measures it has put in place to fight corruption. He also indicated that, in 1982, the country was among the first to institutionalise the fight against corruption. Despite all the positives he outlined, recently, Zambia was graded the 6^th most corrupt country in Africa. How does he reconcile the efforts about which he has been talking so eloquently with the performance assessment?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I appreciate the recognition by the hon. Member of Parliament of the fact that the measures that we are taking in Zambia are very good. 

 

Sir, I am sure that Hon. Lufuma is aware of the fact that the rating is based on a perception, which is called the Corruption Perception Index (CPI). So, the question is: Why is Zambia perceived to be a corrupt country? There are many reasons, the most important of which is the tendency of Zambians to cast aspersions on one another purely for political purposes, as I said earlier. How will other countries perceive Zambia’s performance in the fight against corruption if, every day, there are people who think they have the licence to call the Head of State corrupt?

 

Sir, every day, there is one leader or another being called corrupt without evidence whatsoever on social media. Unfortunately, the people defamed may not even be able to defend themselves. So, naturally, we create the perception. That is why I appeal to all hon. Members who have evidence of corruption against people to submit it to the ACC.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear! 

 

Mr Lubinda: To continue crying “Wolf, wolf!” every morning when there is only a puppy outside the door is not correct because the neighbours will think one is under siege and come only to find a puppy.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Lubinda: That is what is happening in Zambia. We create the impression that we are totally corrupt yet, when people visit Zambia, they see that the situation is different. So, I appeal to all hon. Members to fight corruption genuinely and do it starting with ourselves. We should, for example, not claim that someone got three vehicles as gratification, but fail to adduce evidence when asked to do so. Obviously, the people who hear such statements may go away believing that there was corruption when there may not have been. One can only imagine the amount of damage we are causing to individuals and, especially, on the country. My dear brother should know that this is the reason Zambia is rated the way it is. Further, the world does not hear Zambians, especially us, in Parliament, speak enough about coming up with laws that will enhance the fight against corruption. At the time the CPI for Zambia was better than it is now, APNAC was very active, and the Hansard is there for all to see. Even when coming up with the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, APNAC called for stakeholder consultative meetings and Parliamentarians went out to engage society in the fight against corruption. We did not use APNAC to just label people corrupt without reason. I, therefore, urge my dear brother to help us to stop the habit of calling people corrupt without any evidence because that is denting the image of our country.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Speaker: Order!

 

Hon. Members on the left, if you have questions, I will give you the chance to ask them. You cannot murmur and object while seated. Just stand up and be counted.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Musonda (Kamfinsa): Mr Speaker, admittedly, corruption is a vice that needs to be fought with all our energy and by everybody in the country. I know that most of the power to fight it is vested in the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). In order to ascertain the prowess with which the ACC combats the vice, would the hon. Minister consider sharing with this House and the nation at large the number of anti-corruption cases that have been investigated and, probably, those successfully prosecuted in the courts of law in the past twenty-four months? That would instil a lot of confidence in Zambians in what the ACC is doing, especially in cases involving prominent people like businessmen and us, the leaders.

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, yes, it is possible for the hon. Minister to provide that information to Parliament periodically. However, I would also like to indicate that the ACC has been very active and that, on an annual basis, it releases a report on all matters reported and investigated, and the status of those cases. It is up to members of the public to take interest in accessing such reports. However, if it is the desire of the hon. Member that I present the latest figures on behalf of the commission, I can certainly consider doing that. Unfortunately, we are about to rise. So, it might be appropriate for me to seek your permission to present the report in the next Meeting of Parliament. Nonetheless, it is very important that the ACC has heard that its publications may not be as accessible as they should. So, maybe, it should also invest in information dissemination.

 

Sir, in fighting corruption, it should not be a question of selecting a category of citizens to be reported on, but one of reporting all the cases, irrespective of the people involved. Every case must be reported.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Prof. Lungwangwa (Nalikwanda): Sir, in his statement, the hon. Minister made reference to the importance of multilateral organisations in the fight against corruption as well as the importance of paying attention to transnational crimes. One of the major sources of corruption on the African continent is the illicit flows of finance out of Africa. About two to three years ago, it was pointed out that Africa was losing about US$50 billion every year through illicit financial flows. The continent is now losing more than US$100 billion through illicit financial flows every year, and illicit financial flows constitute about 60 per cent of the corruption on the African continent. Was this important aspect that is undermining the integrity of African countries discussed at the conference in Vienna and others the hon. Minister has attended?

 

Mr Lubinda: Sir, I cannot agree more with the hon. Member, and it was in recognition of that fact that when I spoke on behalf of Zambia at that conference, I indicated that there were some countries that were complicit in facilitating corruption because of laws that established safe havens. It is to safe havens that illicit finance flows out of Africa.

 

Sir, we heard, not too long ago, some newspaper reports on how much money some people have stashed away in foreign financial capitals that do not open up their financial transactions to the rest of the world. It is true that Africa is the one that is bleeding most excessively at the hands of the corrupt. Unfortunately, Zambia is not excluded. The country is also suffering at the hands of corrupt people who get money from it and use all the linkages and financial systems they have established to send money to the Cayman Islands, for instance. When we ask how the money got there and how they generated it in the first place, they do not explain. Unfortunately, Africa is considered the most corrupt continent, yet there are Western capitals that are developing their economies using capital flight from Africa. As Africans and Zambians, we need to curb this vice and continue to speak about it. This is the reason we boldly stood up at the Vienna Conference and said that some Western capitals are the ones that are causing this trouble for Africa.

 

Sir, I am happy that one of the resolutions, as I read out earlier, was that all countries must sign up to and participate in, the article that provides for international co-operation on asset recovery. There is some money that is being discovered in different Western capitals after it was externalised from Africa. That money must be brought back to Africa. If every country agrees to that, then, we will reduce the incentive for those who are corrupt-minded to take money from poor Zambians to go and develop other capitals. That is a scourge that every citizen must fight. If all of us in Parliament were to do that, then, the people we represent would surely follow.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Kufakwandi (Sesheke): Mr Speaker, if Zambia has information that some people in the country have been involved in the illicit transfer of money to foreign banks, are there any legal obstacles to the recovery of that money? Countries like Nigeria have recovered quite a substantial amount of money externalised by the late President Abacha. Our neighbour, Zimbabwe, has also recovered some of the monies externalised illegally in the last two months or so. Why is Zambia failing to use the same means that other counties are using to recover the monies taken out of this country illegally, especially since it appears the Government has information on the externalised funds?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, there are some financial capitals that have no international agreements with countries like Zambia. So, even when we get reports of some suspected illicit assets being held by those capitals, we do not get any assistance from them. The Zimbabwean successes, if you have been following, have been a result of some negotiations between Zimbabwe and the countries where these monies were kept. Some of the money was actually returned by Zimbabweans.

 

Sir, one thing for sure is that the money will not continue to be hidden. This is a timely call for all Zambians who have stashed away their money. The world is getting more and resolved to end the practice. Like I said, Resolution Number 7/1 was on strengthening mutual legal assistance for international co-operation and asset recovery. That resolution was passed by 166 countries. So, the hon. Member can rest assured that it is just a matter of time before we also get to a point where assets suspected to have been stolen and stashed away in safe havens are traced. If they are found to have been illicitly acquired and taken out of this country, they will be brought back to the people who own them. However, I cannot say more, except to indicate that there is already a lot of work being done by the investigative wings of the Government on some of the safe havens. Pretty soon, we shall get there. So, those who have money stashed away in those places are advised to bring it back before they are forced to do so by the law.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Jamba (Mwembezhi): Mr Speaker, a perception can destroy the reputation of a country, and our reputation has been dented by a bad perception, as the hon. Minister rightly put it. A person in Zambia said that the President is corrupt or used a particular amount of money. Thereafter, someone who is not a Government spokesperson defended the President. Why does the Government spokesperson or relevant ministry not respond to such allegations? Is it because the allegations are true? Is the Government working together to clear such perceptions, instead of leaving the work to people who are not mandated to speak for the Government?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, like I indicated, perceptions are created by us. It is interesting that we are lamenting the fact that some people have the tendency to call others corrupt without any evidence. When they go on political platforms, they run out of ideas to sell for them to gain support. So, they talk about corruption. As to why the Government Spokesperson has remained quiet about such allegations, the truth is that some things do not need a response. If a person comes to you all the time saying the same thing about you, responding to every nonsensical statement might just give them some credence.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: So, as a responsible Government, sometimes, we let the trash be and hope that the people will see it for what it is. We do not have the time to respond to every social media and newspaper attack. Even in this House, unfortunately, we sometimes hear some people say “masholi” while pointing at us. If we were to respond to every statement like that, we would not achieve much.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Meaning?

 

Mr Lubinda: Meaning, “thieves.”

 

Sir, while this Government is thinking about enhancing the law to make sure that the fight against corruption is won, Hon. Jamba is at liberty to come up with ideas for solving the problems as well. This fight is ours together. It cannot be won if it is only left to one part of the House. It ought to be won by all of us. Therefore, I hope that all of us will participate in it

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Mweetwa: You are being corrupt alone.

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Choma Central, you know that is inappropriate. If you have a question, just indicate to ask it.

 

The hon. Member for Livingstone may ask his question.

 

Mr Jere (Livingstone): Mr Speaker, the former President, Mr Michael Chilufya Sata, may his soul rest in peace, is on record saying that before investigations were instituted against hon. Cabinet Ministers, permission needed to be sought from him. The current President is also on record saying “Ubomba mwibala, alya mwibala”, meaning, “He who works in the field must eat from the field”. Is that the status quo?

 

Mr Speaker: What status quo?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Ubomba mwibala!

 

Mr Jere: Do investigators still need permission from the Head of State to institute investigations against hon. Ministers? 

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, President Michael Chilufya Sata, may his soul rest in peace, and his successor, President Edgar Chagwa Lungu, made it clear that when an officer of the State, particularly an hon. Minister, is being investigated, the appointing authority must be made aware so that they may facilitate either the suspension or dismissal of that officer so that they are investigated. President Edgar Lungu indicated, in this House, how he dismissed one of his colleagues. He said that he had received a report that a particular hon. Minister was being investigated and he asked him to pave way for investigations to be conducted. The President actually lamented the fact that after he was given the report upon which he acted, the ACC took too long to conclude its investigations. He did not say, “Seek my permission before you investigate”. What he said, which remains the status quo, is that he must be informed so that he can facilitate for that person to be removed from office for investigations to be carried out.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Ms Katuta (Chienge): Mr Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister of Justice for his statement, which I have followed, and the issue of we, Zambians, being the ones who are alarming the international community by stating that this country is corrupt has been raised.

 

Sir, when an hon. Minister resigns or is fired from the Patriotic Front (PF) Government, his or her fellow PF members start saying that their colleague is corrupt while we, who are not PF members just follow events. Why is it that when somebody leaves the Government, the PF Members start alleging that they are corrupt? Does it mean that when in the Government, people are protected from being exposed as corrupt hon. Ministers?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, there are several people on this side of the House (indicated the right) who may have, at one time or another, been disappointed. Without meaning to embarrass anyone, I will start with myself. Another is Hon. Dora Siliya.

 

Mr Speaker: Order, hon. Minister of Justice!

 

Laughter

 

Mr Speaker: I know that you want to be illustrative and, perhaps, factual, but we will run into another difficulty if we begin debating ourselves. Find a way of making the point without pointing at anybody. I am sure that you can do that.

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I thank you. I will not make reference to any particular individual.

 

Sir, a number of people have been disappointed, but not everybody reacted in the same manner. There are some who took it with grace and continued with business with their lives. There were others who, the moment they were shown the door, turned around and started casting aspersions on the people with whom they had worked. Therefore, the case to which the hon. Member has alluded cannot be generalised. This is also about personalities. I have mentioned two and I do not want to go on. However, there are people who are just made differently. It is their own chemistry and I do not think that the chemistry of two should be used to look upon all these people here as though they were the same. As a matter of fact, when I said we were the ones who created this perception by all the false allegations we make, I did not exclude anyone. Even those who after having served the Government decide to cast aspersions on it are part of those who are making false allegations. I would like to see some of the people who make these allegations go to the ACC and adduce evidence so that those who are corrupt are netted. This is what I am saying.

 

Sir, I would like to tell the hon. Member for Chienge Parliamentary Constituency that if we all stop making wild allegations about each other, the perception of Zambia will change.

 

Mr Speaker, I thank you.

 

Ms Tambatamba (Kasempa): Mr Speaker, I recently listened to a radio programme on which President Lungu said that the misapplication of funds was allowable because there were circumstances that would make it difficult for one to get the required authorisation from the Secretary to the Treasury. How will the Government prevent that channel of corruption if there is a Presidential statement that excuses the misapplication of funds?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, when I was a green horn in Parliament, I also, once in a while, misused terms and caught myself referring to misappropriation of funds as though it was synonymous to misapplication. The President was making a clarification that when there is a variation of money and the auditors see that, when they report, they would say that the money was meant for this Vote or for this purpose. However, in the implementation, the money was moved to another purpose. That is misapplication, but it is not corruption or misappropriation. Misappropriation is the one that is unacceptable because that is getting Government funds for one’s private use. Misapplication is where money is moved from one Vote to another because of the difficult circumstances in which the controlling officers may find themselves. I am sure that the hon. Minister of Finance, when she has the opportunity, especially when she presents the Budget, will read the first pages of the Budget, which show that controlling officers have the authority to vary funds, subject to the approval of the Secretary to the Treasury.

 

I thank you, Sir.

 

Mr Chaatila (Moomba): Mr Speaker, it is said that prevention is better than cure. I wish I could see the hon. Minister. I cannot see him because of the camera person.

 

Sir, in his statement, ...

 

Mr Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Moomba Parliamentary Constituency!

 

 Could you ask your question again because the hon. Minister of Justice missed it.

 

Mr Chaatila: Mr Speaker, in his statement, the hon. Minister read out resolutions, one of which indicated that the Government is taking preventive measures to fight corruption. Going by its resolutions, what measures will the Government put in place to fight the scourge?

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, I am sorry, I really tried to follow the question, but my hon. Colleague did not speak loudly enough for me to hear. I did not get the question quite clearly.

 

Mr Speaker: Hon. Member for Moomba, could you summarise your question.

 

Mr Chaatila: Mr Speaker, in his closing remarks, the hon. Minister read out the resolutions of the meeting he attended. I think that Resolution Number 5 was on the Government taking preventive measures to fight corruption.

 

Business was suspended from 1640 hours until 1700 h

                                             

[MADAM FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Mr Chaatila: Madam Speaker, before business was suspended, I was saying that one of the resolutions that the hon. Minister had highlighted was on taking preventative measures to fight corruption. What measures are being taken to enhance the fight against corruption?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, ...

 

Mr Ngulube: Hammer, Minister!

 

Mr Lubinda: ... I indicated that we are revising laws to aid in the fight against corruption. I also indicated that we are concerned about, for instance, the exclusion of State officers and constitutional office holders from the definition of ‘public officers’ in the Constitution with regards to the declaration of assets, incomes and liabilities on an annual basis. We would like to amend that so that State officers and constitutional office holders are included in the declarations. I also indicated that we are amending the Anti-Corruption Commission Act to make it more stringent in the fight against corruption. However, more importantly, it is not just the laws, but also the conduct of citizens. We all ought to be engaged in the fight against corruption.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Mwiinga (Chikankata): Madam Speaker, having attended a conference at a huge expense to the Government, what assurances can the hon. Minister, Bo Lubinda, give this House and the nation at large that we will see a serious fight against corruption, including the investigation of those in leadership who are perceived to be corrupt?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam, the ACC is not hindered from investigating any case taken before it. This is the reason I keep repeating the fact that those who have evidence against corrupt people should provide it to the ACC so that people are investigated. My attendance of the conference does not mean that the ACC will automatically start investigating people. The commission is mandated by an Act of Parliament to investigate all cases of corruption brought before it.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Nanjuwa: Madam Speaker, I am aware that the bureaucratic procedures in the Civil Service promote corruption. Having heard the President, at some point, advise on cutting down on red tape in the Government, what measures are being put in place to reduce bureaucracy in the procurement process?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam, indeed, bureaucracy and red tape are fodder for corrupt practices. The hon. Minister of Finance recently presented an amendment to the Public Financial Management Act through which a lot of excess fat in procedures is being removed. Pretty soon, she will present the Public-Private Partnership Act, which will streamline the operations of public-private partnerships (PPPs) and the Zambia Privatisation Agency (ZPA). All these measures are meant to enhance efficiency and reduce the bottlenecks that create a fertile ground for people to corrupt public officers in the pursuance of goods and services. We are committed to reducing red tape in the provision of Government services to the people of Zambia.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Fungulwe (Lufwanyama): Madam Speaker, I have followed the hon. Minister’s responses, in which he has constantly urged all of us to come together and fight corruption. The people of Zambia have spoken a lot about the fire tenders. One fire tender cost us US$1 million when we could have bought it for US$200,000 elsewhere. Does the hon. Minister not think that Zambians’ speaking out on this issue was one way of trying to safeguard public resources?

 

Mr Mung’andu: What is the question?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: What is your question on the statement that the hon. Minister issued?

 

Mr Fungulwe: Madam, does the hon. Minister not think that the sentiments expressed by Zambians on the fire tenders were their way of telling the Executive that there was corruption?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member has given an example. The Government has been calling the citizens to participate.

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam, indeed, the Government has been calling upon citizens to participate and I have called upon my fellow hon. Members of Parliament to take an active role in the fight against corruption. However, rumour mongering is not part of the fight against corruption. This is the reason I have repeated the call for those who have evidence to present it to lawful Government agencies for them to investigate, instead of screaming out loud all over the place. If they present information, but the ACC refuses to act, then, they can complain. They cannot complain simply because they shouted the loudest about corruption, but nobody made follow-ups.

 

Madam Speaker, I appeal to my colleagues, to understand that those sentiments that are being raised all add to the perception about which we are talking. One person can say something is too expensive without necessarily adducing evidence that there was somebody who was involved in a corrupt act. Once information is provided to the law enforcement agencies, the culprits will be followed up.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Siwale (Mafinga): Madam Speaker, I find it very difficult to understand why the hon. Minister says that those who are making unsubstantiated allegations on corruption should report to the relevant security wings. Does he not think that the people who make the allegations about corruption, deep down their hearts, know that there is no evidence of corruption? Why does the Government not summon such people to the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), the Drug Enforcement Commission (DEC) and the police so that they can substantiate those allegations, which are bent on bringing the Government down?

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, I do not think that I can afford to make the point any better than the hon. Member for Mafinga has done.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: When I presented the budget for the ACC, I called upon the commission to also follow the people who make these allegations. It seems, however, that the commission has not done so to date. So, I hope that it has heard from my dear brother that we, Zambians, are now getting sick and tired of being fed on many incorrect accusations and unnecessary innuendos without the ACC following up to verify.

 

Mr Michelo: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: If need be, we may have to amend the Anti-Corruption Commission Act so that those who accuse others are compelled by law to lodge in a formal report to the ACC.

 

Ms Siliya: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Indeed, all of us are suffering because of unguarded accusations. Like I said earlier, if one has an issue with a person, the best thing to do is go to the press and call them corrupt. You dent their image forever, yet you go scot-free.

 

Hon. Member, if you moved an amendment, I can assure you, judging from the cheering that was heard from one side of the House, you would get a lot of support.

 

Mr Sichone: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: You may also visit the ACC and ask if it can include that on the list of amendments it is proposing to the Anti-Corruption Commission Act. It is a very important suggestion.

 

Madam Speaker, it is very interesting that the people who are quick to call others corrupt are also the ones saying we should amend the law that stops people from defaming others. You may have read in the press in the recent past of people calling on the hon. Minister of Justice to amend the Penal Code so that casting aspersions on the President ceases to be an offence. These are the people who are continuously calling the President a thief, liar and corrupt, but they also want the law to be amended so that they are given free licence to demean the Presidency.

 

I think that suggestion by the hon. Member is most welcome and we will look into it.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Kakubo (Kapiri Mposhi): Madam Speaker, as I ask my question, it is a very sad state in which we find ourselves, as a country, because it is a well-known fact that to do business in this country, even to get a Government contract, there are many kick-backs. That is corruption. Even in cross-border business, the customs and immigration departments perpetrate corruption, but the hon. Minister is, today, saying that a trumpet is being blown unnecessarily by citizens. Is this a confirmation that this Government does not have the hunger that President Mwanawasa had in the fight against corruption? The late Dr Mwanawasa, SC, did not wait for citizens to take evidence to his table, but went out and fought corruption.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Yes!

 

Mr Kakubo: What is this hon. Minister trying to tell the country?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, yes, President Mwanawasa led the fight against corruption. However, I would like the hon. Member for Kapiri Mposhi to indicate any one case…

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: … in which President Mwanawasa personally adduced evidence of a person’s corruption.

 

Hon. Members: Here!

 

Mr Mwiinga: Chiluba!

 

Mr Lubinda: Had he done that, …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Here!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members on the left!

 

Hon. Minister, continue.

 

Mr Lubinda: … then, the hon. Member’s statement would be accurate. President Mwanawasa, like President Rupiah Banda, President Sata and President Edgar Lungu, …

 

Mr Michelo: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: … are all saying those who have evidence should not hesitate to present it so that the culprits are brought to book. If my hon. Colleague, when he was importing goods, was asked to pay a bribe, the President cannot go and arrest the culprits without a report. How will he know? How will the law enforcement agencies know that my hon. Colleague was corrupted unless he presents that information?

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister, please, withdraw that reference to the hon. Member for Kapiri Mposhi.

 

Mr Michelo: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: He did not say that he paid a bribe. He was giving examples.

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, I withdraw.

 

Madam, if any citizen is asked to pay a bribe and does not bring it to the attention of law enforcement agencies, how will the law enforcement agencies possibly know and act? They will not. This is what we keep emphasising. Please, those who are being made to pay bribes, do not pay them. Instead, report the culprits to the ACC and the police. It is no use paying the bribe, then afterwards, crying and saying someone is corrupt because nobody will follow up and nobody will volunteer and say, “I am the one who asked for a bribe”. We have to name people to shame and bring them to book. It is our duty together. It cannot be left to those in the Government alone.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ng’onga (Kaputa): Madam Speaker, permit me to thank the hon. Minister of Justice for his important and timely statement on corruption and its perceptions to this august House.

 

Madam, what is the position of the Government on the perception that Zambia is the sixth most corrupt country in Africa? What is his position, as hon. Minister of Justice?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, naturally, all patriotic Zambians who hear that people’s perception of Zambia’s corruption index is that bad feel very sad about it. However, let me just correct this statistic. If you check the Transparency International Website today, you will find that there is a ranking of African countries on the basis of the CPI, and Zambia is not ranked sixth most corrupt country. As a matter of fact, it is ranked seventeenth least corrupt country …

 

Mr Mwamba: Yes!

 

Mr Lubinda: … out of fifty-five African States.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: That is not to say that is a good rating. I would like Zambia to be the least corrupt not only in Africa, but globally. To achieve that, all of us ought to join the fight and stay away from unnecessarily calling one another corrupt and using the fight against corruption for political gain. Once we stop that, then, I am sure that we shall record a better CPI in the future.

 

I thank you.

 

Mr Ng’onga: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mweetwa: Madam Speaker, with your indulgence, I would like to state that I am a former President of the University of Zambia Student Union (UNZASU), …

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mweetwa: … and I have had many questions about the way the union conducts itself, but I have never gone to the media or to this House to castigate it before advising it on how it can improve operations, especially since I am no longer there. Therefore, those who have been presidents of the African Parliamentarians Network against Corruption (APNAC) should also advise us before they come to depict themselves as the only ones who are intelligent and qualified enough to lead it.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mweetwa: Madam, according to what the hon. Minister has said about the fight against corruption, what does he have to say about the allegation that the Government bought fire tenders at US$1 million each and ensured them at US$250,000? In my view, this could amount to wasteful expenditure because if the fire tenders were involved in an accident, no reasonable insurance company would reimburse this Government their alleged value. Let us be truthful because we have a country to lead. We should not engage in politics here.

 

Madam Speaker, when Hon. Dr Kambwili was in the Government, he was not investigated. The moment he left the Government, however, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) was unleashed on him and the police went to surround his house. Is this not a circus in the fight against corruption? I have a lot of respect for the hon. Minister of Justice and I ask him to maintain his dignity and morality.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!
 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Member for Choma Central!

 

You know that we cannot discuss matters that are being investigated. We cannot even discuss ourselves. The question, however, is to do with the expenditure on the fire tenders.

 

In your view, hon. Minister, does that not amount to corruption?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, the matter of the procurement of fire tenders has been the subject of various discussions. I am sure that unless we are blinded by political spectacles, we will remember that a member of the Cabinet clarified that the matter was reported to the ACC and the commission determined it. With regard to why a US$1 million asset would be insured for US$250,000, asset managers tell us that when they insure a fleet, they do not do it at the same rate as when insuring a single unit because there is cross insurance in a fleet.

 

Madam Speaker, the decision by the fleet owner on the value of insurance is determined by the sum of the property to be insured and the total premiums. Sometimes, it does not make sense to insure property at its purchase value because the total insurance premiums would override the cost of procuring additional assets. Such decisions are made by asset managers. It is not a question of corruption if people decide to underinsure their property.

 

Madam Speaker, I was also told that I should advise, as former President of APNAC. I would like to advise that following a constitution is not a thing that should be questioned.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Minister!

 

Please, resume your seat and allow me to guide.

 

I would like to avoid a dialogue between you and Hon. Mweetwa, who made a statement in reaction to what you had said earlier. Let us leave this matter there because we are not even discussing it. We are discussing your statement on the meeting you attended in Vienna. Restrict yourself to that.

 

Please, continue.

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, in the fight against corruption, it is important for all of us to keep in touch with the provisions of the law. If the law says we do this, we ought to do that without requiring anyone to advise us. The same applies when it comes to holding elections.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Imakando (Mongu Central): Madam Speaker, the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) during the Patriotic Front (PF) reign has been in the range of eighty-seven and ninety-six, suggesting that very little or no progress has been made so far. This is due to the fact that corruption is associated with dishonesty and fraudulent conduct, especially by those in power, and that it typically involves bribery. Can the hon. Minister confirm that there has been very little progress made in the fight against corruption under the PF Government, especially given that the CPI suggests that things are getting worse?

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: Mr Speaker, when I spoke about the CPI, I stated that those who care can go and check on the Transparency International Website, which is available to all of us, and states that Zambia, today, is ranked the seventeenth least corrupt country in Africa. That is the authority on which I can rely. I urge those who have different statistics to cite their authorities. Which authority shows that we are eighty-seventh or eighty-ninth in corruption? The Transparency International rating of African countries is not a Government document. So, the accusation that the PF Government is not doing very well is unfounded. Further, like I said, the fight against corruption is not only for the Government. Corruption permeates society and it must be a source of embarrassment, especially for us, Parliamentarians, that we are not making the progress that we ought to be making. All of us gathered here on either side of the House have a duty to sensitise the people against corruption and confront corruption with conviction. Like I said, our theme is to have a corrupt-free Zambia starting with me. This idea of saying, “They against us” in the fight against corruption will not lead us anywhere. It is our fight together.

 

Thank you, Madam.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, we have been on this subject for some time now, and I would like us to make progress. So, I will only take questions from the hon. Members for Luangeni, Magoye and Siavonga, and the only female, the hon. Member for Gwembe.

 

Mr C. M. Zulu (Luangeni): Madam Speaker, someone said that Zambia is ranked the sixth most corrupt country in Africa, but the hon. Minister told us that it is actually rated the seventeenth least corrupt country. Does he have an idea of how the ranking is done?

 

Mr Jere: On a point of order, Madam.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: The hon. Member for Luangeni has finished speaking. Could you resume your seat.

 

Laughter

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, the CPI is arrived at by surveys. People in a country are given questionnaires to state the number of times they have been confronted by corrupt practices. It is that perception from individuals that is collected and compared from country to country. That is the reason it is called a perception index. So, Zambians, Malawians and the British rate themselves and the different ratings are brought together and compared from country to country. By the way, for the sake of my hon. Colleague, the Member of Parliament for Mongu Central, whereas Zambia is rated the seventeenth least corrupt country in Africa, on the global scale, it is not among the worst fifty out of 180 countries. It is actually rated ninetieth. So, indeed, this perception is not good enough, but it is not as bad as some may wish to make it appear.

 

Thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Machila (Magoye): Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister …

 

Mr Jere: On a point of order, Madam.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: A point of order is raised.

 

Laughter

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: You have really persevered.

 

Mr Jere: Finally.

 

Mr Kambita: Finally.

 

Mr Jere: Madam Speaker, I am compelled to raise a point of order on the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security.

 

Madam, this morning, a news article on one of the electronic media showed the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the National Housing Authority (NHA) addressing workers who had not been paid for almost one year. She told the workers to go to their respective homes because the authority did not have money to pay them and that if they wanted to keep their jobs, they were to continue working without being paid their wages.

 

Madam Speaker, since the hon. Minister of Labour and Social Security is a custodian of labour laws in this country and nobody is above the law, is she in order to remain quiet and to let the CEO flout labour laws in this country with impunity?

 

I seek your serious ruling, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: My ruling is that the hon. Minister might not be aware, since there are so many parastatal bodies in the country. Therefore, hon. Member for Livingstone, the best way to make her aware and prompt her to give you a response is to file in a question of an urgent nature under Standing Order Number 31. If you do it now, I am sure that, by Friday, the hon. Minister will have a response for you.

 

The hon. Member for Magoye may continue.

 

Mr Machila: Madam Speaker, it is evident that during the reign of President Levy Patrick Mwanawasa, SC, Zambia’s rating on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) was quite low and that during the rule of the Patriotic Front (PF) Government, it is high. Could the hon. Minister confirm that the reason the country has risen on the CPI could be the PF Government’s lack of political will and vision?

 

Hon. PF Members: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, time and again, you have guided people to make factual statements in this House. To state that during a certain person’s Government the country’s corruption perception was lower than it is now without providing evidence is, in itself … what is the right word? Is rumour mongering unparliamentary? It is creating innuendo. I ask my colleague, the hon. Member for Magoye, to cite the source of his information. My authority shows me that Zambia has not risen on the CPI. As I already indicated, that is according to International Transparency. Could he also give us the authority that shows that the perception has risen.

 

Madam Speaker, as regards the question of whether there is no political will, President Edgar Lungu is on record saying that he had to disappoint a member of his Cabinet after the ACC told him that it was investigating that member. However, a year later, he had not received a report.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Aah!

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: What more political will does the hon. Member want the President to demonstrate?

 

Interruptions

 

Lubinda: Madam Speaker, this point also brings me to the question asked by one hon. Member, my friend and younger brother, on Hon. Dr Chishimba Kambwili only being investigated after he had been dismissed. In President Lungu, the appointing authority’s own words, not mine, the investigation of Hon. Dr Chishimba Kambwili started when he was still serving as an hon. Cabinet Minister. According to President Lungu, the ACC reported that Hon Dr Kambwili was not co-operating with the investigating officers.

 

Ms Siliya: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: So, the President had to ask him to leave so that he could be investigated. At least, that is the information that was made public by the President. So, there is political will to fight corruption. Like President Lungu asked, all of us must demonstrate that political will.

 

Madam, concerning money that is illicitly obtained and stashed away in safe havens, all of us must agree to strengthen the law to make sure the vice stops. We must not, on one hand say we are fighting corruption and, on another, refuse to stiffen the law to fight against people who externalise the country’s resources.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Mulunda (Siavonga): Madam Speaker, the people of this country are aware, as I am, that after coming into power, the Patriotic Front (PF) Government declared that this country would be ruled in accordance with the Ten Commandments. I am at pains to believe that those Ten Commandments are still applicable today.

 

Ms Siliya: They are!

 

Mr Mulunda: Arising from the hon. Minister’s responses to various questions from the hon. Members this afternoon, can he confirm to this nation that there is no corruption in this Government.

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, the hon. Member who asked this question obviously knows that there is no way I can confirm or deny that there is corruption in this country because corruption ought to be investigated. Unless people are arrested for corruption, how can I say that there is corruption? On what basis would I say that?

 

Ms Siliya: On what basis?

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam, these are some of the political statements to which I was referring earlier, which are only meant to destroy the image of the Government without realising that what we are doing is destroying the image of the country that we want to govern.

 

Mr Mwiinga: Aah, question!

 

Mr Lubinda: As political players, what we must ask ourselves is: What are we doing to stop corruption?

 

Madam, I am tempted to ask people to go and look at the report of the Financial Intelligence Centre to see the volumes of money that were brought into this country in the run-up to the elections of 2016.

 

Mr Mwale: Mwaona manje!

 

Mr Lubinda: They should also see which political party brought in unexplained amounts of money.

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: Where did that money come from?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, earlier, I spoke about UNCAC and said that one of the articles on international co-operation talks about how to avoid the movement of illicit resources or money. If money comes into the country dubiously, naturally, it raises the suspicion that it might have been obtained from corrupt practices. However, it is not my interest to start pointing fingers at which people are suspected to be corrupt and living on corruptly-earned money because the fight against corruption is for all of us.

 

By the way, Madam, for the sake of the hon. Member of Parliament who asked me a question on political will and the perception of corruption under the late President Mwanawasa and now, under President Lungu, and I am being authoritative in saying is, if you go to the Transparency International Zambia (TIZ) Website, …

 

Ms Siliya: Hear, hear! Statistics do not lie!

 

Mr Lubinda: Yes, Statistics do not lie. They tell the truth all the time, but the truth, for some people, hurts. Now, let me hurt them by stating that, in 2007, the CPI index ranking for Zambia was 123^rd out of 180 countries. Now, under President Edgar Chagwa Lungu, it is ninety-sixth.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Mwiinga: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: Is that getting worse or better?

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, I encourage hon. Members of Parliament to research before they come here. They must not come here and say that corruption was less during Mwanawasa and that it is worse now without laying evidence on the Floor.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: I have indicated on authority that, in 2007, Zambia was ranked 123^rd but, today, it is ranked ninety-sixth, whether you like it or not.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lubinda: The CPI for Zambia is improving. Had it not been for irresponsible politicians who want to gain mileage from calling others corrupt, …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

 

Mr Lubinda: … Zambia would have been ranked even better. So, for the sake of Zambia, I appeal to all those …

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members on the left!

 

Mr Lubinda: … who are failing to win elections on the basis of good messages to stop using corruption as a political tool. We must use the fight against corruption to cleanse this country of corrupt people, not to gain cheap political mileage, because Zambians will not buy that. Zambians are more discerning now. They are not as gullible as some think.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Awe!

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam Speaker, as I have indicated, Zambia is doing exceedingly well …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: … and, if we had support from our colleagues, we would do even better. However, the trouble is those who are corrupt always hide behind their finger. They try to use the finger to hide their own mistakes …

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister …

 

Mr Lubinda: … and blame them on the Government.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Ms Chisangano (Gwembe): Madam Speaker, at one time, the President clearly stated that there was corruption amongst some of his hon. Ministers.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Ms Chisangano: Was he politicking when he said that? Further, did he provide evidence?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Kambita: Yes, provide evidence!

 

Mr Lubinda: Madam, the President did indicate that some among his hon. Ministers were corrupt and all of us were waiting to see who would be dismissed to allow for investigations. Indeed, he came here, last year, and reported to us, like I have kept repeating, that on the basis of a report provided to him by an investigative wing of the Government mandated to investigate corrupt practices, he dismissed one of his hon. Ministers.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

ALLEGED SALE OF SOME NATIONAL PARKS AND A GOVERNMENT-OWNED LODGES

 

The Minister of Tourism and Arts (Mr C. R. Banda): Madam, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to address the House and the nation on the alleged sale of some national parks and State-owned lodges in Zambia. This statement is in response to reports in some sections of the media, which alleged that the Zambian Government, through the Ministry of Tourism and Arts, had sold Kafue National Park, Luangwa National Park and Chichele Presidential Lodge. The media houses include Mwebantu on 20^th January, 2018; Lusaka Voice on 28^th January, 2018; The Mast on 8^th February, 2018;  Lusaka Voice on  8^th February, 2018; Zambian Watchdog on 7^th February, 2018; Zambian Observer on 3^rd February, 2018; Lusaka  Voice on 7^th February, 2018; and Lusaka Times on  8^th February, 2018.

 

Madam Speaker, these media outlets quoted the United Party for National Development (UPND) leader, Mr Hakainde Hichilema, …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr C. R. Banda: … alleging that His Excellency the President of the Republic of Zambia, Mr Edgar Chagwa Luangwa, had started the process of privatising part of the Luangwa and Kafue national parks in order to amass personal wealth.

 

Mr Lubinda: Mwamvera manje!

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam, these media further alleged that His Excellency the President had sold Chichele Presidential Lodge to his friends of Asian origin, who were already operating a number of hunting licences in Zambia and that Chichele Presidential Lodge was mostly used by Republican Presidents for holidays to reduce costs on State House in terms of booking lodges. The reports also claimed that the deal concerning the sale was concluded when His Excellency the President went on holiday in Nyimba, where he was accompanied by me, as Tourism Minister.

 

Laughter

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, the official position is that these reports are mere erroneous and misleading allegations by some sections of the media, since it is not the policy of the Government to sell national parks, Government-owned lodges or sites in national parks.

 

Mr Mwale: Hear, hear!

 

Mr C. R. Banda: This is because the ministry considers national parks national assets with God-given resources that should be accessed and enjoyed by all Zambians and foreign tourists. In addition, the ministry is aware that tourism in Zambia is largely nature-based and that, as such, national parks are critical to tourism development, as they are reservoirs of nature-based tourism products. Therefore, the ministry’s position is that national parks will best serve the country’s interests of benefitting all Zambians and generating the much-needed foreign exchange from foreign tourists if the Government owns them.

 

Madam Speaker, it is not possible to sell national parks because the legislation for administering them, the Zambian wildlife Act No. 14 of 2015, does not provide for selling of any national park established by a Presidential declaration order. Therefore, there has been no sell of national parks in Zambia from time immemorial to date. Further, Part II, Section 5(1) of the Zambia Wildlife Act No. 14 of 2015 provides for the establishment of the Department of National Parks and Wildlife, which is responsible for the administration of the Act under the general direction of the Permanent Secretary (PS) in the ministry. In addition, Part II, Section 5(2)(c) and (d) of the Act provides for the department to adopt methods to ensure  the sustainability, conservation and preservation of the natural state of eco-systems and biological diversity in the national parks, community partnership parks, bird and wildlife sanctuaries and game management areas  (GMAs), and encourage the general development of national parks, community partnership parks, bird and wildlife sanctuaries, and GMAs, including the development of facilities and amenities in these areas in accordance with the management plans for those areas.

 

Madam, in line with these provisions, the ministry has adopted collaborative methods of managing national parks through public-private partnerships (PPPs). The PPP approach to the development of tourism-related infrastructure, diversification of products and management of national parks is a strategy contained in the Seventh National Development Plan (7NDP), 2017-2021. This is intended as a means for mobilising resources for managing national parks, and thereby alleviating the financial stress on the Zambian Government. It is these collaborative management arrangements that may have been misconstrued to suggest that the national parks had been sold.

 

Madam, currently, the ministry has a management partnership arrangement for North Luangwa National Park with the Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS), which provides technical and financial support to supplement Government efforts in the management of the park. This arrangement has been there for over thirty-two years now and has resulted in the park being one of the most effectively managed in Zambia. The ministry intends to renew the memorandum of understanding (MoU) on this partnership in 2018. The renewal of the MoU should not be misunderstood to mean the selling of the park by the Zambian Government.

 

Madam Speaker, we do not have any partnership arrangement for the management of the Kafue National Park.

 

Mr Lubinda: Mwamvera manje!

 

Mr C. R. Banda: We only have smaller arrangements that are specific in operations, such as supporting anti-poaching operations. In 2016, the ministry received a joint application from African Parks Network (APN) and The Nature Conservancy (TNC) for a strategic management partnership arrangement similar to the one in North Luangwa National Park in terms of size, but it is yet to fully respond to the application, as it is still conducting a due diligence on the application to ascertain the managerial capacity and benefits to the Zambian Government of such an arrangement.

 

Madam Speaker, another matter that could have been misconstrued as selling national parks is the granting of lease concessions to capable operators to construct and operate tourist facilities on suitable sites in national parks. The sites are not sold, but leased out to capable operators, who bring in tourists and manage facilities. The leaseholders pay applicable fees to the Department of National Parks and Wildlife, which is part of the revenue generated by the National Treasury.  

 

Madam Speaker, in the case of the Chichele Presidential Lodge, which is situated in the South Luangwa National Park, the facts are that the Zambia Government has not sold it. The lodge is still Government property. It was initially leased out on 23^rd March, 1999, to Star of Africa by the Government through the Zambia Privatisation Agency (ZPA) on account that the Government was unable to run it. The lease tenure agreement will expire in 2023. However, Star of Africa lost interest in running the Lodge and requested the Zambia Wildlife Authority (ZAWA) to allow it to transfer the remaining period on the lease to Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited in 2005. The request was granted in 2006. Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited took over the lodge on 1^st April, 2007. However, it also lost interest in the lodge and handed it back to the Ministry of Tourism and Arts.

 

Madam Speaker, the ministry proposed to hold on to the lease up to 16^th October, 2016, to avoid loss of the revenue due to the Zambian Government and protect the interests of the workers employed by the lodge, and Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited agreed on specific terms and conditions.

 

Madam Speaker, the transfer of the remaining period on the lease to the new operator was rigorous, as three companies, namely Puku Chichele Safaris Limited, Chichele Estates Limited and Chichele Safaris Limited, competed for the lease and associated movable assets at the lodge.

 

Madam Speaker, Puku Chichele Safaris Limited was the first company to express interest in taking over the remaining interest and movable assets from Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited. However, due to perceived delay in the conclusion of the due diligence exercise by the investigative wings of the Government and assumed frustration from Chichele Estates Limited, the company withdrew its interest.

 

Madam Speaker, Chichele Estates Limited, the second company to express intent to obtain the lease, was denied approval by the ministry because Mfuwe Lodge Limited, a sister company to Chichele Estates Limited, already had two concessions in relation to Mfuwe Lodge and seven bush camps in the South Luangwa National Park. The ministry was of the view that allowing the company to obtain the lease was likely to stifle competition and create a monopoly.

 

Madam Speaker, Chichele Safaris Limited was the third company to express intent to obtain the lease on the Chichele Presidential Lodge from Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited. Since the other two companies did not obtain the lease and the grace period for the conclusion of the transfer of the lease had come to an end on 16^th October, 2016, the ministry applied the rule of ‘next to be considered in order of application’ and advised Abercrombie and Kent Zambia Limited to consider negotiating transfer modalities with Chichele Safaris Limited. The two companies negotiated the price for the transfer of the lease and the ministry provided the necessary guidance to ensure that the Government realised the appropriate lease fees and variable charges, and that the workers at the lodge did not lose employment due to the transfer of the lease. However, the two companies are yet to communicate the outcome of the transfer modalities before the ministry can sign a tourism concession agreement with Chichele Safaris Limited.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Members, you are now free to ask questions on points of clarification on the statement issued by the hon. Minister of Tourism and Arts.

 

Mrs M. Phiri (Nominated): Madam Speaker, the media houses that like spreading falsehoods are known. Is there any action that can be taken against them? If falsehoods are repeatedly told, they seem true to some people. As a result, most people now think it is true that the Government has sold the said lodge. Is the ministry thinking of using its Public Relations Department to spread the correct information so that the truth can be known by the people of Zambia?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, all I can say is that the ministry will explore all options available to it to give the correct information to the public regarding those assets.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Mung’andu (Chama South): Madam Speaker, Chama South is among the places that have seen the benefits of the partnership between the Government and the Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) of Germany. There are many animals in the constituency because of that partnership. Considering that the Government wants to renew that partnership, and it should, is the hon. Minister in a position to assure the people of Chama South that the FZS will go beyond just protecting animals to also assisting in the management of human-animal conflicts?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, yes, we have to deal with these situations from both ways. We have to protect wildlife for posterity, and the people who live in national parks and GMAs.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Kamboni (Kalomo Central): Madam Speaker, there is no smoke without fire. Is it possible for the hon. Minister to clear the air by availing the memoranda of understanding (MoUs) to us so that we can understand the agreements the Government with the private entities?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, all the MoUs are available and, if it is the wish of the House, I can bring them to the House for the benefit of the hon. Members.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: The hon. Minister will, indeed, bring those Memoranda of understanding (MoUs) to the House.

 

Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lihefu (Manyinga): Madam Speaker, some people have been living in national parks for some time. For example, where I come from, there is Lunga National Park, where some people have been living, but they are now being threatened to be removed from there. What measures has the Government put in place to protect those people?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, we do everything possible to protect our people, except that there are those who encroach on national parks and GMAs. Definitely, the only option is to ask them to leave those areas.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Ngulube: Madam Speaker, …

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

Business was suspended from 1810 hours until 1830 hours.

 

[MADAM FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair]

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: When business was suspended, the House was considering the statement issued by the hon. Minister of Tourism and Arts, and the hon. Member for Kabwe Central was about to ask a follow-up question. May the hon. Member ask his question.

 

Mr Ngulube: Madam Speaker, the allegation that the Government has sold some national parks and intends to sell some of the remaining few heritage sites received a lot of publicity both in the print and electronic media. I wonder why it has taken the hon. Minister more than a month to clarify the issue to this House. I am also mindful of the fact that we have a Chief Government Spokesperson. The reason Zambians now believe social media stories and fake news more is that the hon. Minister’s Government takes long to respond to issues.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Your Government as well!

 

Mr Ngulube: When I say, “Your Government,” I include myself. It is our Government.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: Was the allegation meant to embarrass the Government? The hon. Minister has told us that the Government has no intention of selling those facilities and that it, rather, intends to use them for the greater good of the people.

 

Mr C. R Banda: Madam Speaker, I do not think it would have been very appropriate for me to come to the House with half-truths because that would have raised more suspicions on the issue. I had to get all the relevant facts on all the national parks. I had to look at all the papers that had been signed on concessions that the Government has given, and it takes time to put all the facts together. I wanted to present a tight case. That is why I took long to clarify the matter here.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Mbangweta (Nkeyema): Madam Speaker, is the hon. Minister in a position to share with us the difficulties associated with Chichele Presidential Lodge? I ask this question because it appears all the partners the Government has engaged to run the lodge break the agreement before it reaches its full term.

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, what has come out very clearly from some people who have had concessions to run the lodge is that they were not making the profits they thought they would make.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Michelo (Bweengwa): Madam Speaker, it is a well-known fact and indisputable truth that the Patriotic Front (PF) Government is very interested in empowering foreigners, especially the Chinese, using Avic International. Every week, the Government talks about Avic ...

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Ask your question, hon. Member.

 

Mr Michelo: Madam, how many public-private partnerships (PPPs) in our game management areas (GMAs) involve local and foreign investors, respectively?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, the PPPs have not yet spread to most of our national parks. However, we are appealing to people who have the competencies and capacity to run national parks to partner with the Government because there are still many national parks to develop. We want to restock animals in national parks and GMAs. If there are people who can do that, they are very welcome to discuss with us. We will, then, show them where to go. At the moment, the Bangweulu Wetlands, Liuwa National Park and South Luangwa National Park are the only ones being managed using PPPs.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Mwiinga: Madam Speaker, I am worried because our animals are being managed by foreigners. Are Zambians incapable of managing animals in our national parks?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, the truth is that our officers from the Department of National Parks and Wildlife also look after the wildlife. The people we have partnered with are there to manage parks so that we can preserve our wildlife. When I say “managing”, I mean financing the national parks because that is our handicap.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Ms Tambatamba (Kasempa): Madam Speaker, there are many activities taking place in the Kafue National Park, and mining is one of them. What programme does the Government have to reaffirm the purpose of the park?

 

Mr C. Banda: Madam Speaker, our work is to protect and conserve wildlife. We always refer questions on mining to our colleagues in the Ministry of Mines and Minerals Development, who have their own ways and answers on why there should or not be mining activities in areas like Kafue National Park, which the hon. Member has mentioned.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister, you are part of the Government. What is your position, as hon. Minister of Tourism and Arts?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam, there are no mining activities in the Kafue National Park.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Mwamba (Lubansenshi): Madam Speaker, I have listened with pain to the falsehood and slander against the Government and innocent hon. Ministers.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah, question!

 

Mr Mwamba: Madam, I said “slander” and “falsehood”. So, they cannot question that.

 

Madam, is the law in our country not sufficient to bring to book the people who are spreading these falsehoods?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for that useful contribution.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr C. Banda: Madam Speaker, as citizens, we need to be very mindful of what we say about our country because we all have a country to safeguard. This is the same country we are all fighting to govern in the future. Therefore, let us not forget that what we put in the media, be it social or conventional media, does not only end with  Zambians, but also gets to people who may have an interest in investing in this country. Therefore, we need to cultivate a responsible attitude towards our country. We should regulate ourselves, as citizens, and put Zambia first because it is our product. Anything else should be secondary. We are our own enemies because, instead of building what we have, and what we want to conserve and sell to the outside world, we are always trying to damage ourselves and that which we possess. How, then, can we attract investment?

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Mr Ng’onga: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for this important statement.

 

Mr Livune: Question!

 

Mr Ng’onga: Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister has indicated that Chichele Presidential Lodge has been leased out. If that is the case, what benefits have accrued to the Government and the people, especially the people of the Eastern Province?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Member for Lubansenshi for that ...

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Kaputa.

 

Mr C. R. Banda: ... the hon. Member for Kaputa for that very good question.

 

Madam, the benefits are many. People have been employed at the lodge. Mind you, apart from Chichele Presidential Lodge, Sanctuary Lodges also runs Puku Ridge. Apart from the employment that is created, the Government benefits by getting lease fees. For example, last year, we put US$258,705 into the Government coffers from rentals. That should show that the facility has not been sold. By the way, it was not only in 2017 that we got money from the lodge. In 2010, when business was low, we got US$61,600. In 2011, we got US$192,780 and, in 2014, US$236,012. Therefore, the benefits are there.

 

I thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Mutelo (Mitete): Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister is my neighbour here.

 

Madam, whistleblowers, those who alert us when danger is imminent, have been called “people spreading falsehoods”. What is concealed today by the current Executive will be uncovered when a new Government comes in power. Is the hon. Minister aware that whistleblowers are very important?

 

Mr C. R. Banda: Madam, whistleblowers can be important. However, that depends on their motives. If they mean well, then, they are important. If they are destructive, then, we cannot even refer to them as whistleblowers, but as destroyers. A good whistleblower is one who talks based on facts because they will help the country to move forward.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

_______

 

QUESTION FOR ORAL ANSWER

 

SATURNIA REGNA PENSION FUND SHAREHOLDERS

 

243. Mr Ngulube (Kabwe Central) asked the Minister of Finance:

 

1. who the major shareholders of Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund were;

 

1. how much money was in the fund, as of:

 

1. 31^st December, 1996; and

 

1. 28^th February, 2018;

 

1. whether any money had been externalised from the funds;

 

1. if so, how much had been externalised;

 

1. whether pensioners were adversely affected in any way by the externalisation of funds; and

 

1. if so, in what ways.

 

The Minister of Finance (Mrs Mwanakatwe): Madam Speaker, the Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund, which is the largest private occupational pension scheme, with 30,830 members from 162 participating employers and a net asset value of K1.83 billion, as at December, 2017, does not have shareholders, as it is a pension scheme. However, its fund managers are African Life Financial Services Limited while the fund administrators are Benefits Consulting Services Limited. These are sisters companies with the same shareholders.

 

Madam Speaker, the shareholders in African Life Financial Services Limited and Benefits Consulting Services Limited are Botswana Insurance Fund Management Limited from Botswana, which owns 49 per cent, and Menel Management Services Limited, a Zambian company, which owns 51 per cent.

 

Madam Speaker, the shareholders of Menel Management Services Limited, who are all Zambians, are:

 

1. Mr Munakupya Hantuba, who owns 39 per cent;

 

1. Mr Valentine Chitalu, who owns 30.5 per cent; and

 

1. Mr Hakainde Hichilema, who owns 30.5 per cent.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Hon. Government Members: Stealing from the people!

 

Mr Lubinda: Mwamvera manje? Corruption!

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speakers: Order!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, Botswana Insurance Fund Management Limited is 100 per cent owned by Botswana Insurance Holdings Limited.

 

Madam Speaker, in 1996, Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund had a different reporting calendar, which was March, not December. As at 31^st March, 1996, the net assets of the company were K5.08 million in rebased currency. As of 28^th February, 2018, from the unaudited quarterly accounts, the fund asset value, as at December, 2017, stood at K1.83 billion. The audited financial accounts for December, 2017, are expected at the end of March, 2018.

 

Madam Speaker, the most recent audit report is for 31^st December, 2016, and it shows that the net assets stood at K1.851 billion.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, with regard to externalisation of funds, the answer is, yes, the fund has investments outside Zambia. The externalisation was done within the 30 per cent of net assets permitted in the Pension Scheme Regulations Act of 1996 and Statutory Instrument (SI) No. 141 of 2011.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: However, the approval of the ministry was not sought, as required by law. The regulator will, therefore, impose appropriate sanctions on the trustees and the fund for non-adherence to the provisions of the law. Further, the regulator will request the fund managers to recall the funds.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, the fund had unaudited investments outside Zambia amounting to K452.95 million, which is the equivalent of US$46.46 million, as at 28^th February, 2018. The statutory auditor, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and a special independent auditor, Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler (KPMG), both confirmed the existence of offshore investments that are reflected in the company’s books of accounts.

 

Madam Speaker, the members of the fund are not adversely affected because the fund is performing well.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: The externalised funds are part of the broader investment funds, which allow for diversification and, hence, risk reduction. It should be noted that the law allows for external investments of up to 30 per cent of net assets with permission from the Hon. Minister of Finance, ...

 

Mr Lubinda: But there was no permission!

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: ... but no permission was obtained in this case.

 

Mr Lubinda: Masholi!

 

Mr Livune: Mubotana wena!

 

Mr Lubinda: Wena bo? Auna ni kuhu wena!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, the last question is not applicable.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Lufuma (Kabompo) Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for clarifying this issue so that every Zambian knows what is happening at that international firm. Now, in no uncertain terms, is it illegal for a Zambian to invest abroad?

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, I will repeat what I said: Pension funds are allowed to invest up to 30 per cent of their net assets abroad. However, they need permission from the hon. Minister, who will only act after the Pensions and Insurance Authority (PIA) Board requests permission from the ministry for that investment to be made. In this case, that did not happen.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Question!

 

Dr Kalila (Lukulu East): Madam Speaker, let me begin by sharing my utmost appreciation for the spirit of entrepreneurship shown by the shareholders, …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Kalila: … who are running the biggest private pension fund.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: hear, hear!

 

Dr Kalila: I think that is what we need for this country.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Dr Kalila: Madam, for the record and for avoidance of doubt, are the external investments within the 30 per cent threshold that the hon. Minister says should not be exceeded?

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, the US$46.46 million is within the 30 per cent threshold.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: However, since no permission was sought, it is an illegal transaction.

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Ah!

 

Mr Lubinda: Illegal!

 

Hon. PF Members: Illegal!

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

 

Mr Livune (Katombola): Madam Speaker, I would like to inform the hon. Minister that this issue is very important in the pensions sector. It is a very important business equation. I also want to acknowledge the manner in which the hon. Minister has responded to the question. However, why is she allowing people who understand very little about this business to create the impression that there is something very criminal being done …

 

Hon. PF Members: There is!

 

Mr Livune: That there is something that …

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, on my right!

 

Hon. Member for Katombola, please, continue.

 

Mr Livune: Madam Speaker, I want the hon. Minister to note that I am knowledgeable about on this subject, as opposed to those who are just making noise without understanding the …

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Hon. PF Members: Question!

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order, hon. Members!

 

 Let us be orderly.

 

I know that both sides of the House have an interest in this matter. However, if we do not conduct ourselves in an orderly manner, I may have to curtail the discussion. So, let us be orderly so that everybody gets an opportunity to ask.

 

Hon. Member for Katombola, please, continue.

 

Mr Livune: Madam Speaker, can the hon. Minister state how long this institution has operated and, in the same vein, assure the House and the pensioners that the issue, whatever it might be, is within her ability to manage.

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, I believe Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund has been in existence since before 2006. It was an acquisition by a few individuals and it has grown over the years to be what it is today. What has surprised us is that such an institution, which is well-run, can make a transaction that will incur sanctions on itself and on the trustees for non-adherence to the provisions of the law. Further, the regulator will request the fund managers to recall the funds because one cannot send out such funds without permission.

 

Mr Lubinda: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. PF Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister, the latter part of the question was on whether it is within your mandate, as Minister of Finance, to resolve the problem.

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Yes, Madam, it can be resolved. In fact, we are in the process of resolving it. That is why we engaged KPMG to undertake an independent audit so that we could go to the shareholders at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) held on 24^th February, 2018, where the report of the auditors was shared with all the participants in the pension. This is what we have done in the process of ensuring that everybody understands exactly what went wrong and why.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Dr Musokotwane (Liuwa): Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister has just told us that Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund is being run professionally and competently, and that it is healthy. How would she compare that privately-run institution with those run by the Government, such as the National Pension Scheme Authority (NAPSA) and the Public Service Pension Fund (PSPS)? Which one would she say is safeguarding the interests of pensioners better?

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, I that is a new question, and I request the hon. Member to file it in so that I can come back to this House with the answer.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Mr Ngulube: Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister’s predecessor had ordered a special forensic audit, which was undertaken. The public is waiting to be told when that report will be published so that the people who fear that the externalisation of money will deprive them know the position. We are also meant to believe that Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund has many faces. For example, half of it is registered under the Perpetual Succession Act under the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources while another part is registered under the Patents and Companies Registration Agency (PACRA). There are other parts of it that are registered outside Zambia. As a result, we want to know why it is not paying the pensioners when the pensions fall due. Further, why did the fund invest outside before satisfying the people who have been contributing to it?

 

Hon. Opposition Members: Hear, hear!

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Out of the three questions, pick one, hon. Minister.

 

Mr Livune: That is right!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, the hon. Member for Kabwe Central asked three questions. With regard to the third, I said that 30 per cent of net assets can be invested outside. In this case, the money was invested in Luxembourg.

 

Interruptions

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, vis-à-vis the non-payment of pensioners, we have not found any case of that.

 

Interruptions

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, vis-à-vis the report written by KPMG, I need to check with the PIA whether it can be shared with the public.

 

I thank you, Madam Speaker.

 

Hon. Government Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Ngulube: Madam Speaker, why is the company disguised? There are Saturnia Regna Registered Trustees, Saturnia Regna Pensions Trust Fund, Saturnia Regna Limited and about three other bodies bearing the name ‘Saturnia Regna’. Four of them have no corporate legal personality, meaning you cannot sue them. They are fictitious or fake, in short. They do not correctly follow …

 

Interruptions

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Hon. Minister, you got the gist of the question. Can you, please, respond. Is the company registered under different names in different places?

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, one aspect of a pensions fund is that it has a fund manager who manages the funds, namely Africa Life Assurance. The second aspect is the administrator who, in this case, is Benefits Consulting Services. I also shared with the hon. Members information on the shareholders in these companies. Each fund has trustees, and the trustees who were in office until 28^th February, 2018, at the time of the AGM, were:

 

D. Kabunda,

S. Chitoshi,

E. Ng’andu,

C. Mwanza,

P. Lwiindi,

A. Chalwe,

A. Kapambwe,

R. Namanje,

C. Sokoni, and

D. Rucodumas.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, the new trustees are:

 

Ophelia Nyambe,

Chikosi Mugaga Banda,

Emmanuel Mbambiko,

Judith Lungu, and

Michael Kalimina Shamutete.

 

Madam, the employer representative trustees are:

 

Review Namanje,

Marco Komana,

Collins Moonga Hamusonde,

Pamela C. Piyo, and

Irvin Mwitwa.

 

Madam, what I am saying is that a pension fund has three arms to it. There are trustees, the fund manager and the administrator.

 

Madam Speaker, I thank you.

 

Hon. UPND Members: Hear, hear!

 

Mr Livune: Tutwa is misguided.

 

Dr Chibanda (Mufulira): Madam Speaker, Saturnia Regna Pension Trust Fund was incorporated in 1992 and it manages people’s funds. Has it been used in any public-private partnership (PPP) that the Government has undertaken?

 

Mrs Mwanakatwe: Madam Speaker, if at all any money is to be used for anything out of the fund, the trustees will be advised by the fund manager and, then, they will take the necessary action. However, our investigations did not include that aspect. If the hon. Member for Mufulira wants us to check in the report that has already been published, we will be happy to do so.

 

Thank you, Madam.

 

Mr Sampa (Kasama Central):  Madam Speaker, in the Government’s quest to fight corruption, how would the hon. Minister take the externalisation of resources without permission from the Ministry of Finance? Is this not tantamount to money laundering?

 

Hon. UPND Members: Question!

 

Interruptions

 

Mr Lubinda: Tax haven.

 

Mr Sampa: That is a tax haven in fact.

 

Madam First Deputy Speaker: Order!

 

________

 

MOTION

 

ADJOURNMENT

 

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

 

Question put and agreed to.

 

_________

 

The House adjourned at 1911 hours until 1430 hours on Thursday, 22^nd March, 2018.

 

____________