Date: 02/11/2009
Source: The Inkatha Freedom Party
Title: IFP: Liptak: Speech by Inkatha Freedom Party Member of the Provincial Legislature, in the Debate on the National House of Traditional Leadership Bills, Pietermaritzburg

Madam Speaker

This is the second time this House has been able to pronounce on the two
national traditional leadership bills, and we in the IFP appreciate every
opportunity to highlight the plight of traditional leaders in this province
and beyond. We believe that governance based on traditional institutions is
the backdrop of democracy in Africa in general, and in a democratic South
Africa in particular.

It is unfortunate that we have had to wait so many years for a legal
framework that would ensure that traditional leadership functions in a
manner that contributes to the entrenchment of a democratic culture in our
traditional communities. This legal vacuum, coupled with rapid social change
in the post-apartheid South Africa, has done little to enhance the status of
traditional leaders and their standing in our communities.

At the same time, when this legislation finally saw the light of the day,
the undue haste which has accompanied its passage through Parliament, has
run the risk of compromising the input of the civil society and the
traditional leaders themselves who made submissions relating to this
legislation during the public hearings, four of which were held in this
province. It must be remembered that inadequate public participation opens
every piece of legislation to challenge in the Constitutional Court.

We have long argued that the national, provincial, and district houses of
traditional leaders, as well as the traditional councils, should be provided
with powers and adequate resources to enable them to carry out their
functions in a meaningful way. This legislation makes an explicit provision
for support to the national House by government in respect of
administration, finances, capacity building and resources. We will, however,
believe it when we see it.

Schedule 3 of the PFMA lists the KwaZulu-Natal House of Traditional Leaders
as a public entity. But, unlike others in that category and most notably
some Provincial Government Business Enterprises like Ithala and the
KwaZulu-Natal Growth Fund which are routinely wasting public resources on
irrecoverable loans and unviable business ventures, the KwaZulu-Natal House
of Traditional Leaders continues to be grossly under-funded - to the extent
that it has not been able to afford adequate support staff to carry out its
constitutional mandate.

One set of problems, which this legislation does not recognise, relates to
the new municipal boundaries that had been demarcated in ways, which caused
a great deal of distress to many traditional leaders and communities.
Traditional boundaries had been violated, with the result that confusion
reigned in the countryside with people who were supposed to do things
together being thrown apart. The Municipal Boundaries Demarcation Board
would do well to revisit this matter, and demarcate boundaries in ways,
which would not divide and separate single traditional communities.

As it turns out, many of the newly created municipalities, especially in our
rural areas, are not viable economic entities either. This is partly because
elected councillors are failing to discharge their duties. The national
government-sponsored Local Government Assessment programme and the recent
municipal hearings in this House have revealed that some councillors have
not been seen in their communities since they were elected.

These findings cast a shadow over a belief that the constituency-based
system, within which ward councilors are elected, does indeed result in
greater accountability. It now appears that some ward councillors have even
less of a grounding in our communities than many Members of Parliament who
are elected on the basis of proportional representation.

Last week, during his address to the National Council of the Provinces in
Cape Town, the President, Hon. JG Zuma, insisted that the change of name of
the former Dent to Department of Co-operative Governance was not merely
cosmetic. We have yet to see whether the ruling party is serious about
adding substance to such rhetoric.

By virtue of a long established presence in communities, traditional leaders
often carry more authority and legitimacy with their communities than
elected councillors. The key to effective and efficient service delivery in
traditional communities is, therefore, a close co-operation between
traditional leaders and elected councillors. This co-operation must be
supported by other government departments, most notably the Treasury.

Most previous attempts to resuscitate ailing municipalities, such as Project
Consolidate, largely failed because of lack of consultation and buy-in from
municipalities. Today the Municipal Support Programme, despite the best
intentions of those in charge of it at the provincial Treasury, is running a
similar risk because it is operating on a much reduced budget. Co-operation
with well-resourced Houses of Traditional Leaders is therefore essential to
the success of local government.

One last obstacle in the way of genuine co-operative governance is the
restriction imposed by this legislation on the dual membership of various
Houses of Traditional Leaders, on the one hand, and the National Assembly
and the provincial Legislatures, on the other. We in the IFP have
appreciated that our concern about the constitutionality of this provision
was taken into consideration at committee level and eventually formed part
of this province's negotiating mandate in the National Council of the
Provinces.

At the same time, we have to express our reservations about the quality of
the legal opinion provided by this Legislature which failed to refer to a
key court ruling in this matter. Last year the Pietermaritzburg High Court
ruled in favour of members of the provincial House of Traditional Leaders
whose dual membership of that House and Parliament was challenged by a
member of the province's Executive Council.

Madam Speaker, we in the IFP are confident about the obvious
unconstitutionality of a limit on dual membership of a House of Traditional
Leaders and Parliament. This brings me to the obvious subtext of this legal
provision. When the ANC loses a municipal by-election - as it did in March
at Imbabazane, it challenges the result in court. When it loses a court
battle - as it did last year against the provincial House of Traditional
Leaders, it seeks to change the law. If this was the motivation behind this
legal provision, we will have little choice but take this legislation to the
Constitutional Court.

I thank you.