Date: 07/09/2004
Source: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Title: Mabudafhasi: Deputy Minister's Speech-National Assembly Debate on Air Quality
Address BY HON. REJOICE T. MABUDAFHASI, MP DEPUTY MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM OF SOUTH AFRICA at the National Assembly Debate on Air Quality Management Bill
Thank you Madam Speaker.
I would like to thank the Chairperson of the portfolio committee (Name) and all the members of the parties who have supported this Bill. It is a privilege to be with you today and I am extremely pleased to be able to participate in this important debate.
Introduction
Air quality is not a technical issue that no one, apart from scientists, understand. We have all been provided with very efficient air quality monitoring devices and we have never needed to be trained how to use these devices. I am talking about our noses * we know when air is not fit to breathe, we can tell the difference between clean air and foul smells. We are all air quality monitors. Now it is time for us to become air quality managers.
The people of South Durban, Biopatong, Sasolburg, Secunda, Richards Bay and Table View have shown us that you do not need to be a scientist to know when the air that you are breathing is harmful to your health and well-being.
These people have been waiting for this Bill and have actively involved themselves in ensuring that it will protect them and all the people of South Africa.
As mentioned by the Minister, following the public hearings on the Air Quality Bill, the department has met with all of the groups who made presentations to the Portfolio Committee in order to ensure that all South Africans can make this legislation their own.
This process has resulted in a number of important proposed amendments which, I am convinced, will provide the means to properly deal with the air pollution problems many of our people have to deal with every day of their lives.
Links to the Constitution:
The first one relates to our Constitutional right to breathe air that does not harm us. Despite the arguments of the department that Bill was inherently linked to the Constitution, the public hearings made it clear that people wanted to see a clear and unambiguous link between the Bill and our Constitutional right. To this end, this link has been fully established through amendments to both the Bill's long title and objectives.
Furthermore, a preamble has been inserted to make this doubly clear * the Air Quality Bill is there to protect our health and well-being.
Emission standards:
Another issue that has been widely debated in the press is an impression that the Bill concentrates only on ambient air quality and does not make mandatory provision for emission standards.
This perception is challenged by amendments that provide for mandatory minimum emissions standards for all listed activities. The amendment ensures a 'level playing field' whilst providing for stricter standards where these are required to protect and enhance air quality.
Time frames:
A further concern raised during the public hearings was the issue of time frames. Even though it is difficult to set time frames for things that involve participatory processes, we have shown our commitment to clean air by setting clear time frames for the publication of the National Air Quality
Management Framework * the 'road map' for air quality management implementation over the next five years.
We have also set clear turn-around times for atmospheric emission licensing.
Burden of proof:
In its original form, there was a concern that the wording of the Bill placed an unacceptable burden of proof on the state before it could act to control specific activities or pollutants.
As this was never the intention, this wording has been changed to ensure that the Minister and MECs can take immediate action as soon as they reasonably believe that action must be taken.
Transitional arrangements:
Another important area of concern was around the transitional arrangements in respect of current atmospheric emission authorizations.
In reviewing these arrangements, the department conceded that these were confusing and has reworked these arrangements substantially to allow for a smooth and trouble-free transition from the Atmospheric Pollution Prevent
Act (APPA) to the new approach to air quality management.
Controlled fuels:
All of the amendments I have described have been accepted, and extremely well received in some cases, by the stakeholders who have involved themselves in the amendment process.
However, one amendment appears to have raised some concern. This amendment relates to the inclusion of a new regulatory tool within the Bill known as 'controlled fuels'.
Why it has caused concern is somewhat confusing and perhaps it is worth providing a little more detail here.
Throughout the development of the Bill, there have been calls for regulations that will encourage cleaner production * that is treating the cause of the problem rather than just the symptom. Cleaner production is encouraged when one takes a 'life-cycle' approach to environmental management. Such an approach is what motivated the inclusion of the 'control of dirty fuels' component of the multipoint plan to clean up South Durban's air.
During the Portfolio Committee's visit to South Durban, the question of how dirty fuels are to be regulated under the Bill was raised. In this regard, although it was recognized that the Bill could be used in various ways to control the impacts of dirty fuels, it was also recognized that there was no single regulatory tool within the Bill to deal with this issue simply and effectively. The inclusion of the 'controlled fuels' provision closes this regulatory gap.
Unfortunately, it appears that some people believe that this provision will encourage or legitimize the use of dirty fuels.
Although this logic is somewhat confusing, I will clear up any confusion by saying that this provision will be used to control, regulate and even outlaw fuels that give rise to unacceptable pollution * government will never legitimize the poisoning of our people.
Conclusion
In closing, I again want to express our gratitude to all of those South Africans who have given up their time to engage in the development and finalisation of this Bill. We will all be beneficiaries of your efforts.
I firmly believe that this Bill, together with its important amendments, will begin to address a problem that has been plaguing us for too long. We all have a right to an environment that is not harmful to health and well-being. This means that we also have a right to clean air. At last we are taking the first bold steps to ensure that this right is fulfilled.
Source: Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism
Title: Mabudafhasi: Deputy Minister's Speech-National Assembly Debate on Air Quality
Address BY HON. REJOICE T. MABUDAFHASI, MP DEPUTY MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS AND TOURISM OF SOUTH AFRICA at the National Assembly Debate on Air Quality Management Bill
Thank you Madam Speaker.
I would like to thank the Chairperson of the portfolio committee (Name) and all the members of the parties who have supported this Bill. It is a privilege to be with you today and I am extremely pleased to be able to participate in this important debate.
Introduction
Air quality is not a technical issue that no one, apart from scientists, understand. We have all been provided with very efficient air quality monitoring devices and we have never needed to be trained how to use these devices. I am talking about our noses * we know when air is not fit to breathe, we can tell the difference between clean air and foul smells. We are all air quality monitors. Now it is time for us to become air quality managers.
The people of South Durban, Biopatong, Sasolburg, Secunda, Richards Bay and Table View have shown us that you do not need to be a scientist to know when the air that you are breathing is harmful to your health and well-being.
These people have been waiting for this Bill and have actively involved themselves in ensuring that it will protect them and all the people of South Africa.
As mentioned by the Minister, following the public hearings on the Air Quality Bill, the department has met with all of the groups who made presentations to the Portfolio Committee in order to ensure that all South Africans can make this legislation their own.
This process has resulted in a number of important proposed amendments which, I am convinced, will provide the means to properly deal with the air pollution problems many of our people have to deal with every day of their lives.
Links to the Constitution:
The first one relates to our Constitutional right to breathe air that does not harm us. Despite the arguments of the department that Bill was inherently linked to the Constitution, the public hearings made it clear that people wanted to see a clear and unambiguous link between the Bill and our Constitutional right. To this end, this link has been fully established through amendments to both the Bill's long title and objectives.
Furthermore, a preamble has been inserted to make this doubly clear * the Air Quality Bill is there to protect our health and well-being.
Emission standards:
Another issue that has been widely debated in the press is an impression that the Bill concentrates only on ambient air quality and does not make mandatory provision for emission standards.
This perception is challenged by amendments that provide for mandatory minimum emissions standards for all listed activities. The amendment ensures a 'level playing field' whilst providing for stricter standards where these are required to protect and enhance air quality.
Time frames:
A further concern raised during the public hearings was the issue of time frames. Even though it is difficult to set time frames for things that involve participatory processes, we have shown our commitment to clean air by setting clear time frames for the publication of the National Air Quality
Management Framework * the 'road map' for air quality management implementation over the next five years.
We have also set clear turn-around times for atmospheric emission licensing.
Burden of proof:
In its original form, there was a concern that the wording of the Bill placed an unacceptable burden of proof on the state before it could act to control specific activities or pollutants.
As this was never the intention, this wording has been changed to ensure that the Minister and MECs can take immediate action as soon as they reasonably believe that action must be taken.
Transitional arrangements:
Another important area of concern was around the transitional arrangements in respect of current atmospheric emission authorizations.
In reviewing these arrangements, the department conceded that these were confusing and has reworked these arrangements substantially to allow for a smooth and trouble-free transition from the Atmospheric Pollution Prevent
Act (APPA) to the new approach to air quality management.
Controlled fuels:
All of the amendments I have described have been accepted, and extremely well received in some cases, by the stakeholders who have involved themselves in the amendment process.
However, one amendment appears to have raised some concern. This amendment relates to the inclusion of a new regulatory tool within the Bill known as 'controlled fuels'.
Why it has caused concern is somewhat confusing and perhaps it is worth providing a little more detail here.
Throughout the development of the Bill, there have been calls for regulations that will encourage cleaner production * that is treating the cause of the problem rather than just the symptom. Cleaner production is encouraged when one takes a 'life-cycle' approach to environmental management. Such an approach is what motivated the inclusion of the 'control of dirty fuels' component of the multipoint plan to clean up South Durban's air.
During the Portfolio Committee's visit to South Durban, the question of how dirty fuels are to be regulated under the Bill was raised. In this regard, although it was recognized that the Bill could be used in various ways to control the impacts of dirty fuels, it was also recognized that there was no single regulatory tool within the Bill to deal with this issue simply and effectively. The inclusion of the 'controlled fuels' provision closes this regulatory gap.
Unfortunately, it appears that some people believe that this provision will encourage or legitimize the use of dirty fuels.
Although this logic is somewhat confusing, I will clear up any confusion by saying that this provision will be used to control, regulate and even outlaw fuels that give rise to unacceptable pollution * government will never legitimize the poisoning of our people.
Conclusion
In closing, I again want to express our gratitude to all of those South Africans who have given up their time to engage in the development and finalisation of this Bill. We will all be beneficiaries of your efforts.
I firmly believe that this Bill, together with its important amendments, will begin to address a problem that has been plaguing us for too long. We all have a right to an environment that is not harmful to health and well-being. This means that we also have a right to clean air. At last we are taking the first bold steps to ensure that this right is fulfilled.
Advertisement
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE FEEDBACK
To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here
