Muslim Management BBA MBA Matrimony in UAE- Find lakhs of United-arab-emirates Muslim Management BBA MBA Brides / Grooms - Bharatmatrimony.com
Muslim Management BBA MBA Matrimony in UAE Athina - Girl's name meaning, origin, and popularity | BabyCenter
Athina Girl's name meaning, origin, and popularity
Athena, Aurora, Addison, Avery, Anastasia, Amayah, Harlee, Ava, Adilynn, Elise, Lainey, Helena View Section: MERCHANT SHIPPING (CIVIL LIABILITY CONVENTION) BILL (Second Reading debate) :: People's Assembly
MERCHANT SHIPPING (CIVIL LIABILITY CONVENTION) BILL (Second Reading debate)
← MERCHANT SHIPPING (INTERNATIONAL OIL POLLUTION COMPENSATION FUND) BILL (Second Reading debate)
CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FOR APPROVAL BY PARLIAMENT OF SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY (SADC) PROTOCOL ON TRADE IN SERVICES IN TERMS OF SECTION 231(2) OF THE CONSTITUTION →
Hon Deputy Speaker, Ministers, Deputy Ministers and hon members, let me once more thank the chairperson and members of the Portfolio Committee on Transport for the work done in processing the Bills under consideration.
The objectives of the Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill [B 20B - 2013] are to enact the International Maritime Organization Protocol of 1992; to amend the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 29 November 1969 into law; and to provide for matters connected therewith. The National Development Plan points out that:
Market and policy failures have resulted in the global economy entering into a period of ecological deficit, as natural capital is being degraded, depleted faster than it can be replenished. This Bill provides one way of addressing such policy failures and also fulfils the objectives of Outcome 10 on the preservation of our environment. Output four seeks to preserve our biodiversity and to protect ecosystems and species while increasing the number of species under formal protection. This Bill is key in protecting our marine biodiversity. This legislation will not only protect our resources, but will hold accountable those responsible for polluting and damaging our 3 000 km of world renowned and most beautiful coastline.
The Department of Transport has declared the year 2013 as Maritime Year and it is significant that these Bills are being presented at this particular time. Also noteworthy is the fact that the Department of Transport and its agency, the SA Maritime Safety Authority, Samsa, have sponsored 30 students to study masters and doctoral programmes in maritime affairs at the World Maritime University in Sweden.
It is expected that the students will, on completion of their studies, be more knowledgeable in the area of maritime environmental protection, amongst other fields. This is part of the ANC government's endeavour to create the necessary skills to grow the maritime sector as part of the broader Blue Economy drive.
The package of measures in the Bill is designed to give effect to the Republic of South Africa's obligations under the Civil Liability Convention and the International Maritime Organization Protocol of 1992, and to give effect to the amendments of the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, the Civil Liability Convention.
Once more I want to indicate that, accompanying the Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill are: The Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Bill, which we have just passed; The Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Contributions Bill, which is a money Bill as contemplated in terms of section 77 of the Constitution; and the Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund Administration Bill, which deals with the administrative matters of the money Bill with regard to the collection and management of the levies.
The Bill deals with questions of liability and compensation for loss or damage caused by contamination resulting from the escape or discharge of persistent oil from oil tankers. Under the Civil Liability Convention, claimants are entitled to compensation from the registered shipowner or insurers for pollution damage suffered in the territory or exclusive economic zone of a contracting state.
In the event that the financial security of the shipowner is insufficient to cover all the damages caused, the victim is then entitled to recovering the shortfall from the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund.
Currently, vessel or shipowners are liable to pay for pollution damages up to R1,5 billion based on the Civil Liability Convention, whilst the International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund provides for an additional amount of about R2,6 billion.
The passing of this Bill ensures that South Africa would avoid instances such as the R31 million paid in 2011 for the clean-up of the pollution damages caused by the tanker, MV Phoenix. I hereby table the Bill to be passed by the National Assembly. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
NK N R BHENGU: Phini likaSomlomo ohloniphekile, malungu ahloniphekile, sizwe sakithi eNingizimu Afrika, zihlobo nabangane, thina esimele i-African National Congress ekomidini lezokuThutha kule Ndlu yesiShayamthetho sikaZwelonke siweseka ngokukhulu ukuziqhenya uMthethosivivinywa wokuThutha kwezaManzi.
Nizokhumbula ukuthi sike salubeka udaba olubuhlungu lokufika komkhumbi kaJan Van Riebeeck owafika kule lizwe lokhokho bethu ngowe-1652 wasilethela enkulu ingcindezi nokuhlupheka thina bomsinsi wokuzimilela eNingizimu Afrika. [Ubuwelewele.]
Okubuhlungu kakhulu kwezomkhakha wezokuthutha ngamanzi yilokho okwenzeka ngowe-1993 lapho uhulumeni wobandlululo esebona ukuthi leli zwe selizobuyela kwabomsinsi wokuzimilela ababelwela inkululeko i-African National Congress wasethatha isinqumo sokudayisa yonke imikhumbi yahulumeni yokuthutha izimpahla ebalelwa emashumini amahlanu nesikhombisa.
Leso senzo sasichaza ukuthi noma ungaphatha muntu omnyama kodwa umnotho wasolwandle uyoqhoqhobalwa ngamazwe angaphandle lapho okwavela khona ondlebe zikhanya ilanga. Namanje iningi lezinkulungwane zemikhumbi ehamba olwandle lwaseNingizimu Afrika eyabahwebi bamanye amazwe nokudla okuningi okudliwa kule mikhumbi akuveli kubalimi bale lizwe abasathuthuka. Ngisho nesosishi elinikezwa emikhunjini liqhamuka e-Italy.
Yingakho obenguNgqongqoshe wezokuThutha uMhlonishwa uBen Martins waphakamisa ukuthi lo nyaka kube wunyaka wezokuthutha ngamanzi. Inhloso yalokho ukusabalalisa ulwazi lwezokuthutha ngamanzi, emphakathini wonke nezinhlaka zonke zikahulumeni eNingizimu Afrika ukuze sisebenzise ezokuthutha ngamanzi ukuvula amathuba ezomnotho nokuthuthukiswa komphakathi. Seluqalile uhlelo lokufundisa intsha yaseNingizimu Afrika imisebenzi eyehlukene edingwa umkhakha wezokuthutha ngamanzi.
Kunezinhlelo zokukhangisa ngemisebenzi yokuthutha ngamanzi ezenziwa minyaka yonke kuhambisana ne-South African Maritime Safety Authority, SAMSA, uMnyango wezokuThutha kuzwelonke nezikhungo zemfundo ephakeme ngenhloso yokusabalalisa ulwazi ebantwini bakithi abancishwa ulwazi ngezokuthutha ngomkhakha wamanzi. Lolu hlelo lwenzeka ngegalelo le-African National Congress nokuzinikela kwentsha eyakhetha ukuphuma kule lizwe iye kwamanye amazwe iyofuna amasu nezindlela zokulwisa ubandlululo nemiphumela yalo.
Emkhakheni wezokuthutha i-African National Congress yathuma ukhomanda Tsietsi Mokhele eRussia ukuthi ayoqeqeshwa kwezokuthutha ngamanzi. Ubuholi baleli sosha lomzabalazo eliyi-CEO kwa-SAMSA yikona okulethe izinguquko kwezokuthutha ngamanzi kule lizwe. Uhlelo lokuthuthukisa ezokuthutha ngomkhakha wamanzi liyovula imisebenzi eyizinkulungwane ezingamakhulu amane namashumi amahlanu eminyakeni eyishumi kusuka ngowezi-2012.
Isimo sobandlululo kule lizwe senza ukuthi iNingizimu Afrika ikhishwe inyumbazana ngamazwe omhlaba okwadala ukuthi nemithetho yozokuthutha yaleli lizwe ingahambisani nemithetho yezokuthutha yomhlaba ehlonishwa amazwe wonke. Omunye waleyo mithetho yi-International Maritime Organisation Protocol yowe-1992 oshintsha umthetho obizwa ngokuthi yi-International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of November 1969. Lo mthethosivivinywa uzokwenza ukuthi iNingizimu Afrika yenganyelwe umthetho womhlaba onikeza amandla okuthi uhulumeni ahlawulise abanikazi bemikhumbi ethutha uwoyela uma imikhumbi yabo ichithe uwoyela olwandle kwadaleka umonakalo odinga ukukhucululwa. Lokho kuchaza ukuthi bekungenzeka ukuthi umkhumbi othwala uwoyela uchithe uwoyela olwandle ngaphambi kokuthi le Ndlu ishaye lo mthetho bekuzoba yizindleko zikahulumeni ukukhuculula nokulungisa umonakalo wokuchitheka kukawoyela olwandle. Lokhu bekuyodla izimali eziningi kuhulumeni nabatheli bentela kubuyisele intuthuko emuva.
Uma le Ndlu iwuphasisa lo mthethosivivinywa namhlanje kuzosho ukuthi uma ususayindiwe wuMomgameli Zuma izindleko zokukhuculula umonakalo ongenziwa ukuchitheka kukawoyela olwandle sezingabhekana nenkampani leyo yomkhumbi ochithe uwoyela kungabi wuhulumeni nabatheli bentela abathwala izindleko zomonakalo owenziwe yinkampani thizeni ethutha uwoyela ngemikhumbi.
Lo mthethosivivinywa awuhambi wodwa uhambisana nemithetho emibili. Owokuqala, yilo wesinxephezelo esesikhulume ngawo la eNdlini. Le mithethosivivinywa namhlanje kule Ndlu yesiShayamthetho sikaZwelonke kubalulekile ukuthi ishicilelwe ngesikhathi esifanayo. Yingakho sikhuluma ngayo yomibili namhlanje. Lo mthethosivivinywa inhloso yawo wukusungula isikhwama.
Owesibili, ohambisana nalo mthethosivivinywa, wumthetho wokugunyaza ukuqoqwa kwemali eyofakwa esikhwameni sokubhekela izindleko zokukhuculula umonakalo wokuchitheka kukawoyela olwandle. Lowo mthetho ubaluleke kakhulu ngoba yiwo oyokwenza ukuthi kuqoqwe imali kubanikazi bemikhumbi, ngaphandle kwawo angeke usebenze lo mthetho esikhuluma ngawo. Ngesikhathi sicubungula lo mthethosivivinywa sathola izethulo ezinhlanganweni zabameli ikakhulukazi, nakunhlangano ye-Cape Bar Council ne- Samsa. Salulekwa futhi nayizazimthetho zikahulumeni, kanjalo nezePhalamende. Zonke izazimthetho zavumelana ngokuthi lo mthethosivivinywa muhle kumele ikomidi liwuphasise nathi savumela ngazwi linye kuloko.
Kwaba khona izigaba okwavunyelwana ngazo ukuthi zishintshwe. Ikomidi lanikeza isikhathi esanele sokuxoxisana phakathi koMnyango wezokuThutha, izazimthetho nabe-Samsa. Amaqembu wonke ezombusazwe akhona ekomidini okuyi- ANC, i-DA kanye ne-Cope kanjalo nezazimthetho bavumelana ngazwi linye ngokushintsha kwalezo. [Ubuwelewele.]
Sengigcina Sihlalo ake ngikubeke kucace kule Ndlu ephakeme yesiShayamthetho sikaZwelonke ukuthi igatsha lomkhakha wezokuthutha ngamanzi ngaphansi koMnyango wezokuThutha kule lizwe aliwenzi kahle umsebenzi walo nangendlela encomekayo. Lokhu kudale ukuthi ngesikhathi sicubungula le mithetho ikomidi lihlehlise umhlangano owawuhlelelwe ukucubungula lo mthetho kanti lokho kwaba nomthelela wokusetshenziswa kwezimali budedengu noma ukumosa imali. Sathi sesifikile sizimisele ukuthi sizocubungula lo mthetho sathola ukuthi owu-DDG, okumele afike ahole ithimba la elizokhuluma nathi lisicacisela ngalo mthetho, wakushaya indiva loko wangafika. Wasithumelela ongaphansi kwakhe naye owafika wasitshela ukuthi utshelwe ngayizolo ukuthi makeze azomela uMnyango uma sixoxisana ngalo mthetho. Okunye esafika sakuthola kwaba ukuthi akuzange kuze kube khona ukuxoxisana phakathi koMnyango wezokuThutha ne-Samsa okuyiwona osebenza laphaya olwandle. Lesi yisimo esingajwayelekile ukuthi uma kwethulwa umthetho ekomidini sizowucubungula uMnyango ufike uhamba wodwa i-Samsa ingekho.
Okwesithathu esakubona okungahambanga kahle kwaba wukuthi izethulo ezazilethiwe kakhulu abe-Maritime Law Society uMnyango wawungazange wakhulumisana ngazo kwaba nokuvumelana kangangokuthi izazimthetho zikahulumeni kanjalo nabaluleki bePhalamende kwezomthetho babenokungabaza ukuthi baseluleke bathini. Lokho kwaholela ukuthi siwuchithe umhlangano sithi abaphindele emuva bahambe bayoqoqa kahle babuyele kuthina sebehleleke kahle.
Okunye esifisa ukukuchaza ukuthi kuye kwaba nesidingo sokuthi ngenxa yokuthi lo nyaka unesikhathi esifushane ngenxa yokhetho oluzayo, ikomidi liyaphoqeleka ukuthi libize umhlangano ophuthumayo wokuphasisa lo mthetho nokubhala umbiko walo ngesonto eledlule ngoLwesithathu. Lowo mhlangano wabizwa ngokushesha okwaphazamisa futhi izinhlelo zamanye amaqembu akhona kuleli komidi angakwazanga ukuba khona emhlanganweni. Umhlangano wekomidi waqhubeka ngoba i-African National Congress yona yayiphelele ngobumi bayo kanti futhi sase sivumelene ngakho konke okwakufanele sivumelana ngako la. Sawuqhuba-ke umhlangano siyi-African National Congress sawuphasisa lo mthetho ngoba isibalo sabantu abadingekayo ukuze kuphasiswe umthetho ekomidini sasiyisona. Ngakho thina siyi-African Congress siyawaeseka lo mthetho. Siyabonga futhi ukuthi amaqembu esibambisane nawo savumelana ngesikhathi sixoxisana ngezinto okwakufanele ukuthi zibekwe kulo mthetho. Ngiyabonga kakhulu. [Ihlombe.] (Translation of isiZulu speech follows.)
[Ms N R BHENGU: Hon Deputy Speaker, hon members, fellow South Africans, friends and relatives, as the representatives of the African National Congress in the Portfolio Committee on Transport, we proudly support this Merchant Shipping Bill.
You'll remember that we once mentioned a very painful matter - that of the arrival of Jan Van Riebeeck's ship which arrived in this country of our ancestors in 1652 and brought a lot of hardship and oppression to us, who were born and bred in South Africa. [Interjections.]
The worst thing that happened in the maritime sector is what happened in 1993 when the apartheid government, upon realising that this country was about to return to the rightful owners who fought for freedom, the African National Congress, took a decision to sell all 57 state cargo ships.
That decision meant that even if you could be in power as a black person, the wealth of the ocean would be controlled by the European countries where the whites originated from. Even now thousands of cargo ships travelling in South African waters belong to the traders from other countries, and most food served on these ships do not come from emerging South African farmers. Even the sausages that are served on those ships are from Italy.
That's why the former Minister of Transport, hon Ben Martins, suggested that this year should be regarded as the year of water transport. The aim behind that is to disseminate information on water transport to the members of the public and the government structures in South Africa in order to use water transport to create socioeconomic and skills development opportunities. The programme of training the South African youth for the different jobs needed by the maritime sector has started.
Jobs in the maritime sector are showcased every year in conjunction with the South African Maritime Safety Authority, Samsa, the national Department of Transport and the Higher Education institutions with the aim of disseminating information to our people with regard to the maritime sector. This programme was launched as the initiative of the African National Congress and the youth who sacrificed and left this country for other countries in search of some strategies and ways to fight discrimination and its consequences.
The African National Congress sent Commander Tsietsi Mokhele to Rusia to undergo training in water transport. The leadership of this political activist, who is the CEO at Samsa, is what brought about the changes in the maritime sector in this country. The programme of promoting water transport will create 450 000 jobs in the next ten years as from 2012.
As a result of apartheid, sanctions were imposed on South Africa by other countries. This in turn caused the water transport of this country to be in conflict with international water transportation laws, which is respected by all countries. One of those laws is the International Maritime Organization Protocol of 1992, which replaces the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of November 1969. This protocol will give government power to fine the owners of ships which cause oil spills and to ensure that they clean up the spills as well as repair any damage caused.
This means that if a ship spills oil before this House passes the Bill, it would be the responsibility of government to foot the cleaning-up bill and to repair any damage related to the spill. This would cost the taxpayers and the state a lot of money and it would be a drawback to the economy.
If this House passes this Bill today, and it is signed into law by President Zuma, the expenses of cleaning up and of repairing any damage which might have been caused by an oil spill would be the responsibility of the company that caused the damage and not that of the state and the taxpayers.
This Bill is not independent, but it goes hand in hand with two other Bills. The first one is the one that deals with compensation, which we have already discussed in this House. It is important that these Bills that are before us today in the National Assembly should be passed at the same time. That is why we are discussing both today. The aim of this Bill is to establish a fund.
The second one, which goes together with this Bill, is the law that authorises the collecting of money that will be put in the fund for cleaning up oil spills in the ocean and for repairing damaged caused by those spills. That law is very important, because it is the one that will ensure the collection of money from the shipowners, without which this Bill we are talking about will not work.
When we were analysing this Bill, we received submissions mostly from legal organisations, the Cape Bar Council and Samsa. We were also advised by the state law advisors, as well as those from Parliament. All these legal experts agreed that this Bill is good and that the committee should approve it, and we agreed unanimously.
There were some sections which we all agreed should be amended. The committee gave enough time for consultation to take place between the Department of Transport, the legal experts and Samsa. All the political parties that are on the committee, which include the ANC, the DA and Cope, as well as the legal experts, agreed unanimously in respect of the amendment of those sections. [Interjections.] In conclusion, Chairperson, let me make it clear in this august House that the water transport sector, which falls under the Department of Transport, is not doing its work properly. This resulted in the postponement of the committee meeting which was meant for the analysing of this Bill, and that resulted in careless or wasteful expenditure. When we were there and ready to analyse this Bill, we found that the DDG, who was supposed to come and lead the delegation which was to speak to us about the Bill, did not bother to come. He sent us his junior, who informed us that he was told the previous day that he had to come and represent the department in discussions on the Bill.
What we also discovered was that there was no discussion between the Department of Transport and Samsa, which works directly with matters related to the ocean. This is an unusual situation - when a Bill is presented to the committee to be analysed, the department comes alone without Samsa.
The third thing we observed that did not go well was that the department did not have talks about the submissions which were mostly submitted by the Maritime Law Society, and there were no agreements whatsoever. This resulted in the legal experts of the state as well as the legal advisors from Parliament being doubtful on how to advise us. That led to the postponement of the meeting. We told them to go back and prepare, and then to come back to us when they were well prepared. What we want to explain again is that, since we have limited time this year because of the upcoming elections, the committee was forced to call an urgent meeting to approve this Bill and to write its report last Wednesday. Because that meeting was called urgently, it disturbed the programmes of other political party members who are on this committee and were unable to attend the meeting. We proceeded with the meeting because all the members of the African National Congress were present, and we already had an agreement about everything that we had to agree upon. We proceeded with the meeting as the African National Congress and we approved the Bill because the required number of people was there. Therefore, as the African National Congress, we support this Bill. We are also grateful that we had an agreement with the parties that we work with about the issues that should be addressed in this Bill. Thank you very much. [Applause.]]
Deputy Speaker, the Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill is a companion Bill to the Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Bill, which this House considered in the previous item on the Order Paper.
The purpose of the Bill is to amend the International Convention on Civil Liability Convention for Oil Pollution Damage into law. As in the previous Bill we have just considered, this Bill is one of four in a package which is designed to give effect to South Africa's obligations under the Civil Liability Convention and International Maritime Organization Protocol of 1992 to amend the International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage of 1971, which I will refer to as the Fund Convention.
In this particular case, the money Bill and administration Bill referred to in the previous debate in this House still form part of the package, with the Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Bill completing the quartet.
This Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill must be read together with the Merchant Shipping (International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Bill, which the House has just considered. Therefore, the benefits to be obtained by the establishment of an International Oil Pollution Compensation Fund and the mechanism of the civil liability provisions apply equally to this Bill.
Indeed, as the Maritime Law Association - not "society", committee chairperson - pointed out to the committee, both the money and administration Bills need to be enacted at the same time as the other two Bills to give effect to the Fund Convention. This has been confirmed by the Department of Transport, which assured the committee that the aim was to proclaim all the Bills on the same day. The Bill contains two further important parts other than miscellaneous provisions, which deal with compensation and insurance matters.
With regard to compensation, clause 6 refers to the construction of certain provisions and references in the 1992 Liability Convention and clarifies that references to "territorial sea" and "exclusive economic zone" in the Civil Liability Convention must be construed in a manner that is consistent with the Maritime Zones Act of 1994.
The jurisdiction of the High Court to hear and determine claims for compensation in terms of its admiralty jurisdiction is confirmed in clause 7, while the area of jurisdiction of the court is deemed to include that portion of the exclusive economic zone and territorial waters of South Africa adjacent to the coastline of its area of jurisdiction. This deeming provision was one of the amendments motivated by the General Council of the Bar and accepted by the Portfolio Committee on Transport.
Clause 8 of the Bill completes the section on compensation and sets out the process as to whether a claim for liability may be limited and where that application will be heard. Part 3 of the Bill deals with insurance certificates in some details. A government ship is defined, as well as the application of the Act to ships and a limited class of exceptions. A detailed series of subclauses set out various enforcement provisions and fairly punitive sanctions for noncompliance. The final clauses in this part specify how insurance certificates are issued, extended and may be cancelled. It defines the role that the South African Maritime Safety Authority, Samsa, plays in this respect.
The DA would like to acknowledge the positive and constructive role both the Maritime Law Association and the General Council of the Bar played in tightening up this legislation. The Maritime Law Association made a number of pertinent inputs aimed at harmonising the Civil Liability Convention with the maritime pollution Act as well as commenting on various jurisdictional issues. The General Council of the Bar clarified exactly which protocols or conventions were being enacted, the exact purpose of the Bill, as well as wording some of the language used more precisely. The DA thus has pleasure in supporting this Bill.
Finally, Deputy Speaker, it is odd that we have devoted nearly two hours to debating two pieces of largely technical and uncontroversial legislation when there are so many issues of national importance that are not debated in this House. Why are we not debating the parlous state of our mining industry, brought to its knees by debilitating strikes, or the fate of learners whose exam papers have been torn up by members of the SA Democratic Teachers' Union, or perhaps most importantly, the collapse of health services in the Eastern Cape, where the most vulnerable of our people pay with their lives for catastrophic ineptitude and government failure? After 20 years of democracy, we have to do better than this. Passing good legislation is not enough if the failure of implementation and service delivery reeks like an oil spill on a pristine South African beach. I thank you. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, hon members, it is a simple imperative that both the 1992 Civil Liability Convention and the Fund Convention are given the force of law as soon as reasonably possible so as to ensure that our limits of liability, at least in relation to pollution from tankers, are increased from the unacceptably low-levels contained in the maritime pollution Act and to ensure a claimant's access to the 1992 fund.
The long period of bureaucratic torpor that had characterised the Bill's passage left South Africa in a compromised position. The delay in drafting and passing the Bill was technical and related to the fact that more than one government department was involved. Everyone is aware of the various bulk carriers that have been shipwrecked off various shores of South Africa in the past ten years.
The saying that it is better late than never fits the Merchant Shipping (International Maritime Oil Pollution Compensation Fund) Bill of 2013. This Bill seeks to enact the 1992 protocol and amend the 1971 Fund Convention to become law. This has come at a time when South African taxpayers have been under siege to pay for ships that are stranded and abandoned by their owners in our seas.
In 2009 the Seli 1 was stranded at Bloubergstrand. This was surrounded by controversy. Seli 1's owner abandoned her and insurers washed their hands of the entire affair. The South African Maritime Safety Authority was forced to spend an estimated R40 million on failed rescue operations.
In 2011 the MT Phoenix oil tanker ran aground north of Durban. Even though the High Court in Pietermaritzburg granted Samsa a seizure and sale order, allowing the authority to sell the vessel, millions of taxpayers' money was used to remove more than 400 000 litres of fuel. The vessel also accrued a bill of about R8 million in an attempt to refloat it.
In 2012 South Africa was hit by another headline: "South Africa will foot the bill for salvaging Japanese fishing vessel". That was the headline. This is the vessel which ran aground whose owner refused to cover the costs of the salvage. The question is, do they know something that we don't? Why do they keep refusing to cover the costs? Why do they abandon their ships on our shores?
The answer that one can think of is that they were taking advantage of the fact that there has been no legislation that would hold owners liable until now, as we discuss the passage of the legislation. This is the reason why South Africa is always left with the dirty work and sizeable bills at the end of the day.
Cope agrees with clause 2 of the Bill that seeks to enact the Fund Convention into law. We are only hoping that funds that are lost will be reclaimed either from owners or the fund itself. This is not impossible, because the Seli 1 does not seem to be going anywhere anytime soon. The oil spill is still evident and sea life has been destroyed. She is causing an environmental hazard.
The MT Phoenix is still posing challenges for Samsa. Millions are spent on international salvage specialists to explore options for dealing with the vessel. The prospect for Samsa to sell the vessel and use the money to cover the cost of fuel removal and refloating the vessel before it can be towed out of South African territorial waters is very slim.
In the case of the stranded Clifton vessel, Cope can only hope that the Bill will fast-track the process for South Africa to claim back expenses for the ship's removal from the owner, if she is insured, or from the fund.
The polluter pays principle affects all shipowners and it might be prudent that the Bill leaves room for a regulated environment for separate insurance in the event that they are also held accountable for the costs of the clean-up following an oil spill. Without doubt the vetting of tankers by charterers and owners of oil cargoes is now of paramount importance, and this process will need to be exhaustive and rigorous if the parties involved are to have a fighting chance of disproving negligence and contributory risk to the oil pollution damage in both the civil and criminal spheres.
Offshore civil liability is the next step this Bill has to address to be comprehensive. Floating oil slicks put the shoreline at particular risk when they eventually come ashore, covering the substrate with oil. This influences the type of clean-up that will be required to effectively decontaminate the shoreline. This extends to rivers, lakes, estuary shores and possible grass and farmlands, as well as to biological productivity and sensitivity.
The Exxon Valdes oil spill served as a major focal point in oil spill governance and reform. South Africa should look seriously at the developments elsewhere to come up with a modern Bill. Nonetheless, Cope will support the Bill. Thank you.
Deputy Speaker, previous speakers have dealt with the technicalities of the Bill and I will therefore not repeat that, but what we wish to emphasise is that there is an ever-present danger of oil spills and the resultant pollution and destruction of the fauna and flora of our maritime environments and beaches. Protecting these precious assets must be our primary aim.
The protocol essentially modifies the entry of in-service requirements and increases the quantum of the compensation amount of the 1971 convention.
This Bill, amongst certain others, will give force and effect to our country's obligations under the Civil Liability Convention as well as the said 1992 protocol.
The question of liability and compensation for loss or damage caused by the contamination resulting from the escape or discharge of persistent oil from tankers has always been fraught with difficulty of enforcement.
Claimants will now be entitled to be compensated by the registered shipowner or his insurer for pollution damages suffered in the territory or exclusive economic zone of a contracting state.
The liability of the offending party is strict, but subject to limitation. The conventions provide for a compensation of up to R3,04 billion to be paid after an incident involving an oil tanker. This is a significant and welcome increase from the prior compensation of only R210 million. The IFP supports the Bill. [Applause.]
Hon Deputy Speaker, hon members, it is the responsibility of the state to protect the land, sea and air against pollution. The state also carries the responsibility to clean up where pollution has already taken place.
A lot of taxpayers' money is spent on cleaning and rehabilitating the sea every time something goes wrong. It is therefore right that the state should have a claim against the shipowners who cause pollution. The reality, though, is that there are many other parties whose lives are disrupted by pollution.
There are people who depend on the sea for their livelihood, particularly ordinary small-scale fishermen. Their business is negatively affected during the cleaning and salvage operations. They are unable to operate or forced to operate elsewhere for weeks or even months. How will they benefit from the R3 billion referred to in the Bill? Azapo supports the Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill.
Nksk N J Ngele hansard
Sekela Somlomo, ingathi ingxaki noko ikhona kancinci ngokuba namhlanje size kuthetha ngemikhumbi nezinto ezenzekayo kumalwandle ethu. Siza kuthetha njani ngoku ngeencwadi ezikrazuliweyo ngathi sithetha ngezeSebe lezeMfundo? AbeSebe lezeMfundo sebeza kuthetha ngantoni? Hayi, Sekela Somlomo, mna ndibona ngathi sinokulahlekana okuthile, kodwa ke ethubeni siza kuhlangana. [Kwaqhwatywa.] (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[Mrs N J NGELE: Deputy Speaker, I think there is a slight problem, because today we are here to talk about ships and what is happening in our oceans. How can we talk about textbooks that are been destroyed as if we are dealing with the Department of Education? What will the Department of Education talk about? No, Deputy Speaker, I think we are losing track in a way, but we will be in tune as the time goes on. [Applause.]]
The South African coastline is home to some of the most pristine areas and biodiversity. At 2 798 kilometres, it is the second longest coastline in Africa after Somalia, with 3 025 km, and one of the longest coastlines in the world. The area of confluence of the warm Indian Ocean and the cold Atlantic Ocean produces a rare marine biodiversity. It also produces the most violent sea conditions of a busy shipping route, making the Cape of Storms the most sensitive of the busiest shipping routes in the world.
South Africa, at the southernmost tip of Africa, is especially disadvantaged in that there is minimal capacity and marine equipment available in the region to intervene in cases of marine incidents. We thus have to ensure that there is adequate capacity to monitor the coastline, as well as to intervene in and manage cases of incidents.
The variety of ships that round the Cape varies from very large crude carriers, large container vessels carrying a variety of dangerous goods and substances, chemical tankers with dangerous substances, bulk carriers with large quantities of bunker fuels to scrap vessels on the way to the breakers, etc. Each of these vessels has a particular risk profile and requires a particular approach in dealing with it.
Now I want you to listen very carefully to the following. This is complicated by the fact that these vessels are ordinarily in transit in our waters. Even the ships that call at our ports are foreign-owned and largely manned by foreign crews. The ships of the companies purporting to be South African are all registered in foreign lands, where they pay their taxes.
The exposure to the country is huge, considering the fact that there is very little economic benefit normally realised from these activities. There is no employment or tax income, only a huge risk should an incident occur. This is the story of this country and this is the case for the entire African continent.
Over the past few years we have seen ships that had nothing to do with our country or our economy foundering on our shores. Just as a demonstration of this, in 2009 a vessel carrying coal from Durban to Gibraltar in the Mediterranean Sea ran aground in Cape Town due to the failure of its engines in heavy seas. As it turned out, it was not insured and the owners ran away, leaving the country with a bill of over R70 million. In 2011 the barge Margaret, sailing from China to Holland, encountered heavy seas and ran aground outside Saldanha Bay. Again, it turned out not to have been insured as its insurance was valid only if the barge used the Suez Canal. The shipowner soon ran out of money and the state had to pick up a R15 million bill in wreck reduction costs.
In 2011, again, the vessel Olivia, sailing from Brazil to China, collided head-on with a mountain cliff off Tristan da Cunha Island, breaking into two and spilling thousands of tons of fuel oil and closing the South African fishing grounds in the southern oceans at a big cost to the fishing companies operating in that area as well as to the economy. Also in 2011 the MT Phoenix, a scrap ship from West Africa on the way to India, encountered engine problems, was uninsured, and was abandoned by its owners. It subsequently ran aground off Durban.
UMzantsi Afrika kwafuneka ukhuphe amashumi amathathu avayo ezigidi zeerandi ukuphipha loo mosharha. Sekela Somlomo, imeko yezi nqanawe kuqoqosho lwethu inzima injalo kwaye ayiqali ngoku. Kudala yaqala. (Translation of isiXhosa paragraph follows.)
[South Africa was compelled to fork out a whopping R30 million to clean up that damage. Deputy Speaker, the situation of these ships affects our economy and it dates back from time immemorial.]
In 1983 the Castillo de Bellver, carrying about 252 000 tons of light crude oil, caught fire about 70 miles northwest of Cape Town. This ship drifted offshore and broke in two and sank 24 miles off the coast. This remains the second biggest tanker oil spills in the history of pollution from a tanker vessel.
In 2000 another bulk carrier, the Treasure, also sank in heavy seas off Cape Town, spilling at least 200 tons of heavy fuel oil. The incident severely affected two large breeding grounds of African penguins on Robben and Dassen Islands and resulted in the evacuation of 21 000 birds.
Ithini ke impendulo yethu? Ndiyakuxelela! [What is our solution to this? That is a story for another day!]
The 1967 oil spill from the Torrey Canyon, which ran aground near the Scilly Isles, Italy, exposed a number of serious shortcomings, in particular the absence of an international regime on liability and compensation in the event of oil spills from tankers. That incident led the International Maritime Organization to establish a legal framework for compensation for victims of oil pollution from tankers. This framework was called the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage and was adopted in 1969.
In 1971 an International Convention on the Establishment of an International Fund for Compensation for Oil Pollution, the 1971 Fund Convention, was adopted in order to provide a mechanism for raising funds for the Civil Liability Convention. These conventions were for compensation for damage caused by oil spills from laden tankers, which are the tankers carrying oil as cargo. Both conventions were amended by the 1992 protocols, that is the 1992 CLC and the 1992 Fund Protocol, respectively.
The amendments were effected in order to increase the amounts of compensation payable to claimants. This is due to the fact that the 1969 convention had a limit of R180 million, which has become too little to cater for today's risks. Because of the South African geographic location, there are many VLCCs passing by the coastline, and the 1969 limit of R180 million proved to be minimal and could barely cover oil spills from those tankers.
Our government has acceded to the amended convention, which is the 1992 protocol, in order to gain access to the higher insurance fund in cases of incidents. This amounts to R2,5 billion per incident. The Merchant Shipping (Civil Liability Convention) Bill, which is the CLC Bill, is meant to get South Africa to participate in the benefits of the higher insurance.
One is going to ask: Why did it take so long to get these Bills in place? The answer lies in the historical context. South Africa was kicked out of the international multilateral organisations and, as such, could only apply a range of laws modelled on the international instruments, but not the actual instruments. This has invariably led to a concoction of Acts that we have to be careful does not present a conflict of what are we trying to do now. This specifically affects all laws linked to international obligations.
What we are undertaking is for the government risk to be properly managed, and to ensure that all these incidents that have nothing to do with our economy do not end up costing this economy and thus directing resources away from well-deserving causes. The ANC supports the Bill. [Applause.]
TONA YA DIPALANGWA: Motlatsammusakgotla, jaaka ke ne ke tlhagisitse gore ngwaga ono, go ya ka Lefapha la Dipalangwa, ke ngwaga wa go tsamaisa dithoto ka metsi, le gore re rometse baithuti ba le 30 kwa Sweden go ya go ithuta ka tsa Molao wa Lewatle, poloko ya tikologo le go aga dikepe.
Ke batla go tlhagisa gape gore Moporesitente Zuma o tlhamile ANC e e lebaneng le ekonomi e e tlisang kgwebo ya tsa lewatle e bile e tlhama ditiro go lwantsha botlhoka tiro le go fedisa lehuma. Batho ba rona ba tshwanetse go itse gore lewatle le rwele eng, kago ya dikepe le lefelo la go tsamaisa dithoto ka metsi. Dikepe tse re buang ka tsona gompieno ke dikepe tsa mafelo a kwa ntle, e seng tsa batho ba Aforika Borwa.
Ke batla go tlhagisa gape gore mo ngwageng ono ... (Translation of Setswana paragraphs follows.)
[The MINISTER OF TRANSPORT: Deputy Speaker, as I have indicated, this year, according to the Department of Transport, is the year to transport goods on sea, and we have sent 30 students to Sweden to learn about marine law, environmental conservation and ship design.
I would also like to indicate that President Zuma, who leads the ANC, has sound economic policies that promote marine business, create jobs to fight unemployment and eradicate poverty. Our people need to know what is being transported on the sea, how ships are designed and what harbours is like - where goods are transported. The ships that we are talking about today are importing products which are not manufactured by South Africans.
I would also like to indicate that this year ...]
... the South African Maritime Safety Authority, Samsa, bid to host the regional co-ordination centre under the Western Indian Ocean Marine Highway Project. As the Department of Transport we are obliged to support Samsa to make this project a reality. Samsa wants to host the centre at the Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centre, which is paid for by the Department of Transport. Therefore, we need to look for additional resources, and I believe that the department will get the support of the portfolio committee to make this centre a success.
At the same time, I've taken note of the issues raised by the chairperson of the portfolio committee. I want to say to you, Chair, that it is not the intention of the Department or the Ministry of Transport to undermine the portfolio committee. I want to say to you today that we are addressing the challenges that you came to raise with me.
I would also like to convey my appreciation for the effort that the portfolio committee made to send a multiparty committee to meet with me to raise the particular challenges that you experienced in the process of dealing with these pieces of legislation. We will not undermine the role and task of Parliament and we want to work together with you. But, I also would like to say to hon Krumbock that it is... [Time expired.] [Applause.]