• Version
• Download 13
• File Size 712.25 KB
• File Count 1
• Create Date March 4, 2025
• Last Updated March 12, 2025

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HANSARD 04 March 2025 VOL 51 N0 30

PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE

Tuesday, 4^th March, 2025

The National Assembly met at a Quarter-past Two o’clock p.m.

PRAYERS

(THE HON. SPEAKER in the Chair)

         *HON. P. ZHOU: I rise on a matter of national interest. We notice that on most highways and major roads, by the edges of the road, you find car breakers, different cars and this is an eyesore. We also see cars that have broken down and sometimes there are stones or tree branches and even cars that would have been involved in accidents.  I want to urge responsible authorities like Ministry of Local Government and the police to do their jobs with due diligence. If anyone is held liable, then they should be prosecuted because this causes accidents. Our country cannot develop when things happen in that way. I thank you.

         HON. NYANDORO: My point of national interest arises from the critical importance of Zimbabwe’s hosting of the upcoming 15^th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Ramsar Convention and Wetlands COP15. This is not merely an international event but it is a golden opportunity to advance our national interest on multiple fronts. Firstly, I submit that the Government must commit maximum efforts to the preparations for the COP15. This is not just a logistical undertaking but a strategic investment. We are showcasing Zimbabwe to the world, demonstrating our commitment to environmental stewardship and sustainable development.

         The success of this event directly impacts to our international reputation and our ability to attract future investments and partnership. The revenue potential of hosting COP15 is substantial. We are expecting thousands of delegates, experts and observers from around the globe. This influx of visitors will inject significant capital into our tourism sector benefiting hotels, restaurants, transport services and local businesses. The multiplier effect to this expenditure will ripple through our economy, creating jobs and boosting our GDP. We must ensure that our hospitality sector is prepared to capitalise on this opportunity.

         The event should also be used to market Zimbabwe as a premier tourism destination long after the conference is gone. COP15 provides a unique platform to tell the real Zimbabwean story beyond the political narratives that often dominate international discourse. We can showcase our rich biodiversity, our commitment to conservation and the innovation solutions we are implementing to protect our wetlands. This is an opportunity to highlight the resilience of our people and demonstrate our leadership in addressing global environmental challenges. Let us use this opportunity to project a positive image of Zimbabwe as a nation committed to sustainable development.

         Hosting the Ramsar COP15 is a momentous occasion for Zimbabwe. If Zimbabwe maximises its effort, it can unlock significant economic benefits, enhance our international standing and most importantly, improve the lives of our people. I urge the Government to seize this opportunity to ensure that COP15 is a resounding success for Zimbabwe and the communities.

         THE HON. SPEAKER: Hon Zhou, I hope the Minister of Transport will take care of your statement, the same with Hon Nyandoro. The Minister of Environment will take note of your statement of national interest.

         HON. ENG. MHANGWA: Taking a snap shot on each and everyone of us today; from the house we sleep in, the alarm we wake up with, the water we use to bath and clean our teeth, the electricity that boiled our water for tea, the road that we drove on and the building that we are in today; there is one common thread. It is an omnipotent profession that we celebrate today. Today is World Engineering Day - [HON MEMBERS: Hear hear] - We celebrate the engineers, many a time, very undervalued. It is on such a day that we need to see where the nation has handed a short stick to the profession and where we have stifled their contribution to the country’ progress. This profession is not an import from the western civilisation.

A visit to Great Zimbabwe shows that since time immemorial, we have been Chartered Engineers, professional engineers of note.  If you go to the Great Enclosure and you go to the main precinct where the royal wives used to stay, if you look at the structure, that is a masterpiece of engineering. You go inside, the temperature in there is much cooler than in this Parliament because they were great air-conditioning technicians. If you go and go up the mountain where the king used to stay, strategically you would stand in the cave, control the waves and send a message to his bride that he wants to call and through movement of waves, there were very brilliant communication and electrical engineers.

This has been lost overtime. By the time that we graduated, 20 or so years ago, I graduated on the 17^th October and by the 1^st of November, I had been employed. By February, the whole class had been absorbed; half of it by ZESA. This is no longer the case Mr. Speaker. The majority of graduates, engineering graduates, are either under- or unemployed because there are moratoriums that are there in State enterprises not to employ. There are the smaller companies that have taken over from the huge conglomerates that had management plans and skills transfer that do not have a place for skills development. It is my plea on this day Mr. Speaker, that we realise that engineering is the lifeblood of this country if we hope to be an upper middle-income country by 2030.  This I submit, as I congratulate all engineers and wish them a happy Engineering Day. I so submit.

THE HON. SPEAKER: Thank you very much. I hope the relevant ministers will take note of your statement where engineers are employed and act accordingly.

HON. DR. KHUPE: Education is the strongest instrument for removing poverty.  A hungry child cannot excel in their school work but a well-fed child does well in school.  The school feeding programme is very commendable, the only missing link is relish. Government has been giving schools mealie-meal but without relish.  When Members of Parliament were given rice by the President and we appreciate that gesture very much, some of us and many others distributed the rice to schools.  I would like to give an example on the schools where l distributed rice, they said they did not have rice as part of their menu and that they were going to include it and they have since included it. The challenge they have is that of having no relish, this is so with many schools. 

I would therefore like to recommend and call upon Government to put at least 1 hectare of drip irrigation systems in all schools with boreholes. We thank the Lord Almighty for the good rains leading to increased water levels because with drip irrigation, you use a small piece of land, little water and the yield will be very high and you can do three crops per year, meaning that schools will not run out of relish.  Pupils will be guaranteed of a decent and nutritious meal every day and this will improve pupils’ focus on their school work and at the same time lead to achieving SDG number 4 on Quality Education as well as SDG number 1 on No Poverty. Once our children are well-fed in schools and at home, they are assured of performing well at school, which will result in them getting a decent job and a decent salary.

An educated workforce will contribute to development of our country and poverty will be a thing of the past as most people will have the means to satisfy their basic needs. Once more, I am calling on Government to put at least one hectare of drip irrigation in all schools with boreholes as well as dig boreholes in those schools that do not have them so that at least schools are able to grow their own vegetables and feed their pupils without any difficulties. I thank you.

THE HON. SPEAKER: I hope the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education will take note of your very pertinent observations.

COMMITTEE STAGE

First Order read: Resumption of Committee: Broadcasting Services Amendment Bill [H. B. 10, 2024].

House in Committee.

         On Clause 15 (now Clause 13):

         *HON. MAMBIPIRI: Thank you Hon. Chair, I do not agree with Clause 15 which compels every motorist to buy the ZBC licence before they buy ZINARA licence.  When we carried out public outreach programmes, Zimbabweans said they do not agree with that. Even from the different constituencies that we come from, people are in disagreement.  As Zimbabweans, indeed we need to support ZBC as a national broadcaster but this approach is what they do not agree with.

         What is prohibiting people is the pricing of the radio and television licences.  When that is combined with ZINARA licence, it means that this will be beyond the reach of many people.  People were saying that USD30 for every term for a ZBC licence is just too much. It is like buying a goat, which means per term they will be buying a goat or they will be donating a goat to ZBC.  In urban areas, this amount is equivalent to primary school fees.  So, parents are saying the money is as high as the money they are paying for school fees in primary schools. 

         The second point of concern is the point that ZBC has different revenue streams including selling, advertising but Hon. Chair …

         THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Hon. Chair we are in Committee Stage and the Member must not be debating.  Hon. Members must just zero-in on what they want done on that particular clause.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU): Hon. Mambipiri, please continue but take note of what the Hon. Minister said.

         HON. MAMBIPIRI: Thank you Madam Chair.  People are complaining about Clause 15, the wording that compels motorists to pay for ZBC radio licence first before they buy their vehicle licences. People are not refusing to support ZBC but they do not agree with Clause 15. I would like to urge the Hon. Minister not just to focus on motorists and drivers.  The money that is required to support ZBC should be taken according to what is already happening, which is legal that every household with a radio and television set should pay every year. The money should be reviewed downwards from USD30 to USD5 dollars per household. 

         When you look at the television sets that are in the country that are around one million multiplied by USD5, you would find that ZBC will raise USD5 million dollars per year.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: I wanted to remind Hon. Members that just like what the Leader of Government Business has said, the general debate was done and now we want to debate clause by clause.  You only highlight what you agree with and what you do not agree with in this clause instead of getting into the general debate.   Our thoughts have already been alluded to. We did that when we were doing our general debate.  For example, in Clause 15 (13), lines 15 to 20, please go straight and highlight what you want changed. 

HON.  MADZIVANYIKA: Madam Chair, Clause 15 of the Broadcasting Services Act, what this clause seeks to achieve is to ensure that all motorists, before they acquire ZINARA insurance, they are supposed to pay for radio licence.  Why is radio licence  so special above others?  Why does it have so much special power given by this Act? It is not necessary Madam Chair, it is discriminatory.  Secondly, the problem that I have with this clause is that everyone who has got a receiver in their vehicle is liable to pay radio licence.  Radio licence, under normal circumstances Madam Chair, is supposed to be paid for listening to the radio.

Who are the listeners, if you are playing ZBC on your motor vehicle then you are a listener, you deserve to pay radio licence.  If I am using my memory card on your receiver, to me it does not make sense to pay. Why should you pay for that?  There should be that separation to say, am I just using it to play my memory card?  Am I listening to ZBC or not? That must be distinct because payment must be made to licencing of listeners of ZBC not for other things?  I think it is prudent for us to pay those musicians like Alick Macheso, to pay them royalties than to pay for listening to ZBC that we do not tune on. The majority of our Members of Parliament here Madam Chair, do not listen to ZBC because of its content.

So, Madam Chair, my issue on this clause is on the receiver. Can this receiver be allowed to be divided into two so that those who want to listen to ZBC, you get a receiver and the receiver that allows you to listen from your flash disk?  That must be distinct in the interest of justice.  The majority of people do not listen to ZBC.  I thank you very much.

         HON. KAITANO: Thank you Madam Chair.  It is my submission that in order to strengthen the relationship between ZBC and ZINARA on this Clause, it is critical that we add a caveat that ensures that there is an operational or an implementation agreement between the two parties in order to avoid situations where parastatals – because we have come across instances where parastatals have an operational agreement but that operational agreement is not honored by the receiver of the service.

         So, I believe we can put a caveat in this Act to ensure that there is indeed an operational agreement between ZINARA and ZBC, an agreement which is then honoured when the work is executed.  I thank you.

         ⁺HON. S. MAHLANGU: Thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am.  ZINARA is a stand-alone entity and ZBC is equally a separate entity.  ZBC should not just force itself on ZINARA.  People of Phumula were saying they do not have radios in their cars. What will they do when ZINARA works together with ZBC?  I thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am.

HON. TOGAREPI:  Madam Chair, I think on this area, we should know that we have one Government and all these institutions run under one Government of Zimbabwe.  It is critical that they can all equally cooperate.

         So, for me, ZINARA and ZBC to achieve, either it is payment of fees for listenership, I think it is very correct that there should be a regulated partnership between ZBC and ZINARA. I do not see anything wrong.  We definitely want to thank the Hon. Minister for proposing that section because it will even reduce costs and create convenience in terms of making people pay. 

         I want to emphasise that the majority of the people of Zimbabwe listen to ZBC and very few listen otherwise but still they listen to Macheso when he is played on ZBC and they dance to it.  So, for that reason, I think Hon. Minister, that section must remain very intact. 

         ⁺HON. S. MAPHOSA: Thank you Hon. Chair. The contributions that we are getting indicate that this move will be a disadvantage to ZINARA.  I am saying this because we foresee a lot of challenges being faced by ZINARA after the promulgation of this law. I do not agree with this because regarding ZINARA licences, ZINARA officials were saying that in December last year, about 800 000 people had paid for their ZINARA licences yet ZBC says that people who paid for car radio licences were around 400 000.

         What we are trying to do here is infecting this ZBC pandemic to ZINARA. When we enact this law, what will happen Madam Chair is that ZINARA already has third party insurances which we see as useless because they indicate that when you have an accident, you fix your own car and when you have an accident with someone and you are at fault, that is when the insurance pays.  This is what has affected ZINARA and has brought apathy to ZINARA where you find people not being forthcoming in terms of paying for insurances because it is difficult for them to pay for insurances.  So, they end up exempting their cars. 

         If it was not for this insurance challenge, in December, we might have had more than a million people paying.  Now, with the burden of ZBC riding on the insurance and on top of ZINARA fees, it means ZINARA has twins like ZBC and the insurance.  It is like being infected by HIV.  Taking ZBC is like taking ZBC’s illness and infecting ZINARA. 

         I really do not agree with this and the people that I represent, even though we are told not to say these things, I am saying this because I represent people.  I thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am.

         ^*HON. S. TSHUMA: Thank you Hon. Chair.  I agree with the others who are saying that the ZBC licence is too high.  Madam Chair, we are representatives of the people - the poor and the rich.  So, this money, like what Honourable Mambipiri said, is too much for the poor.  There are USD800 cars, USD1000 cars, USD5000 cars, but when we talk about radio licences, this is universal for those who have USD1000 cars.  There is a certain amount that they can afford.  So, I agree with the fact that radio licences should be paid but it should be minimal.  For example, if it is USD5,00 to be paid, it has to cover both ZINARA and ZBC licences and it has to be paid at once instead of having a condition that you must bring ZBC licence for you to buy ZINARA licence, which means we are valuing ZBC more than ZINARA. 

As Members, we need to advocate for a lesser fee because not everyone can afford USD30.00.  At the end of the year, we will be raising a minimum amount but when we bring an amount which is fair, then people comply.  I thank you.

         *HON. CHIKOMBO:  Thank you so much Madam Chair and good afternoon. I have a bone to chew on this Clause, which is Clause 15, on the basis that I strongly feel that it will not pass the constitutional test.  Honourable Minister, through you Madam Chair, I will take you to section 56 (3) of the Constitution which talks of equality and non-discrimination.  Honourable Members, for so many times, have said this issue is so unfair in the sense that it seeks to punish only those individuals who own vehicles but those who receive radios through phones and radio stations, they are not in the same bracket.  That is exactly the discrimination which is being said by the Constitution, section 56 (3) of the Constitution. 

         It is my view and my humble submission Madam Chair, that the burden of taxation must be shared fairly and equally.  This is enunciated in section 298 (1) (a) and (2).  Again, if you see what is being sponsored by this clause, it is an affront and an attack to these sections of the Constitution that I have referred to.

         Madam Chair, let me remind the House about the supremacy of the Constitution which is in section 2 of the Constitution, that any law that seeks to be enacted and is inconsistent to what is promoted, that Constitution is not going to stand.  So, therefore, I am equally disturbed, how did this Bill pass the Parliamentary Legal Committee?  It was supposed to pass an Adverse Report on those issues that I have raised because these issues are quite fundamental.

         This issue seeks to discriminate against certain individuals, which is an attack to the Bill of Rights as from section 48 to section 86 of the Constitution.  My submission is that Honourable Minister, if need be, you have to withdraw this Bill and make sure that you put your mind together for the best interest of protecting the Constitution, not to further emasculate the Constitution.  I so submit.

         HON. MUGWADI:  Thank you Madam Speaker. I want to ride on what Hon. Tshuma has said.  I think we stand to persuade the Minister to understand that it is one thing to be very ambitious about taxation as a source of funding for the ZBC and it is also another  thing to deal with what is realistic and what is affordable and by and large, that which is payable without unnecessary burden.  I am sure, what Hon. Tshuma is seeking is to convince you Hon. Minister, it is that indeed as a House, never mind the flotsam and jetsam being raised about whether people watch ZBC or they make toys.  I am sure we are all obligated to promote national institution and this House cannot take that as persuasive material to say other people choose to watch it and others do not choose to watch it. 

Therefore, we must let the broadcaster or the State institutions fall in our eyes, we cannot allow that but the taxations proposed by Hon. Tshuma could really be the way to go.  I am sure even when you are enforcing it, whether through the police or other instruments of the State, honestly, a person may say really what is the burden of me being arraigned before the courts or having problems with the enforcement agents on the roads for simply failing to pay USD5.  Let us assume they have agreed.  For example myself, when I go to the beerhall to drink Madam Chairperson, I take quite a lot beyond USD5.  It will be incumbent on myself to say I have taken bottles worth more than USD5 but then on my way home, I will have a burden with enforcement agents about failing to pay a television licence of USD5.

Madam Chair, I am sure this USD5 becomes an equaliser between the rich, the haves and the have nots.  We must have a balancing act.  I am sure Hon. Tshuma has emphasised the differences of our vehicles on the roads.  It is a realistic situation which we cannot wish it was not there.  It is real, the cars that Hon. Members in this House drive courtesy of our good Government are different from the cars that we see doing mushikashika there, in terms of the costs and everything.  They speak about the diversity of our lifestyles.  The common denominator that is there is that we are different in terms of our lifestyles, what we can afford and what others cannot afford.  That reality cannot be ignored by this section Hon. Minister. 

Therefore, I choose to ride on what Hon. Tshuma has said to persuade you on the basis that the people we represent here really are not on the same wavelength.  They are not getting paid from the same system, others actually are driving cars without lights and you would expect them to pay licence.  Let us be considerate about the amount which we have that is balancing between an ambitious taxation system but also appreciating what is obtaining on the ground.

 I must say as I sit down Madam Chair, that I seek to disagree with Hon. Chikombo, the Section he is raising is misapplied.  In fact, the very nature of taxation Hon. Chikombo, I will tell you that not every person pays -I take heed of what my colleagues are saying.  Indeed, this provision is very much constitutional and is not ultra vires the Constitution actually.  It does not violate the provision of non-discrimination for the simple reasons that taxation is sector based.  For example, you do not own a commuter omnibus, you cannot go to VID and say therefore I should pay tax for commuter omnibus when you do not have one.  This provision is saying car radio licences, for example, a specific group of people that own cars or drive cars, it means that the tax proposal is clearly targeting a particular sector of our community.  Therefore, rules of taxation in this matter do not violate provisions of non-discrimination.  I am sure the Hon. Member was mesmerised about informing the House of how he has gone far with his studies, he was my classmate but I think this one is a misapplied provision.

HON. CHIKOMBO:  On a point of order Madam Chair, I think at this juncture, you seek to protect the House …

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order, order, Hon. Chikombo!  We are going to proceed with the debate without having to repeat what has been said.  Hon. Members, please take note that you are not supposed to talk to each other. I am still here, speak through the Chair. 

*HON. HAMAUSWA:  Madam Chair, my point of order emanates from the fact that when you look at the different contributions, there is a bit of a challenge from the wording that was done in Clause 15.  I want to request that this Clause should be put aside and the Hon. Minister should go and review the Clause…

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order, order, Hon. Hamauswa! You rise and indicate whether you want to add or you want to subtract, when you say point of order and you start debating, then you are not respecting the Chair, please take your seat. 

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI):  Hon. Chair, I noticed that those who are debating are not debating about the Clause. The Clause does not speak to quantum, it speaks about having motor vehicles with radio licences.  Let us zero in on what the Clause is speaking to.  The issue about the quantum of the licence is not covered in this Clause, so when we are in Committee Stage, we speak to exactly what is in the Clause, we do not do a general debate where we bring in other issues. 

*HON. MAUNGANIDZE: Thank you Hon. Chair. I stand to support Clause 15 because when looking at the broadcasting sector in Zimbabwe, you will find that the music industry and local content creators are behind. So, for us to have quality programming, quality film industry and quality services in broadcasting, it is important to have people pay radio and television licences for them to enjoy quality production. I thank you.

*THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Bajila, you were saying a lot of good things but it does not help for you to just shout. I heard that you were saying Hon. Maunganidze should use one language. When you want to assist, please stand up and indicate so that we recognise you. Thank you.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA: I am against Clause 15 on five primitives. The first being, this legislation comes from an Act. This amendment seeks to come from an Act that was in the year 2000. By then, when someone spoke of a radio, it was merely a device to receive waves from a broadcaster. Nowadays, in my case, the primary purpose of the radio in my car is a radio free device. It has nothing to do with broadcasting. Secondly, when I am in Chinhoyi, I would rather have this clause talk to the community radio or the commercial radio station, that is Platinum FM in Chinhoyi because it relates directly to me. Thirdly, ZINARA and ZBC have two distinct mandates. ZINARA is for roads and ZBC has its mandate which is being a national broadcaster.

ZINARA does far with its few challenges and has been collecting efficiently. There is risk of pollution and there is risk that ZBC will pollute ZINARA in the process and reduce the collection rate that we direly need for the roads to be repaired in the process of trying to cure a lesser important mischief.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Mhangwa. Hon. Sibanda, please approach the Chair. [Hon. Sibanda approached the Chair]. You can proceed Hon. Mhangwa.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA: I was thinking if the same approach is utilised on the cell phones, I will be made to pay because now I use SMS and email. I should pay ZIMPOST because they have lost business from letters. If the same logic is used, I will have to pay for all the applications that are on my phone, that is those that I use and those that I do not use. Fourthly, this legislation or this clause seeks to say, if I am a multiple car owner, when I licence each of my vehicle, I am made to pay for each of them. I am not someone who has presents in all the cars -[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections]-[Hon. Mhangwa having kept quiet.]-.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Mhangwa, you are debating. If you keep quiet and listen to what other Hon. Members are saying, then I will request someone to stand and debate. If you want to proceed, please do.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA: I needed to proceed with your protection Madam Chair. The point that I was at is, if this gets to be a unified licence, it is supposed to be a unified licence which I presume it will be  a prerequisite for every vehicle licencing. It is automatic that if I have five cars, for all the cars to be licenced, I will need to pay ZBC for each of the five. This cannot work because even if I am a user of a radio, there is nowhere I can be in five cars at the same time.

Lastly, using other regional benchmarks, they only go to a household. The fact that it is a household gadget, it means you can also listen to all gadgets. If you go to DSTv, you still streamline using the same payment that you have made. So, it is best practice that if you have multiple gadgets from which you listen to, you pay just for one and use others. It is best practice. Having said that, it is my belief that it is double taxation. When I come here, I represent more than 100 000 people of Chinhoyi, one with one car, another with two cars and others with five cars. [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections]-

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Mhangwa. Order Hon. Members. Hon. Mhangwa, please proceed and wind up.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA: Thank you Madam Chair. The point still remains. If one is made to pay for more than one car, the person is being double taxed because definitely the person is double  sharing on the vehicles. The fact that you are time sharing on the vehicles, means that you cannot be made to pay as if you are using that car  all the time. The same goes for gadgets. It is best practice, check everywhere else, this is the procedure. If we choose to deviate, we are on record to say, we have thrown money at ZBC and have robbed the people of Zimbabwe through wanting to fund ZBC multiple times and wanting to fund ZBC through exorbitant means. Clause Number 15 in its entirety should go. I thank you.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: If you have anything that has not been said, you can stand up and debate but if you are going to repeat, I will ask you to sit down.

*HON. W. MAPOSA: Thank you Madam Chair. I agree with Hon. Tshuma. People should pay for licences but there should not be a combination of ZINARA and ZBC…

*THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPESON: Hon. Maphosa are you going to emphasise on what has already been said by Hon. Tshuma. The moment you say that you want to emphasise or support, it means the point you want to mention has already been said. Bring up a different point.

         HON. MANDIWANZIRA: Thank you very much Madam Chair. I do not have any challenge with Clause 15 except that it enforces the insurance companies to play the collection role of the licence fees without providing for a relationship with the insurance companies. It is easily understandable with ZINARA and it has already been explained that it is Government. However, this section also requires that even insurance companies that are not owned by the Government have an obligation to deny issuing an insurance policy to somebody who has not paid the radio licence. We are promoting double offence in that the insurance company will say to somebody who wants to insure a vehicle, walk away until you have gone to ZINARA or you have gone to ZBC to buy your listener’s licence.

Risk is higher if you do not pay your insurance policy than your radio listener’s licence. I would like to suggest that the wording of this section takes into account, first, the avoidance of promoting double non-compliance to a radio licence and non-compliance to insurance policy. Also, what is the relationship being established with private insurance companies in terms of them being either the collectors of that radio licence because it is inconveniencing to the public, to simply say go to your insurance policy provider and be told – no, walk away, we cannot do it. Unless this Clause gives authority to the insurance company to also collect the radio licence. I think that clarity needs to be put in that Clause. I thank you.  

         +HON. NYATHI: Thank you Hon. Chair. It is my desire to raise a different point to the Hon. Minister that there are areas like Gonde in Plumtree, the radio signal is not there. People have their cars in that particular area in Matebeleland South, North and other areas, there are no radio signals but people own cars. As a country, are we going to tax people, whether it is a rural headmaster, a licence of a radio that he listens to when he goes to Bulawayo to get his salary? Are we then going to charge that particular person the same amount with someone who listens to the ZBC radio every day from Harare? I thank you.

         HON. JAMES: Thank you Madam Chair. I do not agree with this Clause for a couple of reasons, notwithstanding what has been mentioned regarding the Constitution. I feel it is discriminatory against those with hearing impairments and also the Minister has not taken into account the public hearing records where the people generally just do not want this Clause. Thank you.

         HON. M. SIBANDA: Thank you Madam Chair. I really want to add my voice on this Clause to say, I really disagree with it. The fact that it is not spreading the source where it will collect the money, it is actually sparing other people who will be radio licence users. It only concentrates on the vehicle users because on a simple calculation, I realise that Zimbabwe is having about 1 400 vehicles and at the current rate, it means per term, we are likely to get about 42 million collected on 1 400 vehicles that are currently on the road and this actually pushes the cost of doing business. The vehicle users will transfer the cost to the general public and the cost of doing business in Zimbabwe will be actually higher.  I want to say, let us spread the collection even to other people who are not vehicle users. Let us reduce if we are going to focus on vehicles, let us reduce to as low as USD2 per vehicle, I submit.

         HON. MAKUMIRE: Thank you Hon. Chair, Clause 15 because of its content and what it implies, I believe it is improper to bring a marriage which does not exist between ZINARA and ZBC…

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: It has already been mentioned. Thank you and take a seat. It has already been addressed, take a seat Hon. Member. This was alluded to earlier by the speaker who debated in English. This has already been addressed Hon. Member. Order Hon. Makumire! We agreed that when you stand, do not repeat what has been said but bring in new points. When you repeat, we will ask you to sit down and you have just repeated what has been said. –[Hon. Makumire having remained standing]- Order, Hon Makumire! Please take a seat. Hon. Makumire, please take your seat. Hon. Makumire and Hon. G. Hlatywayo, can you take your seats?

You are quite passionate, you want to debate and we do not deny anyone the opportunity but we agreed that when you repeat, I will ask you to sit down, thank you. You were just supposed to go to a new point, so we are going to move forward.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: You said you are allowing everyone to debate. What Hon. Makumire simply did was to state his position. He had not even given his reasons and I think– [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: There is no need for one to have an over-emphasis. What has already been said has been said and there is no need for that.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: He stated his position, he was now going to the reasons why he is stating that position.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order, order! You have time to debate but if you repeat what has already been said, I will ask you to sit down. Order Hon. Makumire! I have the whole day and I can go into the night. It is fine with me but if you want to talk before I recognise you, we can go on, we can sleep here and I have the time to do that. Order!

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Thank you Madam Chair.  I want to thank all the Hon. Members of Parliament for their contributions to this particular clause but I will not labour you with issues that do not relate to this particular clause.  I will respond specifically to issues related to Clause 15 in the Bill.  Hon. Chair, Section 194 (1) (g) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, obligates all institutions and agencies of Government that they must cooperate at all levels.  This is the supreme law of the country; the Constitution of Zimbabwe.  The collaboration between ZINARA and ZBC is in terms of the Constitution of Zimbabwe. 

         I want to respond to one of the issues about the licence fees.  This is not part of the debate in terms of the particular clause.  That is provided for in terms of the Broadcasting Services Act [Chapter 12.06], in that ZBC as a corporation and the Minister will discuss about the schedule in terms of the fees.  So, that matter does not arise in this particular clause.  I want to distinguish a radio receiver in terms of the Post and Telecommunications Act [Chapter 12.06 (b)], which clearly elaborates that a radio receiver is capable in terms of the reception and a broadcasting service. Some of the issues alluded to in terms of dealership are well catered for in terms of Section 38 (a) of the Broadcasting Services Act.  So, we have so many landmark cases, rulings by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court relating to what we term an electromagnetic wave or radio receiver.

         What we seek to do is to collect through a radio signal receiver, which is what we should primarily focus on.  Where the particular individual or company does not possess the radio receiver, the same clause, clearly elaborates that the particular individual should have a ZBC exemption certificate or a particular individual can get and sign a declaration as specified in the Eighth Schedule.  The clause seeks to ensure that it complies that we utilise a whole of Government approach.  The Second Republic has ensured that we do away with silos.  So, this is where technology has superseded the utilisation of old manual methods.  This will ensure that we boost revenue collection and ensure that there is convenience.  I have already stipulated, in terms of Statutory Instrument 264, which provides for the engagement of third parties to collect licence fees.

         As I conclude, I would want to add an amendment to that clause, that the Bill is amended in Clause 15 on page 6 in line 17, by the insertion of ‘and companies after individuals’, I think we should move forward, we should not discuss issues that do not relate to this Clause. I thank you. 

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Minister, can you amend by reading the continuous line so that we can also be taking note?  You can submit.

         The Temporary Chair having wanted to move for adoption.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: No, we want to debate.  You did not give us the opportunity to debate, it is allowed.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: I did not say it is not allowed.  It is allowed.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Thank you Madam Chair.  I have listened to the Hon. Minister responding to the submissions that have been made by the Hon. Members.  I would like to think that the Hon. Minister did not get what the Hon. Members were saying.  I propose that this Clause 15 (4), if the Minister cannot completely remove this clause, my compromise submission is that instead of saying that ZINARA and every motor insurance company shall only issue; we delete the word shall only issue and replace with these words that ‘ZINARA and motor insurance company shall concurrently issue ZINARA licence and insurance together with ZBC licence’.  We then also put a proviso, which then speaks to the need for ZBC, ZINARA and insurance company to have sort of a workable agreement in terms of the corrections.

         The essence of this Hon. Ziyambi, I see you are shaking your head.  The essence of it is this, right now ZINARA will tell you that it is from only 800 000 vehicles that they are managing to collect licences.  The moment you then tell people that you pay ZBC on its own, the number is going to go down. It does not matter whether the law enforcement is actually implemented in which way.  So, the best way in my view is that, let us have a mechanism where this collection of ZINARA licence is concurrently done with the ZBC licence.  Then we will have an arrangement between ZBC and ZINARA.  To me that makes more sense and it is even easier administratively to work on, rather than the current situation to simply say if you do not have the ZBC licence, you cannot pay your vehicle licence.  I think it is actually prudent that we do that. 

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Thank you Hon. Chair. I think the Minister has explained, let us proceed. This clause, if you look at it carefully, I think what Hon. Mushoriwa is trying to say is exactly captured. If you read it carefully, it says ZINARA and every motor vehicle insurance company ‘shall only” issue a motor vehicle licence. In other words, there is already a relationship between ZINARA and an insurance company to issue a motor vehicle licence. The clause is not speaking about insurance companies that do not issue a motor vehicle licence but is saying if you are an insurance company and you are issuing a motor vehicle licence, then you also need to collect a radio licence. If you are just an insurance company and I walk in there for an insurance licence, I should be able to get it. If I go to ZINARA, they will ask for proof that you have an insurance and radio licence, then they issue the motor vehicle licence. This is a whole of business approach that we are now encouraging so that you do not visit ten offices to get something that can be collected in one office. This is the ease of doing business that His Excellency is introducing that it is done under one roof. So, exactly what Hon. Mushoriwa is alluding to, that is what is captured. So, I move that we proceed.

HON. MUSHORIWA: I think the Hon. Minister is deliberately twisting what I have said and in the process, misconstrues what I have said. The reading of this clause says, “shall only issue” that is the first thing that you have to do. You have to pay ZBC and I am saying, even the same thing that you continue to say that you do not want to operate on a silo system, the best way Hon. Minister, when we say that concurrently, we need a mechanism where ZINARA and ZBC has got an agreement. So, ZINARA can collect fees on behalf of ZBC not a situation where you say ZINARA cannot issue a vehicle licence until you have seen the ZBC licence. That to me is a contradiction at the point of departure. This clause as it stands, will have unintended consequences, revenue will go down and this I can assure you because one way or the other, this one is not proper and is not good for ZBC, neither is it good for ZINARA. - [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] - 

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order, order.

^*HON. HAMAUSWA: My concern Madam Chair on Clause 15, there is an issue that the owner of the car may get an exemption that they are not going to pay. There are a lot of cars that are different from these modern cars, that if you take out the radio, it becomes ugly. For example, vehicles such as 323 commuter omnibuses, radios can be inserted inside and can be easily taken out. You will realise that engineers are going to take out those radios.

         The Hon. Minister is taking it as a joke but this is the most serious issue. This is the one that is going to reduce the revenue. We have to persuade people and there must be a social contract. This clause that you have put in place that you want to arrest people but have you finished arresting thieves. If you leave this clause, it must be rectified.

^*THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Do you want to say anyone who removes radio licence, do you want to suggest a solution?

^*HON. HAMAUSWA:  Hon. Chair, Clause 15 must be rectified and started.

^*THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  I thought you want to suggest or proffer a solution that anyone who removes that radio must be charged a fine.

^*HON. HAMAUSWA: What l am trying to say is that they are saying this is a good clause but it is very bad. If we are to approve it as an august House, we are signing for a land mine that will burst tomorrow because people are going to take out their radios. That clause does not stop them.

         Amongst the 800 000 vehicles that are there, you will realise that maybe 400 000 will have radios and they will take out the rest.

^*THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: They have noted your point.

^*HON. HAMAUSWA:  We like the issue of funding ZBC but we do not agree to this clause. We want them to spread this issue instead of targeting motorists only, I thank you.

         HON. SHIRIYEDENGA: I note that the exemptions certificates in this case are only applicable to those vehicles that do not have receivers. If you look at SI 264 of 2021, it issued exemptions for people who are 65 years and above. Primarily, they are for those who have the radios and TV that we have at home but in this case, I do request in terms of expanding those that are eligible for exemption that are vehicle owners who are 70 years and above should be exempted from paying radio licences, I submit.

         ^*HON. MHETU: My argument is, if this Bill passes, let us protect the citizens of Zimbabwe because we have empowered ZBC too much. Since it is after making money, it might end up charging high fees. So, I think we must protect the citizens. Let us include a clause that says if the user fees must be increased, it must not go beyond 5% per annum, I thank you.

HON. MUGWADI:  Thank you Madam Chair. It appears to me that the clause we are burdened with for the past one hour is an administrative provision and that ZBC licences will be payable through ZINARA facility is an administrative mechanism. This Parliament, in the process of legislating, must not behave as if it should be responsible for collecting the taxes on behalf of ZBC. This is an administrative arrangement between two State institutions that operate in unison. If ZBC has made an arrangement with ZINARA, they could make this arrangement even with OK Zimbabwe, if it were possible. They could make this arrangement with the Zimbabwe Republic Police, just as they are doing in the streets. It is an administrative provision.

So, my humble request, through you Madam Chair, is that the House must not venture into administrative areas that are not within the province of its responsibility. It is an administrative mechanism of collecting what we would have agreed here. In fact, it would have served very well if Members contributing knew exactly what tax is. If we start from there, Members will understand that tax is compulsory. It is imposed by an authority and payable by those targeted. This provision is very clear.

Therefore, the administrative mechanism of how the tax ends up in the hands of ZBC is exclusively and exceptionally an administrative matter which this House must not be burdened about. Otherwise, for the sake of proceeding Madam Speaker… – [AN HON. MEMBER:  I also have a point of order Madam Chair. I have been standing for sometime.] –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:   Point of order when Hon. Mugwadi has been concluded, can you please take your seat? – [AN HON. MEMBER:  I just wanted to say….] – You raise a point of order while someone is still debating. When he is finished, who are you raising a point of order to? – [AN HON. MEMBER:  But I was standing. Madam Chair, I was up standing but you did not recognise me.] –

HON. MADZIVANYIKA:  Thank you Madam Chair. If ever we go to vote and this Bill sails through, there is a proviso to this Clause which says, if you are a motorist and your vehicle does not have a radio receiver, you are not supposed to pay for radio licence fees but then there is a requirement that you go to ZBC to complete a form according to the Eighth Schedule. I think this proviso is also administrative, it is not necessary. As we travel, if I decide to remove the receiver myself, as I travel, you will see the officers of the law, officers from ZBC manning the roads and they will see that my car does not have a radio receiver. So, this proviso, according to me, is not necessary on the Clause.  I wish the Honourable Minister to consider repealing the proviso. Thank you.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Thank you Madam Chair…

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Minister! I would like to ask the Government Chief Whip, the Leader of Government Business and the Hon. Minister to use the microphones that are audible so the Hon. Minister can be heard. Hon. Minister, please proceed.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Hon. Chair, I think we are still going round in circles. I have already addressed the same issues. Madam Chair, this clause seeks to ensure that we have compliance. This Clause also seeks to ensure that we boost revenue for the public broadcaster. Madam Chair, if a person does a false declaration, there is a high risk that they can be arrested in terms of perjury. Madam Chair, the issue related to ZBC and ZINARA as institutions, I have already highlighted that in terms of Section 194 (1) (g), that institutions of Government and agencies are obliged to work together under a whole of Government framework. We already have existing agreements between ZINARA and ZBC and they have worked together very well.

Madam Chair, the issue related to the utilisation of technology in terms of collecting revenue is already addressed because it is an operational and administrative issue. This is an institution or a platform which provides a software platform in terms of what we term a national enterprise architecture, utilising a whole of Government approach which was approved by Cabinet and the Government of Zimbabwe. The national enterprise architecture provides for an inter-operability that systems should be able to talk to each other in terms of the Constitution,

which is Section 194 (1) (g).

Madam Chair, what will take place operationally, even though this issue has got nothing to do with this particular clause but is related, I want to help the Hon. Members of Parliament that this enterprise architecture allows a particular motorist or a person who owns a radio

receiver to move into any of the offices, either owned by ZINARA, ZBC, an insurance company and by any agent to be able to utilise their bank cards to be able to swipe. The money will automatically be distributed to a particular account...

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  On a point of order Madam Chair.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order Honourable Minister! What is your point of order Honourable Mhangwa?

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  Madam Chair, the Minister has been gyrating on the same issue, deliberately avoiding the sticky points. The sticky points are not for people who are exempted.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Honourable Mhangwa, the Minister is in the middle of responding. He has not finished yet. Can you give him the opportunity to finish? – [HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  Madam Chair, the last time you said if you bring a point of order after someone is seated…] – No, no Hon. Mhangwa, you are out of order. Please take your seat.  Honourable Minister, please proceed.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair, I think I have addressed this matter that I want to thank all Hon. Members of Parliament for their rich contributions but I will not labour to respond to issues outside this particular clause. Let us stick to the particular clause in terms of the rules.  

Madam Chair, this clause relates to individuals and companies that either hold a current radio licence issued by the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation or a valid exemption certificate from ZBC. Unless the vehicle to be insured is not equipped with a radio receiver, provided the licenced applicant shall sign a declaration as specified in the Eighth Schedule. If a particular person does not own a radio receiver, I do not understand why we should be debating about that. You put in place, you sign a declaration form or you get a ZBC exemption certificate but if you own a radio receiver, then you are obliged to pay. Thank you Madam Chair.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  Madam Chair, point of order again. Now he has finished, can I come with my point of order?

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order? What is your point of order?  Which question has not been responded to or which contribution that he has not referred to?

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  Please, may you patiently listen to me Madam Chair. What he refers to exempted vehicles that do not have a receiver are not in question because they already do not have the receiver. The problem or the sticky point is that one has an electro magnetic wave, a receiver is not a necessary and sufficient condition for one to pay a licence. The second sticky point is the fact that I have multiple of them, he has not referred anything to that. The two are the sticking points from my side.

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON Z. ZIYAMBI): This is the reason why I moved that we vote because we cannot reach an agreement. We belabour ourselves repeating exactly the same issues. I move that we proceed.

Amendments to Clause 15 (now Clause 13) put and agreed to.

Clause 15 (now Clause13) as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 16 (now Clause 14):

*HON. MAMBIPIRI: I am not in agreement with the amendment on Clause 16 that if there are people who want to apply for a broadcasting licence in Zimbabwe, they should give ZBC three channels without any payments. My suggestion to the Minister is that three are a lot for ZBC. I think we need to go back to the one channel. As of now, we have challenges as a country in transmitting signal to remote areas. Broadcasting business is capital intensive. If we say three more channels it will be a quandary to them.

For example, as of now, DStv is carrying one ZBC channel which has advertisements and that money will be wasted on what is being suggested in Clause 16. The public broadcaster is not remitting anything to DStv. I do not think that we will have more investors in the media industry.

HON. MUSHORIWA: I do not know why we have Clause 16 in the Bill. The Hon. Minister has to explain to this august House what mischief does he seek to remedy by including the clause in the Bill. Basically, to say that you want three public broadcaster channels to be allowed to be carried by a licencee, I think it creates challenges even for business. Last week we bemoaned that broadcasting as a business is capital intensive and I do not think that it will be prudent to then say that you want to make sure that you have three.

The current status is that if you do not make payment, your subscription on DStv as a public good, you are allowed to have Channel 280 and hear Hon. Dr. Muswere there. If you are going to have an additional two, you are basically killing the business. It will not help. In my humble view, this Clause does not have a reason to survive in this Bill and I ask the Hon. Minister to consider expunging it.

*THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON DR. MUSWERE): I would like to thank the Hon Members who have debated. Looking at the import of the Clause that we are dealing with, it is a standard procedure internationally that if you are a subscription based licence operator, you must carry three national broadcaster channels. In Zimbabwe, we had one and we are trying to come up with two more. We want this law to help us to ensure that all those that we may licence carry two more. We want to add ZBC 2 and 3. This is based on heritage broadcast. We want our content to spread internationally and cater for the sixteen languages. There is nothing new as this is international practice.

         HON. MAMBIPIRI: In his response, I think the Minister missed the point that we raised this side. We are not arguing that DStv for example, must not carry the national broadcaster, far from it. We believe as a mandate, DStv must carry our own national broadcaster, ZBC. What we are debating and asking you to change is on the number of channels because already we are acknowledging that broadcasting is capital intensive and takes quite a lot from the private investors and DStv to carry our channels. So, instead of three channels, we are simply asking that they carry only ZBC and use the other two frequencies or channels that they have for proper business purposes.

         THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Mambipiri, I thought the Hon. Minister said it is an international requirement.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: It is part of an internationally agreed position in terms of standard. Secondly, DStv which one of the Hon. Members has already mentioned is in agreement and fully supports to carry three channels. Thank you.

         HON. BAJILA: International agreements have names, places and dates. The Minister should proffer us the international agreement which was agreed on such and such a place on this day. We want to know the agreement.

         THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Hon. Chair, let us proceed. We are going in circles over debates that are useless. This is the position of the Executive that we want three and we are not going to change. So, let us proceed.

         *HON. MUTSEYAMI: May we proceed in harmony as a respectable House. I respect Hon. Minister Ziyambi but now Hon. Ziyambi is now applying dirty tactics that were used before independence.

         *THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: I thought you wanted to address to me or it seems you want to talk to Hon. Ziyambi. If you want to talk to Hon. Ziyambi, call him and go outside to talk to him. If you want to talk to me –

         *HON. MUTSEYAMI: My point is, let us respect and be able to understand each other. Let us not use bullying tactics.

         *HON. TOGAREPI: I think he must withdraw the word ‘chitororo’ because if he does not know, we can go outside and show him what that means.

         *THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Mutseyami, can you withdraw.

         *HON. MUTSEYAMI: Hon. Togarepi leads an association of war collaborators and even when he is asleep, he knows what that means.

         *THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Mutseyami, Hon. Togarepi is inviting you to go outside so that you two can engage in ‘chitororo’ outside. I urge you Hon. Members to take the business of Parliament with the seriousness it deserves – [HON. HAMAUSWA: Murikutidzvanyirira kunouku.] -  Hon. Hamauswa, you have a habit of just standing without being recognised and say whatever you want, please respect my position.

         HON. MADZIVANYIKA: My point of order arises from Order Number 65 (5) which says, ‘when a point of order is raised, the Member debating shall resume his/her seat and no other Member shall arise until the Chair has decided on a point of order’. With due respect, Hon. Bajila raised a point of order to request the Minister to explain the international standard procedure that he was talking about and a ruling was not made to that effect. So, I actually ask you Madam Chair to make a ruling so that the House is well advised on the point of order raised by Hon. Bajila.

         *THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Madzivanyika, if you recall, when Hon. Bajila stood, that is when Hon. Leader of Government Business stood up and many other issues then came up. So, let me give the Minister the floor so that we proceed.

         *HON. DR. MUSWERE: I have an agreement with the international players in terms of the licence and framework and that is our position. Can you please proceed?  There is no way you can have an international subscription-based service operating in your country and without carrying your own public broadcaster channels.  All these Hon. Members know that they can watch SABC from DStv.  So, there is nothing new there.  I thank you Hon. Chair.

HON. MAMBIPIRI: Thank you Hon. Chair. I think this Parliament is a House of record and when we make reference to items, publications, agreements, we must be clear and not deviate.  The first point is that there is no international agreement that speaks to the number of channels that will be carried. There is what is called International Best Practice and that practice always mentions that the public broadcaster, at least a channel from the public broadcaster must be carried. 

Secondly, I think the Hon. Minister is misleading the House when he says he has the word that DStv will carry three channels.  The report that was read in this House from the Media Committee and the submissions on very bright coloured paper from DStv that came to Parliament were complaining about the three channels and asking the House to consider a single channel – that is the position from DStv.  I thank you Hon. Chair.

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Hon. Chair, when we have a disagreement, there are rules on how to proceed. Our position is very clear, we looked at it and we are satisfied that we need three channels, so let us proceed.

HON. TOGAREPI: On a point of order Hon. Chair.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: What is your point of order?

HON. TOGAREPI: DStv is opening so many channels.  Why is it shocking that people on my left are surprised – [HON. MAMBIPIRI: But are they for free?] –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Mambipiri.

Clause 16, now 14 put and agreed to.

Clause 17, now 15 put and agreed to.

On Clause 18, now Clause16:

HON. MUSHORIWA: I have got two issues on this Clause. The first one relates to subsection (e) (2) (a) where it says, ‘the Chairperson of the board may at any time, convene a special meeting of the board’.  Madam Chair, this inclusion is actually not good, more-so when we are trying to make sure that the ZBC Board adheres to the Public Entities Corporate Governance Act.  History has taught us that where certain public boards like the ZINARA Board that was fired, would actually end up having several meetings and to then give the Chairperson a blanket authority to just call any time, convene a special meeting, I think it is too broad to be left like that. 

I want the Hon. Minister to expunge it or alternatively to amend it to say that we remove the words ‘at any time’ and say ‘may convene a special meeting of the board’ and we delete this ‘at any time’.   We say ‘may convene a special meeting’, we do not to just give a blanket authority. 

The second issue is on the b (ii), which says ‘shall convene a special meeting of board on the written request of not fewer than two members’.  I think we agreed, the board is going to be seven and the best practice that we have actually laid in this august House is that it should not be fewer than 50% of the board and in this case, no fewer than three. We cannot have a situation where we simply say two members just write to the Chair. We want a board meeting and the Chair then calls a special meeting.

Let us say as a standard, the board is seven and we should say at least three. So, I propose that the Hon. Minister deletes the word ‘two’ and put the word ‘three’.  I so submit Hon. Chair.

HON. M. C. SIBANDA: Thank you so much Hon. Chair. I want to make amendments to line number 4 which says that ‘a member shall hold office for a term of four years and the appointment may be renewed to a one further such term’.  I may want to suggest why really we want to renew.  I think as Zimbabweans, we need to develop a culture of passing on the button. Four years is adequate, let us not renew. That is my submission.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Thank you Madam Chair. I am sure what we seek to do is to align with the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act [Chapter 10.31] which specifies among other things, a maximum of two fixed term based contracts for the Chief Executive Officer, each term not exceeding five years.  With relationship to the board members, the term is fixed for four years, which is one term and a further term upon a satisfactory performance. So, what we seek to do is just to align the Acts in terms of the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act. There is nothing wrong with the Hon. Members of Parliament amending the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act.  In this particular case, we want to align the legislation. So, as it is exactly, it is correct.

HON. MUSHORIWA: Hon. Chair, I think the Hon. Minister forgot to answer my submissions.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Madam Chair, it is two plus the Chair, it becomes three and the total becomes seven. So when you have a Chair, it becomes three.  I thank you.

HON. MUSHORIWA: Hon. Chair, the Hon. Minister first did not respond to the question where I had suggested that he deletes where it says, ‘at any time’ so that it just remains ‘may convene a special meeting’.  I think it is actually sufficient without putting ‘at any time’.  The second one, the Hon. Minister is saying that it is two plus Chair then they become three.  The way it is framed there, not fewer than two members, meaning he is saying that two members can actually cause – and what we are basically saying, let us remove the word ‘two’ and say ‘three’, not fewer than three members. If they are three, that is fine, so it is two members plus the Chairperson that makes them three.  If you say not less than two, I think it is not proper.  Let us remove the word ‘two’ and put ‘three’ and Hon. Minister, this one I will tell you, you will see the benefits of it. You will be the Hon. Minister responsible for this board. You will see where I am coming from – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] -

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Hon. Chair. I want to try and assist the Hon. Member. Go to item 2, the Chairperson of the board, that is a person, it is not a piece of furniture. Subsection (a) says; “may at any time convene a special meeting of the board and shall convene a special meeting of the board on the written request of the Minister within such period as the Minister may specify or not fewer than two members, not latter than 14 days after his or her receipt of such request”.

         So, there will now be three people, the Chairperson plus other two members, they become three or more.  It is very clear.  It does not mean he can only invite the two members, it says, plus the Chairperson, so they become three people.

         The second issue on, ‘may at any time’, it is an issue of semantics.  It is correct as it is and it is not limiting.  I thank you Hon. Chair.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Hon. Chairman, I have got a point of order.  That the leader of the House, Hon. Ziyambi – he knows and I think it is prudent that when an Hon. Minister comes to this House piloting his first Bill, they should be taught that conceding is not defeat.  It is actually building a country – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.]-

         THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Hon. Chair, I do not see where Hon. Mushoriwa is getting lost.  The provision is very clear.  It is not a quorum of a meeting; it is who is calling the meeting. 

         The first person is the Chairman of the Board.  The second is the Hon. Minister. Then it says; ‘not fewer than two’ – what is not fewer than two? It is three and above. I thank you.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Chair.  I think the leader of Government Business has explained that very well. ‘Not fewer than’ sets a parameter as a minimum.  The second issue I want to remind the Hon. Member is that this is not my first Bill.  Go and check the records, this is not the first time I am in Parliament.  Go and read the Cyber and Data Protection Act, I piloted it and many other pieces of legislation – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

         HON. HAMAUSWA:   I think there would be no prejudice if the Hon. Minister concedes on the proposal by Hon. Mushoriwa to deal with the text.  It allows also to bring confidence …

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): I think the Hon. Minister has responded Hon. Hamauswa. Let us proceed. 

         Clause 18, now Clause 16 put and agreed to.

         Clause 19, now Clause 17 and Clause 20, now Clause 18 put and agreed to.

         On Clause 21, now Clause19:

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Hon. Chairman, the Hon. Minister says that when it comes to a sport channel, 50% of its programming should be content from the local content and from Africa. 

         Before I raise my issue, I think the Hon. Minister needs to explain to us why you set at 50%? My thinking; given the challenge that we have in terms of broadcasting covering all the sporting disciplines in the country, requiring 50%, is too much of a threshold.  I know that if you speak to Hon. Members here, those that love soccer, basketball and even tennis, most Hon. Members would possibly know international teams and other competition that goes around there.

         So, 50% to me looks a bit higher.  I think for starters, if the Hon. Minister could say 30% or if the Hon. Minister could actually ensure that instead of putting this per centum in this Bill, it be reflected on the regulations that the Hon. Minister can do time after time having looked and scanned the environment, to then have this proposal in the Bill at 50%, is actually putting pressure on a broadcasting channel.

         So, my thinking Hon. Minister, is that can we remove this one and then we add to say that the number of channels or the per centum of content shall be determined by the Hon. Minister through regulations from time to time? Having a piece of legislation to just do that may create a problem. Maybe, at a time, you will then realise that no, you need 80% or 70% - naturally without the need of you coming back to this august House to amend, that is my proposal.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Chair.  I want to thank the Honourable Members for handing over some of the regulatory powers to the Hon. Minister.  So, I want to redo this particular Clause.  I want you to repeat so that I can capture in consultation with the Hon. Minister so that we can progressively increase in terms of trajectory.

Hon. Chair, we have so many sports disciplines in our country and in the region.  I want just to read a few.  The number one in terms of football under Zimbabwe Football Association, the projected leagues are Zimbabwe Premier Soccer League, Zimbabwe Women’s Football Super League, Central Region Division 1, Eastern Region Division 1, Northern Region Division 1, Southern Region Division 1, Community Recreation Leagues, ZPSL 18 teams, 34 matches, ZWFSL 16 teams, 30 matches. 

         Category 2, Zimbabwe Netball Association,  Premium League, NASH League, NAPH Leagues, Community recreation leagues, Basketball Union of Zimbabwe, Super-6 League, Provincial League 7, Super-6 Rugby League, Community Recreation Leagues, Cricket, School Leagues, Provincial Leagues, Logan Cup, Pro-5 Championship, MPLT-20, Zimbabwe Rugby Union, School Leagues, Provincial Leagues and National Leagues,

         Athletics:  National Athletics, National Association of Zimbabwe, NASH Leagues, NAPH Leagues, Provincial Leagues, University Leagues, National Leagues.  We can go on and on, we have a category for hockey, category for tennis, we have a category for table tennis, we have a category for chess, we have a category for cycling and so forth.

Hon. Chair, all this is content and sporting is universal.  So, we must support local content. Sometimes I wonder Hon. Chair.  These are Members of Parliament for Zimbabwean people. We should be supporting the coverage of all these sports channels but I do not have any challenge, if the Hon. Member can recite and ensure that the Minister can increase in consultation with the Minister, so each and every time they would have to consult me and we increase the content coverage.   Thank you. 

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE):  Hon. Mushoriwa, you can submit a written amendment to the Minister if there is any need. 

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  I think the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs can actually help us.  Subject to sub paragraph 1, the responsible Minister shall prescribe to a television broadcasting sport channel or the per centum of its programming in terms of local content.  I think the Hon. Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs can actually polish it.

         HON. MAMBIPIRI: I rise on a point of privilege Hon. Chair.  Thank you very much Hon. Chair.  Hon. Maposa travelled all the way from Chimanimani West, he had something to say on this Bill but was denied the opportunity.  I am humbly asking, if you could indulge him to say something at least. 

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Unfortunately, your point of privilege has been overruled. 

         HON. TOGAREPI: Thank you Hon. Chair for the opportunity. We want the clause to read as follows; ‘that the Minister may, by regulation, prescribe the per-centum of local and African content for sport channels. I thank you.

Amendment to Clause 21, now Clause 19 put and agreed to.

Clause 21, now Clause19, as amended, put and agreed to.

Clause 22, now Clause 20 put and agreed to.

         Clause 23, now Clause 21 put and agreed to.

         Schedule put and agreed to.

         House resumed.

Bill reported with amendments.

Bill referred to the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS (HON. Z. ZIYAMBI): Madam Speaker, I move that Orders of the Day, Numbers 2 to 31 be stood over until Order of the Day, Number 32 on today`s Order Paper has been disposed of.

Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON ICT, POSTAL AND COURIER SERVICES ON MOBILE AND INTERNET CONNECTIVITY

Thirty-Second Order read: Adjourned debate on motion on the Report of the Portfolio Committee on ICT, Postal and Courier Services on mobile and internet connectivity in Zimbabwe.

Question again proposed.

THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF INFORMATION COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY, POSTAL AND COURIER SERVICES (HON. PHUTI): Thank you Madam Speaker Ma`am. On 14^th November 2024, the Portfolio Committee on Information Communication Technology, Postal and Courier Services (ICT) tabled the report on mobile and internet service in Zimbabwe and on 26^th February, 2025, the Ministry was humbly reminded of the obligation to respond to the Committee report. That report of the Portfolio Committee on ICT brought in some recommendations and I shall here present them. The Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion should prioritise foreign currency allocations to capacitate infrastructure development and increase on investment in ICT infrastructure projects and new technologies to expand digital access by 31 December 2025. The Ministry concurs with the Committee’s recommendation and implores the Treasury to follow the international best practice of dedicating 3% of the national budget to ICT infrastructure development and adopting new technologies.

         The Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion should review policies that impact on viability of the telecommunication sector, for example the tax rebates for the ICT gadgets by December 2025. The Ministry continues to implore and appeal to Treasury to reduce taxes for the sector as well as implement tax rebates on selected electronic communication devices.

         In order to develop infrastructure and attract investments, the Ministry of ICT should allow other players to provide mobile and internet services in the country to allow competition from other private players such as Huawei and Starlink by 31 December 2025. The Ministry is already implementing initiatives to develop ICT backbone infrastructure and has licenced players such as Starlink (Satellite services) and Dark Fiber Africa (DFA, fiber network) that has laid over 1500km of fiber along the NRZ rail network in the year 2024.

         That, with effect from 2025, PORTAZ should effectively oversee the deployment and operations of base stations to ensure improved quality of the telecommunications services. Postal Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ) as the regulator is already overseeing the deployment and operations of base stations and other critical telecommunications infrastructure being deployed across the country. Postal Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe (POTRAZ) is also providing infrastructure sharing in underserved areas through the USF, by derigging collocated base stations and redeploying them to underserved areas of Zimbabwe. They also keep a record of the sector developments and quarterly reports are submitted to the Ministry and now appraisals are submitted to Cabinet quarterly.

         That, the Ministry of ICT must ensure that the Postal Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe completes as per schedule, the tower relocation project, especially in remote areas by the first quarter of 2025. The Ministry envisions the completion of the tower relocation programme by POTRAZ in conjunction with MNOs, hoping that forex is availed for critical purchases of inputs and equipment for such initiatives to be successful. In October 2024, the Ministry superintended the deployment and commissioning of 14 relocated towers across Zimbabwe by Hon. Vice President K.C.D. Mohadi. 

NUMBER	SITE	DISTRICT	PROVINCE
1	Muchekawakasungabeta	Sanyati	Mashonaland West
2	Zvipani	Hurungwe	Mashonaland West
3	Msampakaruma	Kariba	Mashonaland Central
4	Cranham	Mazowe	Mashonaland Central
5	Chatumbama	Mt Darwin	Mashonaland Central
6	Chitsungo	Guruve	Mashonaland Central
7	Svuure	Zaka	Masvingo
8	Gezani	Chiredzi	Masvingo
9	Chikwarakwara	Chiredzi	Masvingo
10	Makaha (Mt. Nyamutanga)	Mudzi	Mashonaland East
11	Fair Adventure	Wedza	Mashonaland East
12	Nswazwi	Bulima	Matabeleland South
13	Mapholisa	Mangwe	Matabeleland South
14	Avill/Fombe	Nyanga	Manicaland

 

         That, the Ministry of ICT and POTRAZ should urgently prioritise border lying community network provision in areas such as Manama, as citizens are using networks for mobile and internet connectivity. There is already a running project under the NMBB Phase 2 and 3 programmes for border area connectivity. This has seen remote border areas like Mlampapele, Mphoeng, Snago, Mkumbura, Nyakomba, Kanyema Msambalaluma and others getting connectivity as new base stations have been deployed. This has been necessitated by the need to curb social challenges like cattle rustling that is rampant in border areas.

         The Postal Telecommunication Regulatory Authority in Zimbabwe should fast track the 4G and 5G roll-out plan in line with the existing schedule. The Ministry is coordinating and overseeing the deployment of the 5G infrastructure together with the requisite broadband infrastructure across the country. This has seen the official launch of the Zimbabwe Broadband Policy by President, His Excellency E.D. Mnangagwa, this year in Somabula in the first quarter of 2024 as well as the launch of 21 NetOne 5G base stations in Harare in October 2024 by Hon. Vice President K.C.D. Mohadi in Harare South. A total of 81 5G base stations have been installed across the country to date (Econet 42 and NetOne 39).

         The Postal and Telecommunication Regulatory Authority of Zimbabwe should create a platform of engagement with the citizens in order to assess network challenges in different parts of the country by December 2025. The Ministry takes note of the recommendations and has engaged POTRAZ and weekly programmes on radio are being aired and updates on social media handles. More efforts will be dedicated to this cause to gather as much market intelligence as possible over and above the current process of customer satisfaction surveys conducted by the Ministry and POTRAZ.

         Mobile Network Operators overseeing base stations should consider installing solar power systems in addition to generators and electrical power supplies. This would guarantee uninterrupted connectivity during power outages, with a target completion date of January 2026. The solarisation projects are ongoing with each Mobile Network Operator (MNO) funding their programmes. All the Hub 5G base stations that are being deployed by MNOs have solar back-up and this is being expanded to all other new base stations.

         I move that the debate do now adjourn.

         Motion put and agreed to.

         Debate to resume: Wednesday, 5^th March, 2025.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

         HON. KAMBUZUMA: I move that we revert to Order of the Day, Number 10.

         HON. C. MOYO: I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

MOTION

REPORT OF THE DELEGATION TO THE SIXTEENTH CONFERENCE OF PARTIES TO THE UNITED NATIONS

HON. MATEMA: I move the motion standing in my name

that this House takes note of the report of the delegation to the Sixteenth Conference of Parties to the United Nations (COP16) Convention on Biological Diversity held from 21^st October to 1st November 2024 in Cali, Colombia.

         HON. NYANDORO: I second.

HON. MATEMA: The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Environment, Climate and Wildlife, Hon. S. Matema, led a delegation that travelled to Cali, Colombia, to attend Sixteenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 16), Eleventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety ( CP-MOP 11), and Fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties to the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation (NP-MOP 5 that was held from 21 October to 01 November, 2024.  The other Members of the delegation were:

1. C. Kambuzuma; Member of Parliament;
2. B. Nyandoro, Member of Parliament; and
3. J. Mazani, Principal Committee Clerk

2.0 OBJECTIVES

1. To understand the key negotiation issues on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.
2. To appreciate diverging views from the negotiations on biodiversity conservation and sustainable use;
3. To identify the key outcomes of the Biodiversity COP 16 negotiations; and
4. To make policy and legislative recommendations on Biodiversity conservation.

3.0 KEY NEGOTIATION ISSUES

3.1 At COP 15 in 2022, Parties agreed on a new global plan to protect nature called the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Each country was expected to update its own national plan for biodiversity conservation to align with this global framework. At COP 16, the Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI), reviewed the progress made by countries in updating their national plans.

3.2 The negotiations at COP 16 were also centred on the sharing of benefits from the use of digital genetic information. Digital Genetic Information refers to digital data about the genetic makeup of organisms. Parties agreed that when someone uses digital information about the genes of plants or animals, they should share the benefits with the countries where those organisms come from. A new system is being set up to ensure fair sharing of benefits. This system will include a global fund to support countries, especially developing countries. A group of experts has been working to develop the details of this new system.

3.3 Negotiations at COP 16 also involved the setting up of a system to track progress on the new global plan for protecting nature (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework). In order to monitor progress, scientists have been working on creating indicators to track how well countries are doing in achieving the goals of the plan for protection of nature. To ensure enhanced reporting on the global plan, a system for regularly checking how well all parties are doing together will be established. This system is a voluntary country review where each country would have the option to share its own progress reports and get feedback from others. Non-State actors can also report on their contributions to protecting nature. Countries will use a standardized format to report on their progress every few years.

3.4 In terms of the financial aspects of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, two aspects were negotiated on namely resource mobilisation and financial mechanism. Under resource mobilisation, a funding strategy has been developed to raise money to implement and support the Global Biodiversity Framework Fund. An advisory committee, is advising the COP on how to raise money and manage the funds. In addition, the funding deeds for implementing the plan are being assessed. On financial mechanism, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) is a key financial mechanism for biodiversity conservation. The performance of GEF in supporting the biodiversity plan is being reviewed. The goal is to ensure there is enough money to implement the plan effectively.

3.5 Regarding capacity building and technical cooperation, negotiations delved into ways to improve the skills and knowledge of people working on biodiversity conservation. The intention is to improve the way countries and organisations share information and build expertise to protect nature. There are intentions to establish a central hub that will coordinate efforts and share information. Furthermore, regional centres will be set up to provide specific support to different regions. The parties also negotiated on setting up a clearing-house mechanism, a platform for sharing information and data on biodiversity that is user friendly and accessible. In addition, a knowledge management strategy is being developed to effectively manage and use knowledge related to biodiversity conservation.

3.6 To achieve better results, Parties intent to work together with other international organisations and conventions to share information and coordinate efforts including joint actions to achieve common goals to protect biodiversity.

3.7 Another topical negotiation aspect at COP 16 was the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) and how to better protect their traditional knowledge and practices related to biodiversity. Parties had a deeper discussion about the role of languages in passing down traditional knowledge between generations. Parties negotiated on the creation of a new plan to better protect the rights and knowledge of IPLCs. This was meant to ensure that IPLCs were fully involved in developing and implementing this plan. Thus, discussions centred on deciding the best way to organise and manage this work in the future. The Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, a UN body that focuses on Indigenous Peoples' rights, submitted its recommendations for consideration by the COP.

3.8 The Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was working on improving how it communicates about biodiversity issues to the public. It has adopted a new communication strategy to support the global biodiversity plan. The CBD is also updating its plan for educating people about biodiversity and raising public awareness. This includes creating guidelines for countries to use in their own communication and education efforts. The Subsidiary Body on Implementation (SBI) has reviewed these plans and made recommendations, which were considered by the COP.

3.9 The CBD is working to identify the scientific and technical needs to implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The goal is to make sure that it has the right information and tools to effectively implement the global biodiversity plan. It does this by reviewing existing tools and guidance as well as identifying gaps and redundancies to see if they are sufficient to implement the Framework. The CBD is identifying new scientific information that is needed to support the implementation of the Framework. It is working with the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) to ensure that the Platform's work aligns with the needs of the Framework.

3.10 In addition, the CBD is working to develop a long-term strategy to mainstream biodiversity considerations into various sectors of society, such as agriculture, forestry and urban planning. As a result, it is seeking input from governments, organisations and stakeholders on how to effectively mainstream biodiversity. This ensures that biodiversity is considered in all decision-making processes, leading to more sustainable and environmentally friendly practices.

3.11 The CBD is recognising the diverse values of biodiversity, beyond just its ecological importance. This includes cultural, social and economic values. It is doing this through reviewing a report from the Inter-governmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) that delves into these diverse values. This information will be used to inform the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

3.12 The delegation learnt that the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity was working to improve the management of wildlife populations. It is reviewing the current state of wildlife management and identifying areas where additional guidance or support may be needed. The CBD is collaborating with the Collaborative Partnership on Sustainable Wildlife Management to develop a comprehensive analysis of existing tools and guidance for sustainable wildlife management. This analysis will help identify gaps and opportunities for improvement. The goal is to promote sustainable wildlife management practices that balance the needs of people and nature, ensuring the long-term conservation of wildlife populations.

3.13 The delegation also noted that the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was addressing the issue of invasive alien species, which are species that have been introduced to new environments and cause harm to native ecosystems. It was doing that by reviewing existing measures to control invasive alien species and identifying emerging threats from invasive alien species, such as those caused by pathogens and parasites. To address the issue of invasive alien species, it collaborates with other organisations to protect biodiversity and prevent the ecological and economic damage caused by these species.

3.14 The delegation learnt that CBD recognises the strong link between biodiversity and human health. It was working to promote the health of both people and the planet. To that effect, a Global Action Plan on Biodiversity and Health was developed to address the link between biodiversity loss and human health. Work is underway to integrate biodiversity considerations into health policies and practices.

3.15 The delegation also noted that the CBD is working to protect plant diversity. They are collaborating with the Global Partnership for Plant Conservation to develop a set of actions to support the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The goal is to conserve plant species and their habitats, recognising the critical role that plants play in ecosystems and human well-being.

3.16 Another interesting negotiation aspect at COP16 observed by the delegation was that the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity is monitoring the development of synthetic biology, a technology that involves modifying the genetic material of organisms. The CBD is concerned about the potential impacts of synthetic biology on biodiversity and ecosystems. It is working to assess the risks and benefits of this technology and to develop appropriate guidelines and regulations.

3.17 The delegation noted that CBD recognises the strong link between biodiversity and climate change. It is working to address the impacts of climate change on biodiversity and to promote nature-based solutions to climate change. In fact, the CBD is reviewing the relationship between biodiversity and climate change and exploring ways to integrate climate change considerations into biodiversity conservation efforts.

3.18 Finally, the delegation observed that the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity is reviewing the implementation of Article 14, paragraph 2, of the Convention, which deals with liability and redress for damage to biological diversity. It is collecting information from Parties and other Governments on their experiences with implementing the relevant decisions and any recent developments in this area. This information will be used to assess the effectiveness of the current mechanisms and to identify any potential improvements.

• DIVERGING VIEWS FROM THE NEGOTIATING PARTIES

Negotiations highlighted the complexities of international environmental governance, with diverse interests and perspectives among different countries and regions. The discussions reflected ongoing debates on balancing economic development, environmental conservation and social equity.

4.1 Financial Mechanism and Resource Mobilisation

The primary departure points between developing and developed countries in the negotiations on the CBD Financial Mechanism lies in their differing perspectives on the adequacy and effectiveness of the current financial system, particularly the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Fund.

4.1.1 Developing countries argue that the current financial system, including the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) Fund, is not providing enough money to address their biodiversity needs. They believe that these mechanisms are not adequately addressing the specific challenges faced by developing countries, such as poverty, inequality and climate change. They are calling for increased financial support, including new and additional funding, to implement the Global Biodiversity Framework. Developing countries are pushing for a new, dedicated global instrument for biodiversity finance. Developing and developed countries have different views on how much money is needed to protect biodiversity and how existing financial mechanisms are working.

4.1.2 On the other hand, developed countries often argue that the current financial system is sufficient and that the focus should be on improving the effectiveness of existing mechanisms. They believe that the GEF and the GBF Fund are important tools for financing biodiversity conservation and that they should be strengthened and better utilized. They also argue that developing countries need to improve their own financial management and governance practices to better utilize existing resources. Thus, developed countries are more hesitant to create a new mechanism and prefer to strengthen existing ones.

4.2 National Biodiversity Targets

4.2.1 Zimbabwe was amongst the 41 African countries that submitted their national targets aligned with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. This is significant for several reasons. Firstly, submitting national targets shows Zimbabwe's commitment to the global goals of biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Secondly, the process of developing and submitting national targets helps Zimbabwe prioritise biodiversity conservation and sustainable use within its national development plans. Thirdly, national targets provide a framework for monitoring progress towards biodiversity goals and identifying areas where additional efforts are needed. Lastly, it helps identify global gaps in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, informing international policy and decision-making. The next step is to revise and update its National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plan (NBSAP) that outline the nation’s overall strategy for biodiversity conservation. It provides a framework for achieving national targets and includes a wider range of actions, such as policy framework, actions and implementation, capacity building and public awareness campaigns.

4.3 CBD Cooperation

4.3.1 The main point of contention in these negotiations revolves around the extent and nature of cooperation among various multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs) and other relevant stakeholders, especially regarding the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). While there was consensus on the importance of cooperation, viewpoints differ on how to best achieve it, some parties champion broad cooperation encompassing biodiversity, food, nutrition, climate change and ocean conservation. Others stress the importance of respecting individual MEA mandates to prevent overlapping efforts. Developing countries prioritise strengthening cooperation and coordination among the Rio Conventions, particularly in resource mobilisation and capacity building, emphasising the need to address their specific needs in collaborative efforts. In contrast, developed countries focus on specific cooperation areas like data sharing and technical assistance, prioritising streamlining processes and avoiding duplication.

4.3.2 There are differing views on the role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (IPLCs) in decision-making and resource access. Many developing countries, particularly those with significant Indigenous populations, strongly advocate for greater IPLC involvement and the establishment of a subsidiary body under Article 8(j) to provide a dedicated platform for their rights and participation. They emphasise the importance of recognising IPLCs' rights and contributions to biodiversity conservation and sustainable use and call for their inclusion in the work program and decisions.

4.3.3 Some developed countries have concerns about the potential costs and administrative burden associated with a new subsidiary body, arguing that existing mechanisms can adequately address IPLC needs. They also express concerns about potential overlapping mandates and the need to balance IPLC rights with other considerations like environmental protection and sustainable development.

Additionally, many developing countries, particularly those with significant African diaspora populations, advocate for recognising the contributions of people of African descent to biodiversity conservation to ensure their equitable participation and benefit-sharing. While acknowledging the importance of recognising the contributions of all groups, some developed countries express concerns about potential unintended consequences and the need to avoid creating new categories of rights holders.

4.3.4 The primary points of departure between developed and developing countries during the Working Group II negotiations centred on several key issues. Developing countries strongly advocated for increased capacity-building and financial support to implement the CBD and its Protocols, particularly the NP and CP. They emphasised the need to address capacity gaps, particularly in developing countries. Developed countries had differing views on the specific mechanisms and levels of support.

4.3.5 Many developing countries faced challenges in implementing the NP, particularly in terms of access and benefit-sharing. They sought support for capacity-building, technology transfer and financial resources to effectively implement the Protocol. Developed countries emphasised the need for compliance with the NP and may advocate for a balanced approach that ensures both access to genetic resources and fair and equitable benefit-sharing.

4.3.6 There was significant debate on the terms of technology transfer to developing countries. While some parties advocated for mutually agreed terms, others argued that this would hinder the transfer of technology. Disagreements emerged over the definition and role of bioeconomy approaches in the development of commercial products from genetic resources. The disagreement highlighted the tension between economic development and environmental protection. Some parties emphasised sustainable approaches, while others preferred a broader bioeconomy framework. Sustainable bioeconomy approach focuses on using biological resources in a way that minimises harm to the environment and ensures long-term sustainability. It prioritises practices like sustainable agriculture, renewable energy and conservation of biodiversity. A broader bioeconomy framework is more open to various commercial applications of genetic resources, potentially including those with higher environmental impact. It may prioritise economic growth and innovation, even if it means sacrificing some environmental considerations.

4.3.7 Developing countries highlighted the importance of considering socio-economic factors in biosafety assessments. They emphasise the need for capacity-building and awareness-raising to promote the use of voluntary guidance on socio-economic considerations. Developed countries had different perspectives on the specific criteria and methodologies for assessing socio-economic impacts. They prioritised scientific and technical considerations, while also recognising the importance of socio-economic factors. Developed countries have more advanced biosafety regulatory frameworks and research capacities. They prioritise risk assessment, risk management and international cooperation. Developing countries require more support in developing their biosafety capacities. They emphasised the importance of technology transfer and capacity building. Developing countries placed significant importance on fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources. They advocated for stronger implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and support mechanisms for capacity building and technology transfer. Developed Countries prioritised access to genetic resources for research and development. They emphasised the importance of intellectual property rights and the need for clear and predictable regulatory frameworks.

4.3.8 Developing countries were more supportive of reviewing liability and redress mechanisms to address potential harm caused by biodiversity loss and climate change. They advocated for strong liability and redress mechanisms to ensure that victims of environmental damage receive adequate compensation and called for financial security mechanisms to cover potential liabilities. Developed countries, on the other hand, were more hesitant to revisit the issue, concerned about potential liabilities and legal implications. They prioritised a balanced approach that avoids excessive burdens on industry and promotes sustainable development.

4.3.9 Countries argued about the need for global rules on sustainable wildlife management and the role of regional organisations in creating these guidelines. There was disagreement about what exactly is causing unsustainable use of wildlife, especially the impact of new technologies. Countries discussed the extent of unsustainable harvesting and use practices and the importance of promoting legal and sustainable trade. Everyone agreed on the need for incentives, but there were differences on how to achieve this, such as using biodiversity credit schemes and involving local governments.

4.3.10 Developed countries want to strengthen international cooperation, scientific research, and policies to address invasive alien species. They prioritize early detection, quick response, and prevention. Developing countries, on the other hand, face more challenges due to limited resources and capacity. They need financial and technical support from developed countries to effectively manage invasive alien species.

4.4 Biodiversity and Health Co-benefits

4.4.1 Developing country parties advocated for the inclusion of derivatives of genetic resources in benefit-sharing mechanisms, arguing that they are crucial for developing new medicines and treatments. Developed country parties expressed concerns about the potential implications of including derivatives, arguing that it could complicate existing intellectual property rights regimes and hinder innovation.

4.4.2 Derivatives of genetic resources are substances or products that are derived from genetic material. These include biochemical compounds produced by organisms, such as proteins, enzymes and lipids. For instance, a pharmaceutical drug can be derived from a plant's natural compounds. Genetic derivatives also consider traditional practices, innovations and knowledge associated with genetic resources. By advocating for the inclusion of derivatives of genetic resources in benefit-sharing mechanisms, developing countries aim to ensure that they receive a fair share of the benefits arising from the commercialisation of products derived from their genetic resources.

4.4.3 Traditional knowledge plays a crucial role in identifying, understanding and utilising genetic resources. Indigenous and local communities have centuries of knowledge about the properties and uses of plants, animals and other organisms. This knowledge often forms the basis for scientific research and the development of new products. Without acknowledging and respecting the traditional knowledge associated with that plant, the communities that have preserved and passed down this knowledge may not only receive compensation for their contributions to scientific research and product development but fair benefits from the commercialisation of products derived from their genetic resources.

5.0 KEY OUTCOMES OF COP 16

The 16th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (COP 16) concluded with several significant outcomes aimed at safeguarding biodiversity and addressing pressing environmental challenges.

5.1 Sharing Benefits from Digital Genetic Information

A ground-breaking agreement was reached on the operationalisation of a new global mechanism, the "Cali Fund," to share the benefits from the use of digital sequence information on genetic resources (DSI) more equitably. This mechanism will ensure that developing countries and Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities receive a fair share of the profits generated from the commercial use of genetic information.

5.2 Strengthening the Role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities

COP 16 recognised the vital role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in biodiversity conservation. A new Programme of Work was adopted to ensure their meaningful contribution to the Convention's objectives and the implementation of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF). Additionally, a new subsidiary body was established to elevate their voices and participation in decision-making processes.

5.3 Funding Biodiversity

Parties agreed on a strategy for resource mobilisation to secure USD200 billion annually by 2030 to support biodiversity initiatives. This funding will be crucial for implementing the KMGBF and addressing the biodiversity crisis.

5.4 Implementing the KMGBF

The COP took stock of progress in implementing the KMGBF and encouraged countries to accelerate their efforts. A significant number of countries have already submitted national biodiversity targets and National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plans.

5.5 Synthetic Biology

The COP recognised the potential benefits and risks of synthetic biology. A new thematic action plan was adopted to address capacity-building, technology transfer and knowledge-sharing needs in developing countries.

5.6 Invasive Alien Species

To combat the threat of invasive alien species, the COP agreed on guidelines for managing these species, including measures to address e-commerce and cross-border trade.

5.7 Sustainable Wildlife Management and Plant Conservation

The COP emphasised the importance of sustainable wildlife management and plant conservation. A decision was adopted to strengthen monitoring, capacity-building and the involvement of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in wildlife management.

• Biodiversity and Health

A Global Action Plan on Biodiversity and Health was approved to address the interconnections between human health and ecosystem health. This plan aims to prevent the emergence of zoonotic diseases and promote sustainable ecosystems.

• Risk Assessment

New guidance was adopted to assess the risks posed by living modified organisms (LMO) containing engineered gene drives, ensuring a rigorous and transparent approach to risk assessment.

6.0 Delegation Observations

6.1 Zimbabwe, rich in biodiversity and cultural heritage, has long been concerned with protecting indigenous knowledge and genetic resources. The country has taken steps to safeguard these assets, including the development of Statutory Instrument 61 of 2009 and the ratification of the Nagoya Protocol. However, challenges in implementation, such as capacity building and awareness, have hindered progress. With the adoption of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, Zimbabwe now faces the need to update its legal framework to align with international obligations and ensure fair and equitable benefit-sharing for its communities.

6.2 The key provisions of this Bill would focus on establishing a comprehensive framework for access to genetic resources, prior informed consent, mutually agreed terms and benefit-sharing. It should also allocate resources for training and capacity building of relevant stakeholders, including government officials, researchers and local communities. In addition, the Bill should develop transparent and equitable mechanisms for sharing benefits derived from the utilisation of genetic resources, including financial benefits and technology transfer arrangements. It would be essential that the Bill establishes a robust system for monitoring compliance and enforcing its provisions.

6.3 The main purpose of the Authority would be to streamline the implementation of biodiversity policies and regulations. Its critical functions would be the development and implementation of national biodiversity policies and strategies, issuing permits for access to genetic resources facilitating benefit-sharing agreements and ensure that benefits are shared equitably with local communities and collaborate with international organisations and other countries on biodiversity issues.

7.O RECOMMENDATIONS FROM KEY OUTCOMES OF THE NEGOTIATIONS

Thus, the delegation recommends the following;

7.1 The Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife should craft a comprehensive Biodiversity Bill that consolidates and strengthens existing biodiversity legislation, including the Nagoya Protocol.

7.2 The Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife should establish a National Biodiversity Authority.

7.3 The Ministry of Environment, Climate and Wildlife should ensure that relevant provisions of the Parks and Wildlife Amendment Bill [HB.1.2024] which is under consideration by Parliament, extensively provides for the sustainable use and benefit sharing from the wildlife proceeds.

8.0 Conclusion

8.1 The COP 16 negotiations highlighted the critical role of international cooperation in addressing biodiversity loss and climate change. Key outcomes included agreements on sharing benefits from digital genetic information, strengthening the rights of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities and securing funding for biodiversity conservation. Zimbabwe's participation in the COP 16 underscores the country's commitment to global biodiversity goals. To effectively implement the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, Zimbabwe should prioritise updating its national biodiversity strategy, strengthening its legal framework and building capacity to ensure fair and equitable benefit-sharing from genetic resources. I thank you.

         HON. NYANDORO: Madam Speaker, I rise to second the motion on the COP16 report. This report highlights both the progress made and the significant challenges that remain in our global effort to protect biodiversity. I want to focus my remarks today on a critical aspect of this challenge which is climate finance and how Zimbabwe can effectively access and utilise these vital resources.

         As you might be aware, the absence of key world leaders from major polluting nations at the recently ended Climate Change Conference in Baku, Azerbaijan sends a chilling message. Their lack of engagement underscores the ongoing struggle to mobilise the political will and financial commitments necessary to tackle the intertwined crises of climate change and biodiversity loss. This is particularly concerning for nations like Zimbabwe, which are disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change despite contributing minimally to the problem.

         Climate change is not an abstract, it is a present reality for Zimbabwe. We are witnessing increasingly erratic rainfall patterns, prolonged droughts and devastating floods. These extreme weather events wreak havoc on our agriculture sector, threaten our water resources and undermine our food security. They also exacerbate existing pressures on our biodiversity, pushing vulnerable species closer to extinction and disrupting vital ecosystems.

         Therefore, security access to climate finance is not merely desirable, it is a matter of survival for Zimbabwe. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, with its ambitious targets and its emphasis on resource mobilisation, provides a crucial framework for action. However, translating these global commitments into tangible support for developing nations requires concerted effort and strategic planning.

         Zimbabwe must adopt a multi-pronged approach to effectively access climate finance. Firstly, we need to strengthen our national institutional capacity. This means establishing clear lines of responsibility, developing robust project proposals and ensuring transparent and accountable financial management systems. We must demonstrate to international funders that we have the capacity to utilise these resources effectively and efficiently. The proposed Biodiversity Authority, as outlined in the report, can play a pivotal role in this regard, streamlining implementation and fostering collaboration.

         Secondly, we must prioritise the development of bankable climate-related projects. These projects should not only address urgent climate adaptation needs but also demonstrate clear economic and social benefits. They should be aligned with our national development priorities and contribute to building a more resilient and sustainable economy. Investing in climate-smart agriculture, promoting renewable energy and strengthening our water management systems are just a few examples of areas where we can develop impactful projects.

         Thirdly, we must actively engage in international climate finance mechanisms. This includes participating in relevant forums, building relationships with donor agencies and staying abreast of evolving funding opportunities. We must also advocate for greater equity and accessibility in climate finance, ensuring that developing nations like Zimbabwe have a fair chance to access the resources they need.

         Fourthly, we must strengthen our monitoring and reporting systems. Demonstrating tangible results and transparently tracking progress is essential for building trust with international funders and securing continued support. This includes establishing clear indicators, collecting reliable data and regularly reporting on the impact of climate finance investments.

         Finally, Madam Speaker, we must recognise the crucial role of local communities in climate action. Empowering local communities, particularly indigenous people and local communities, participating in project design, implementation and monitoring are all essential for ensuring that climate finance investments are truly effective and sustainable. Their traditional knowledge and experience are invaluable assets in our efforts to adapt to climate change and protect our biodiversity.

         In conclusion Madam Speaker Ma’am, the COP16 report highlights the urgent need for accelerated action on climate change and biodiversity loss.  Securing access climate finance is a critical component of this effort.  Strengthening our institutional capacity, developing bankable projects, actively engaging in international mechanisms and prioritising local community involvement, Zimbabwe can position itself to effectively access and utilise these resources, building a more resilient and sustainable future for all.  I urge this august House to support the recommendations outlined in the report and to commit to taking the necessary steps to secure Zimbabwe’s access to climate finance.  I thank you.

         HON. TOGAREPI:  I move that the debate do now adjourn.

         HON. C MOYO:  I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

         Debate to resume:  Wednesday, 5^th March, 2025.

 

On the motion of HON. TOGAREPI, seconded by HON. C MOYO, the House adjourned at Two Minutes to Six o’clock p.m.