• Version
• Download 50
• File Size 480.93 KB
• File Count 1
• Create Date May 13, 2025
• Last Updated May 13, 2025

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HANSARD 13 MAY 2025 Vol. 51 No. 46

PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE

Tuesday, 13^th May, 2025

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

PRAYERS

(THE HON.  DEPUTY SPEAKER in the Chair)

ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE HON.  DEPUTY SPEAKER

MENTAL HEALTH PRESENTATIONS

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I have got a notice. Kindly be advised that Premier Medical Aid Society will be conducting mental health presentations in the Multipurpose Hall from 1000 hours to 1100 hours on 14^th to 15^th May, 2025. All Members, staff of Parliament and any staff seconded to Parliament, irrespective of being a member or not of the Medical Aid Society, are invited.

HON. CHIDUWA: Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on a point of national interest to express my appreciation on this year's ZITF theme whose focus was on industrialisation, crafting an integrated economic landscape. The theme underscored the critical role of industrialisation in driving Zimbabwe's economic agenda in line with Vision 2030. My point of national interest focuses on the inaugural rural industrialisation Indaba which was running under the theme ‘Inclusive Growth, Industrial Roots, Unlocking Zimbabwe's Rural Potential’. The Indaba was a high-level forum which brought together Government officials, private sector players, traditional leaders and development partners to explore strategies for transforming rural areas into industrial and economic hubs.

The Indaba fed well in the Vision 2030 policy of sustainable inclusivity of leaving no one and no place behind. Stakeholders deliberated on how to develop rural economies through industrial development. It was quite refreshing to see Ministers of State for Provincial Affairs and Devolution showcasing what each province is endowed with that can form the nucleus of development in their areas. The Indaba looked at resource endowments and how best they can be used to promote industrial growth and the promotion of backward and forward linkages in rural areas. The Indaba also looked at key areas of exploration covering strategies to maximise the manufacturing industry's contribution to the growth of upstream and downstream industries, specifically cutting-edge advancement in technology. The Indaba also focused on tooling and retooling rural infrastructure development, access to finance, market expansion and export diversification.

Madam Speaker, to develop, to reach upper-middle income status, we need to industrialise. The presentation showed us that as a country, we can promote equitable development through the promotion of rural industrialisation. I noted that our rural provinces are rich in resources. What is needed is the right infrastructure, partnerships and policy frameworks to unlock that potential. There is need for us to promote local economic development by focusing on local endowments. The Indaba was a platform that also connected the rural businesses with investors, technology providers, policy makers, facilitating the development of a more integrated and resilient industrial landscape across Zimbabwe. Going forward, there is need for the development of feasibility studies and bankable project proposals to assist our local authorities in marketing their identified projects. I so submit.

THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you. However, I would like to remind other Hon. Members that this must be a one minute statement.

HON. MAMBIPIRI:  Madam Speaker, five days ago, Zimbabweans joined the rest of the world in following events around the election of a new Pope who became known as Pope Leo XIV. Today, I rise to pay tribute to his predecessor, a spiritual shepherd and a moral compass whose voice echoed far beyond the church but sadly passed on the 21^st of April 2025. Born Jorge Bergoglio on December 17, 88 years ago in Argentina, Pope Francis became the first Pope from the Americas and the first in modern history from the global South. His leadership was marked by a steadfast commitment to justice, peace, the dignity of all people. His call for a “poor Church for the poor” resonated deeply in Zimbabwe, where economic hardships and social challenges persist. His messages of reconciliation, environmental stewardship and dialogue inspired our collective efforts to address pressing national issues such as poverty, corruption and political polarisation.

Through his teachings, he encouraged us to build bridges of unity and to work together for the common good. For the past 12 years as Pope, Francis was a voice of moral clarity in an era of growing inequality, conflict and economic exploitation. He attacked unregulated capitalism and globalisation. He criticised war and called for peace.

In words and actions, he defended migrants, refugees and the marginalised. Pope Francis was not merely a leader in words—he embodied the humility and simplicity that he preached - often rejecting luxury and opulence, opting to live and travel in modesty.

 

In Africa, Pope Francis will be remembered for his visits to some of the continent’s most impoverished and war-torn regions, where he walked among the people, condemned corruption and urged leaders to act in the interests of the poor. I am comforted as I conclude by the knowledge long shared by the preachers that the journey of the faithful does not end in the grave but in the house of the Lord. I thank you.

         *HON. BUKA: I am very happy as I stand up noticing the Independence celebrations to rural areas. We saw it happening in Mashonaland Central. Last year we were in Manicaland, this year the Independence celebrations took place in Nembudziya, Gokwe North in Midlands Province.

         First of all, let me thank His Excellency, the President Cde Dr. E. D. Mnangagwa for his vision and love for bringing the celebrations in Gokwe North in Nembudziya. His vision compliments his mantra that no place and no person should be left behind. In the same breadth, we saw the hard work that was exhibited in Gokwe Nembudziya within a few months. Those works, if there was no Independence celebrations, the work would have taken us more than 10 years to accomplish. Within a short space of time, Gokwe Nembudziya was a changed place.

         In thanking the war liberators, the President built three modern houses for our war veterans. When the houses were being handed over, he also recognised women for they also fought for our liberations. Next to the houses of the war veterans, a stadium for sporting activities was built. We are so thankful about that because this will uplift sporting activities in Gokwe Nembudziya.

         I want to appreciate this good gesture because one good thing that was done was that roads were rehabilitated. Besides the roads, we also had boreholes drilled, gardens and schools were improved. We want to appreciate all that development.

         Lastly, I want to thank all the distinguished guests that visited Gokwe Nembudziya. It was raining but the President came. I also want to thank the First Lady and all the distinguished guests that came to Gokwe. Members from the opposition, you came in your numbers. From the ruling party, we had a good time in Gokwe. With these few words I want to thank you. I wish good health to our President.

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE HON DEPUTY SPEAKER

VISITORS IN THE SPEAKER’S GALLERY

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I would like to acknowledge the presence of members of staff from the National Assembly of Namibia sitting in the Speaker’s Gallery. You are most welcome – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear] -

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

         HON. KAMBUZUMA: I move that Orders of the Day, Numbers 1 to 8 on today’s Order Paper be stood over until Order of the Day Number 9 has been disposed of.

         HON. C. MOYO: I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: On a point of order. The job of Parliament is that of legislation. You will recall that the President, when he came to this august House, bemoaned the lack of Bills being processed by this august House. If you check on the status of Bills that are before this august House, you will note that there are quite a number of Bills whose public hearings have been held by this Parliament and its various Committees.  However, the processing is failing primarily because Ministers and their Deputies are not coming before Parliament to move those Bills to have the processes of Second Reading or even Committee Stage.

         Generally, the major challenge that we then also face as a Parliament is that we come to Parliament prepared hoping that Ministers will come for debate. As you may be aware, Hon. Members do not have the gadgets to store sufficient information pertaining to these Bills. We come with bags full of these Bills everyday hoping that the Ministers will come. Week after week, the Ministers are not coming. It becomes problematic. When you see Hon. Members not debating the Bills, it is not because that they do not want to debate but the Ministers are letting us down as Parliament.

         I beseech you therefore Madam Speaker, to ensure that a letter is written to the Executive so that those Bills that are on the Order Paper are processed. We have three weeks without any Ministers coming here to move a Bill. That is not proper and not good for Zimbabwe. I thank you.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you Hon. Mushoriwa. Your point of privilege has been taken note of.

MOTION

APPROVAL FOR RATIFICATION OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REPUBLIC OF ZIMBABWE AND THE REPUBLIC OF BELARUS ON THE PROMOTION AND RECIPROCAL PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS

         THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE (HON. S. CHIKOMO): A pleasant afternoon Madam Speaker. Memorandum of the ratification of the agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments. Section 327 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe provides that an International Treaty that has been concluded or executed by the President or under the President’s authority-

         Sub Section 2 (a) and (b):

• does not bind Zimbabwe until it has been approved by Parliament and
• does not form part of the law of Zimbabwe unless it has been incorporated into law through an Act of Parliament.

         Sub Section 3 (a) and (b)

 An agreement which is not an International Treaty but which:

 (a) has been concluded or executed by the President or under the President’s authority with one or more foreign organisations or entities and  

(b) imposes fiscal obligations on Zimbabwe does not bind Zimbabwe until it has been approved by Parliament.

The agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus on the promotion….

         HON. MUTSEYAMI: On a point of order. The Hon. Speaker of Parliament has put a directive to the House. I am sure in consultation with the Presiding Officers that all treaties that are to be presented in this House have to go through a process in the Multipurpose Hall and all Members must be addressed and debates done. Thereafter, we will have the treaty presentation in this august House. So, I present Madam Speaker.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: I hear you Hon. Mutseyami. Let the Minister proceed and we will not debate until Hon. Members have gone to the workshop or seminar about the treaty.

         HON. MUTSEYAMI: Sorry Madam Speaker, with all due respect. The Hon. Speaker’s judgement cannot be abused. I stand so guided. Are we starting to change the rules or we are going vice versa?

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: We are not changing the rules Hon. Mutseyami. I am in agreement with what you are saying. We are not changing the rules. Hon. Deputy Minister, may you proceed.

         HON. S. CHIKOMO: Thank you Madam Speaker. I wish to also guide the Hon. Member. We just indicated that this Memorandum of Understanding has been procedurally discussed. The presentation was done in the Multipurpose Hall.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Deputy Minister is saying the presentation was done. Is it not yet done Hon. Deputy Minister?

         HON. S. CHIKOMO: Madam Speaker ma’am, I moved the motion two weeks ago and last week, this discussion was held in the Multi-Purpose room.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER: Hon. Members, I am being advised that the presentation was done but Hon. Members were not present.

HON. S. CHIKOMO: Thank you Madam Speaker ma’am. I wish to proceed. The agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus on the Promotion and Reciprocal Protection of Investments, seeks to create favourable conditions that are fair and equitable which will enhance the mutual flow of capital by intensifying co-operation between private enterprises in both contracting parties with a view to stimulating the productive use of resources.

The agreement was signed on the 1^st of February, 2023. Article 1 provides the definitions for the purpose of the Agreement. Article 2 provides for the scope of application which states that the Agreement applies to investments made in Zimbabwe and Belarus and only made by nationals of the countries.

Article 3 provides that the contracting parties shall promote the development of economic cooperation between their nationals through the encouragement of investments made by those nationals in the territory of either contracting party. In addition, provides for the admission within the framework of the contracting parties laws and regulations, the participation of their nationals through investments in the establishment and operation of the productive activities in each territory which contribute towards the improvement of the standard of living of their people and the prosperity of their country.

Article 4 states that the Host Contracting Party shall accord investments by investors of the other contracting party protections and security no less favourable than it accords to investments of its own.

Article 5 provides for fair and equitable treatment to investments of nationals for both contracting party and neither contracting party shall impair by unjustified or discriminatory measures, the operation, management, maintenance, use, enjoyment or disposal thereof by those nationals.  Furthermore, this article accords investments of investors of each contracting party, full protection and security it accords either its nationals or to nationals or any third state, except in cases that the respective laws and special treaties provide otherwise.

         Article 6 provides for fair and equitable treatment of nationals from the host State.

         Article7 states that each host contracting party shall accord investors and their investments treatment no less favourable than it accords in like circumstances to investors and their investments from any third country with respect to the establishment, acquisition, expansion, management, operation and disposition of investments in its territory.

         Article 8 places a common obligation against corruption and enjoys investors to not partake in corrupt activities.

         Article 9 requires foreign investors to comply with domestic laws in the host contracting party.

         Article 10 calls upon investors to provide information to the host contracting party for the purpose of decision making as well as statistical information.

         Article 11 requires investors to maintain an environmental management system consistent with recognised international environmental management standards and good business practice standards.

         Article12 provides for other commitments, therefore, if either contracting party’s legislation or obligations under an international agreement existing at present or to established contain rules whether general or specific entitling investments by investors of the other contracting party to treatment more favourable than is provided for by this Agreement, such rules shall apply to the extent that they are more favourable.

         Article 13 provides for exceptions.  Certain provisions of the Agreement may be suspended subject to limited grounds which include national security.

         Article 14 states that investors whose investments suffer loss in the territory of the host contracting party owing to war or other armed conflict, revolution, national emergency, revolt, insurrection or riot, shall be accorded treatment as regards restitution, indemnification, compensation or other settlement not less favourable than that which the host contracting party accords to its own investors or to investors of any third party.

         Article 15 states that investments of investors of either contracting party shall not be nationalised, expropriated or subjected to measures having effect equivalent to nationalisation or expropriation.

         Article 16 states that each contracting party shall with respect to investment, permit investors of the other contracting party upon the fulfilment of all their tax obligations.

         Article 17 states that a contracting party or its designated agency having made payment to an investor based on a guarantee issued for non-commercial risks in relation to an investment in the territory of the other contracting party, shall be by virtue of subrogation, be entitled to exercise the rights of the investor to the same extent as the original investor.

         Articles 18, 19 and 20 prescribe the process of dispute settlement between the parties and between investors.  It states that when a dispute arises, it shall be settled amicably through consultation or negotiations in the event that negotiations fail, the parties shall constitute an arbitral tribunal to settle the dispute.

         According to Article 21, each party shall, subject to its laws and regulations relating to the entry and sojourn of non-citizens, permit natural persons of the other contracting party and other persons appointed or employed by investors of the other contracting party to enter and remain in its territory for the purpose of engaging in activities connected with investments.

         Article 22 provides for amendments.

         Article 23 states that the contracting parties shall consult at the request of either contracting party on any matter concerning the interpretation, application or implementation of this Agreement.

         Articles 24 and 25 provide for the entry into force, duration and termination of this Agreement.  Entry into force begins on the date of receipt of notification by either contracting party to the other that its constitutional and legal requirements have been fulfilled.  This Agreement shall remain in force for fifteen (15) years and shall be automatically extended for another five (5) years unless either contracting party notifies of the intention to terminate the Agreement in writing twelve (12) before the said expiration.

         Article 26 is a confidentiality clause while Article 27 states that all correspondence pursuant to the Agreement shall be done through diplomatic channels.

         It is desirable that the Republic of Zimbabwe ratify the aforesaid Agreement.

         HON. MDLURI: I rise to present the Committee report for the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade on the Agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus on the promotion and reciprocal promotion of investment.

         1.0        INTRODUCTION

1.1 Pursuant to Section 327 (2) of the Constitution and Standing Order No. 21 (e), the Portfolio Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade considered the Agreement between the Republic of Belarus and the Republic of Zimbabwe on the promotion and reciprocal protection of investments, signed on 21 February 2023. This seminal agreement brought to Parliament by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade on 10 March 2025, is poised to catalyse sustainable development, poverty reduction and economic growth by striking a balance between economic, social and environmental considerations, ultimately bolstering the prosperity of both nations.

2.0    METHODOLOGY

2.1 The Committee convened a half-day workshop for all Members of Parliament on Thursday 03 April, 2025 to deconstruct the agreement, bringing together esteemed institutions and experts to provide a nuanced understanding of its implications. Notably, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade offered in-depth insights, while the Zimbabwe Investment and Development Agency (ZIDA) contributed a critical analysis from a legal and investment standpoint. Additionally, renowned think-tanks from Africa University and the University of Zimbabwe provided an authoritative critique from an International Relations perspective, supplemented by expert input from the Midlands State University's Department of Governance and Public Management. This engagement informed the Committee's deliberations, ultimately shaping the findings and recommendations presented in this report.

          3.0                 BRIEF ANATOMY OF THE AGREEMENT 

3.1 The Agreement between Belarus and Zimbabwe aims to create a conducive investment climate and promote the development of the two countries, while ensuring that investments are made in accordance with the laws and regulations of the Host Contracting Party and international best practices. It establishes a reciprocal framework for promotion, protection and facilitation of investments between the two sister republics and the mutual basis for investments made by one country's investors in the other's territory. Additionally, the Agreement strongly provides for the prevention of corruption, environmental management, sharing of vital information as well as general exceptions on compensation for losses, expropriation and dispute settlement mechanisms. 

4.0    COMMITTEE FINDINGS

4.1 The Committee commended the Executive for signing the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (BIPPA) with the Republic of Belarus, a milestone that marked a significant departure from traditional BIPPAs. Historically, such agreements had prioritised the protection of Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) from developed nations, often at the expense of the host country with a focus on extractive industries such as mining. Notable examples include but not limited to, the Zimbabwe-United Kingdom BIPPA (1995) and the Zimbabwe-Canada BIPPA (1995), which facilitated investments in Zimbabwe's mining and manufacturing sectors by companies such as Rio Tinto, Anglo American, Cambria Africa and Caledonia Mining Corporation.

4.2 The BIPPA with Belarus, however, presented a more progressive approach, offering Zimbabwe opportunities to access cutting-edge technologies and establish reciprocal investments in the former Soviet Republic. Articles 3 and 16 of the Agreement establish a strong foundation to facilitate horizontal investments such as infrastructure development, technology transfer, and establishment of manufacturing companies. This collaborative framework aimed to stimulate the Zimbabwean economy while generating profits for Belarusian investors and vice versa, thereby creating a mutually beneficial partnership. The adoption of this innovative approach is a testament to the Executive’s commitment to forge more equitable and sustainable economic relationships which have the potential to drive growth and development in Zimbabwe.

4.3    Article 11- Environmental Obligations 

The Article contains environmental obligations that are binding on investors investing in the territory of another country. In most cases, environmental obligations are less binding as they are still an emerging issue in investment law, necessitated by the need to promote sustainable investments. The Committee commended the parties for negotiating an ambitious provision to ensure that investors promote and protect sustainable investments through adherence to strict environmental standards. However, the Agreement is lacking on human rights, business ethics, labour standards and corporate social responsibility provisions, which can be negotiated in the same light. These provisions are common in new generation of Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) to ensure that businesses are held to a higher standard during their operations. 

4.4      Article 14- Compensation for Losses  

The Committee was pleased to note that the Agreement with Belarus aligned with Zimbabwe's national objectives, outlined in section 1 of the Constitution, to establish a sustainable and democratic society. The alignment is reflected in the Agreement's provisions on compensation for losses and dispute resolution mechanisms. Article 14 provides that host States must compensate investors for losses suffered during times of armed conflict or national emergencies. This follows the commitment on full security and protection of investments. However, the Committee observed that though the provision seeks to ensure that investors received restitution, indemnification or compensation in a fair and timely manner, it is inconsistent with international best practices as the provision has been excluded in contemporary investment treaties. The provision puts an undue burden on the Host State to compensate investors for any loss suffered due to force majeure occurrences. The standard practice is that investors are compensated only for losses that arose due to Government expropriation and not force majeure occurrences. 

          4.5      Article 16- Transfer of Funds  

The Committee acknowledged that provisions on transfer of funds are common in investment treaties and national laws. They enable investors to repatriate funds to their home countries from the investment made in the territory of another. However, the provision in the Agreement is too broad. The ZIDA Act, in Section16 provides for permissible instances for investors to repatriate funds in a freely convertible currency and the funds are limited to only those that are directly linked to the investment. This is meant to curb the externalisation of funds and capital flight. Ironically, Article 16 of the Agreement does not put in place similar safeguards to ensure that some of the money generated by the investments remains in the country for utilisation. Therefore, the Committee deemed it prudent that the Agreement should be tailor-made to mutually benefit both the investor and the host State, particularly when it comes to sustainable investments. 

4.6        Articles 18, 19 and 20 Dispute Resolution

The Agreement also provides for dispute resolution mechanisms, outlined in Articles 18, 19 and 20, which included a six-month cooling-off, period for negotiation or mediation, followed by arbitration if necessary. The arbitral tribunal's decisions are binding and costs are shared between the parties. The Committee noted that these mechanisms are robust and effective as they provide a fair and efficient means of resolving investment disputes, utilising international arbitration rules such as the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) Convention or the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) Arbitration Rules. 

However, the Committee noted with concern that the question on whether or not to include investor State dispute settlement in investment treaties has been topical internationally as many countries moved away from including such provisions in Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) due to the fate they suffered in investment arbitration.  Ironically, the Agreement provides for arbitration to the controversial ICSD, a platform condemned for broadly interpreting agreements in favour of investors, lack of judicial precedence and awarding punitive damages payable by sovereign countries. Notably, Zimbabwe received punitive damages at the ICSD for three cases on expropriation, namely Von Pezold, Funnekotter and Border Allied Timbers. Therefore, the inclusion of investor-State dispute settlement is unsettling given that the BIT is very ambitious and broad in scope in its current provisions and it extends coverage to investments established before the Agreement entered into force.

         5.0          OBSERVATIONS

5.1 Historically, Bilateral Investment Treaties were designed by first world economies as key drivers of foreign investments into emerging markets with conducive environments that provided certain guarantees to investors at State level. However, the dynamics have drastically changed, including the face of international law and international relations. Therefore, the BIPPA is emerging in the context of South-South cooperation with both countries seeking to further their interests on a mutual understanding. Given that Zimbabwe’s economy is anchored on agriculture and mining, Belarus will bring the much-needed technology and mechanisation opportunities in both sectors. 

5.2 The Committee observed that if implemented and enforced

effectively, the Agreement has the potential to serve as a crucial tool for

attracting foreign direct investment (FDIs). Additionally, it conveys a

positive message to the international community, affirming that

Zimbabwe is a premier destination for international investments. The

foregoing aligns with the transformative vision that Zimbabwe is Open

for Business. 

5.3 The Agreement corresponds with Section 12 (10) (c) and (d) of

the Constitution, which mandates Zimbabwe to coexist peacefully, resolve international disputes through amicable means and foster collaboration with all nations. This constitutional provision reflects the country’s commitment to maintaining friendly relations and developing strategic partnerships while avoiding any adversarial stance, encapsulated in the guiding principle that Zimbabwe is a friend to all and enemy to none.

       6.0               RECOMMENDATIONS

       The Committee recommends as follows:

2025. Parliament should approve the Agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus on promotion and reciprocal protection of investments by 31 May 2025.
2026. The Ministries of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion and Environment, Climate and Wildlife should ensure that once the Agreement entered into force provisions on corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability are effectively implemented and enforced.

         7.0 CONCLUSION

The Agreement between the Republic of Zimbabwe and the Republic of Belarus presents a significant opportunity for Zimbabwe to promote investment, foster sustainable development and strengthen economic ties. The Committee therefore strongly recommends for Parliament to approve the agreement.

         HON.  MUSHORIWA:  Thank you Madam Speaker for allowing me to debate in respect of this Bilateral Agreement that the Hon. Minister has brought to this august House.  Madam Speaker, in principle, there should not be a problem with respect to Zimbabwe entering into bilateral agreements with any country.  But fundamentally, Zimbabwe as a nation, should be guided by our national interest whenever we enter these bilateral agreements.  We should be guided by what will drive Zimbabwe forward.  I want to say that with respect of this,   there are fundamental things that are there.  You will firstly note that this Bilateral Agreement was signed on 1^st February 2023.  We are now in 2025 and the coincidence of the Minister bringing this Agreement before this august House was meant to be timed by the President’s official visit currently happening.  What it means is that this Agreement, as I will explain later, does not take cognisance of what we want.  The Hon. Minister, when she presented the report, fundamentally failed to disclose some things to this august House.  First and foremost, it is the balance of trade between the two countries.  Coming here with a Bilateral Agreement without the Minister telling us what the balance of trade is like between the two countries, means you are giving Zimbabwe a half-baked measure. 

         For the benefit of Hon. Members, you need to understand how this agreement is bad for Zimbabwe.  As a country, from 2018, which was our highest in terms of exports to Belarus, we exported USD243 000.  That number has been declining every year by 84% to the extent that in 2024 we exported USD23 worth of tobacco.  What has been happening is that we have been importing from that same country millions and millions of dollars.  It started at USD2 million in 2018 and the figure has been going at an average of 4% every year and in 2024, we actually imported USD3.07million worth of goods from that country.  What it means is that we have a trade deficit of more than three million and what it tells you is that this Agreement that the Hon. Minister wants Parliament to sanction is a one-sided Agreement.

         HON. MUDUMI:  On a point of order Madam Speaker.  Hon. Mushoriwa is either lying or he is lost.  His debate is not based on factual information but based on opinions.  I pledge to share the report with Hon. Mushoriwa so that he can come up with factual information.  There is nothing like USD23 trade imbalance between the two countries.  Thank you Madam Speaker.

         THE HON. DEPUTY SPEAKER:  Hon. Mushoriwa, you can proceed but do not mislead the House.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  Madam Speaker, thank you so much.  The Hon Member presented a Portfolio Committee report and should have actually made it easier for this august House to supply the figures if they think that I am actually lying. However, in any event, the Hon. Minister is there. She is going to respond to this report. The figures that I am giving you Madam Speaker are as accurate as I can vouch because I have actually gone through.  I want to tell you Madam Speaker, the story. As a country, we need to be saying, do we get an advantage by trading with country X or country Y? If there is no advantage to us as a nation, if the citizens of this country are not benefiting, then it becomes a problem.

We also need to be worried when we end up having a trade arrangement which can easily be manipulated and exploited by few individuals who are connected and end up bringing certain items. Like in this case, we know. In Zimbabwe, what have we been importing? You see that there have been motor vehicles, special purpose motor vehicles. Some of them were done by the Ministry of Local Government and then they were imposed on the local authorities under the devolution funds. We cannot as a country continue to go and allow ourselves as Parliament to endorse this agreement. An agreement cannot be based on political friendship. It cannot be an agreement based on friendship. It has to be based on trade. If there is no trade which benefits us as a country, I do not think this agreement should be ratified by Parliament.

Fundamentally, Madam Speaker, I just want to point to you something. If you go through what the Hon. Minister has been saying pertaining to the agreement and thankfully, the Portfolio Committee did raise some of the things that are contained in this agreement which are retrogressive. One of the things that you need to understand in terms of compensation, a country that is exporting more than three million and a country which is exporting to that country less than 10 000, which country really benefits from a clause that talks of compensation - [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] This agreement is skewed against us as a country. I want to tell you Hon. Members, this is an agreement that we as the representative of the people, the people that were elected to serve the citizens of this country, we should be able to say no, let the Executive go back, re-look and analyse this agreement.

Alternatively, Madam Speaker, we should have a position paper from ZIMTRADE to be saying what is it or mechanism in place to make sure that as Zimbabwe, we will be in a position to benefit from such an agreement? Otherwise, endorsing this agreement is unpatriotic. It is against the interests of Zimbabwe and we should not endorse this agreement.  I urge Hon. Members across the political divide that in this case, let us be united and put Zimbabwe first. Once we have put Zimbabwe first, everything will be okay. I thank you Madam Speaker.

         HON. JERE: Thank you Madam Speaker. It is very sad that this is one of the agreements which was thoroughly analysed even by independent parties including Africa University representative director of external relations. They came up with their submissions to the workshop which was carried on the 27^th of March in the Multi-Purpose Hall. The discussions which took almost the whole day were quite thorough. According to the submissions from the experts, they actually gave a thumbs up that this is one of the Bills which was well thought out and the input of everyone was done. Let me take you through the team which put the submissions on that particular day. The Minister of Foreign Affairs was represented by their Permanent Secretary who was there and they gave their submissions to the Bill. ZIDA, our chief legal officer was also there.

All the amendments which were required were agreed to and the Minister of Foreign Affairs took note of those changes which needed to be put in. One thing which as a country, actually makes us as Parliament to say we need to endorse this agreement is, it took into account some of the problems which the country was facing in line with other agreements which were done before. The issues of corporate social responsibility were actually looked at and they were thoroughly interrogated.

It was agreed that those things were going to be corrected and also incorporated in this agreement which I am happy that they have been incorporated. The Members were concerned about the labour issues. What is going to happen? This is because it was also talking of the mining. What is going to happen when the investors finally leave where they are carrying out their mining activities? Those are some of the areas which we are interested in which we contributed during that day. Our interest was based on the experience which I have, in a way by the communities and then left with the rebels. It was agreed by the experts who were going through the legal parties that all those things were incorporated in this Bill. It was an agreement that was thoroughly interrogated. So, for us to come into this House and say I have packed and we lied to the nation to the people who are listening out there that nothing was done on this, is saving the interest of a few.

It is a Bill which is coming to this House to save the interest of a few when it was thoroughly interrogated and it was a whole day’s workshop. To start with, there was a lie that this Bill never came to the workshop before a discussion…

HON. MADZIVANYIKA: Thank you Madam Speaker. I would like to thank the Hon. Member who is debating. He is indicating that this Bill was thoroughly unpacked, . Can you give us the facts as to whys it it good for us so that we take it up as such? We are very open to it but to just say it was thoroughly interrogated without giving us the facts is not good. Thank you Madam Speaker.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER (HON. TSITSI ZHOU): Your point of order is overruled. Hon. Jere is still debating and please proceed Hon. Jere.

HON. JERE: Thank you Madam Speaker Ma’am. I think it is very important that we respect how each and every one of us debates. I am giving a background of who was there to try to allay the lies which are being peddled to this House that this was never discussed to start with and this is what is with our people, our people who are out there, the electorate who voted for us to be here. Out there, they are saying, how can they bring to Parliament something which was never discussed or interrogated which is something which was done for the whole day? We do not want to peddle lies in Parliament. We need to be men and women of integrity. We tell the truth. I am giving you the date when this was interrogated. It was on the 27^th of March. So I am now unpacking the critical issues which were discussed.  I spoke about the issues of labour.  I spoke about the environmental issues which were interrogated during that day and these things were incorporated into the Bill.

There is also an issue of the FDI.  All those issues were interrogated and we saw them benefiting this country on the foreign direct investment which this country is desperately looking for.  The Bill was so balanced even in the issues of exchanges of skills between the two countries which is very key.  If you look at today's world, the issues of skills are very critical.  Most economies are going down because they will not be having enough or the required skill sets in that particular subject or area.  So this agreement is one of the agreements which we have never seen as a country in a long time.

Some of the issues which were also discussed were very critical, especially to us the parliamentarians who come from rural areas, the issues of what is the direct benefit which is going to remain in the communities, in the societies where we come from besides the FDI which comes through, of course, the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion.  We need the investors when they come into our communities, to have our communities benefit directly from the investment which they are going to give.  The issue of 1% which was recently discussed in Parliament, I understand which was passed, that from the benefits which an investor is getting, 1% should benefit the community from which they are doing their business.  It was also discussed.

So this Bill has got everything which one might think of when it comes to the benefit of our people, the benefit of the country, the macroeconomic benefits, the benefit from the grassroots, how our people are going to benefit in the rural areas where we come from.  All those issues were captured and they were thoroughly interrogated because we are basing on the previous experiences which we have had as a country where the investors come, they leave us with a lot of problems than benefits, especially the communities where we are coming from.  

One of the reasons why I would want this House to pass this particular agreement, Madam Speaker, is  this agreement already performing.  Look at what this agreement has done to our agricultural sector from 2013 up to today.  You are seeing the mechanisation, how our agricultural mechanisation has actually improved and the equipment which is coming.  Everyday our President is busy commissioning equipment which is coming.  Our economy is hinged on agriculture and for one to stand up and lie to the nation that it is not going to benefit our people when we are already benefiting as a country from this agreement before it is already ratified.  

So Belarus is coming from a good standing in my own opinion because already they are performing what is in the Agreement before it is already signed and we are seeing it.  Our local authorities are benefiting.  We are seeing a lot of equipment that is coming from Belarus.  Our farming has moved to another level through mechanisation before it is even ratified by Parliament.  So what else do we want?  It is not an Agreement which you are saying is going to perform later after we have signed it. So this is one agreement which I would want to encourage the Hon. Members not to delay because we already know the nature of the partner we are dealing with.  They are already performing.  It is an agreement which I would want Parliament to sign even before the 31^st, the deadline which we are given because it is a performing agreement.

Some of the issues which we also discussed besides this were issues of scholarships, that our youngsters are going to be taken to Belarus to be trained so that in the future Zimbabwe becomes self-sustainable.  Of course, there are some issues which we are now trying to push to say issues of mechanisation, especially the tractors which are coming.  We already have more than a thousand tractors which are on their way to boost our agriculture.

The issue which was also being discussed is why can we not have those tractors assembled in Zimbabwe which is something being elevated which was agreed that no, let us look at that so that we also assemble some of these tractors.  It will also become a value addition which is being pushed.  Manufacturers will also become part of it.

So this is one agreement which is very good for the country, which is good for Zimbabwe and if those tractors come they are going to benefit everyone.  We are seeing them already wherever they have come.  They have already flooded our rural areas.  So it is an agreement which I would want to urge the Hon. Members to support and make sure that it is signed even before the 31^st.  I so submit, Madam Speaker. Thank you.

HON. CHIDUWA:  Thank you, Madam Speaker.  I rise to support the endorsement and agreement between the Government of Zimbabwe and Belarus.  I think what is critical is for us to define who Zimbabwe is.

In terms of what we stand for, it is clearly captured in Vision 2030.  We have got the critical pillars of who we want to be.  The first pillar is on macroeconomic stability and financial re-engagement.  We have got the pillar on inclusive growth and development, the pillar on infrastructure development, the pillar on governance and the pillar on social development.  When you want to capture the national interest of who Zimbabwe is, you look at those critical pillars as defined in Vision 2030.

Now, we are looking at the bypass between the Government of Zimbabwe and the Government of Belarus.  The main one is Zimbabwe's foreign policy position.  The bypass between Zimbabwe and Belarus will engender the foreign policy principle of Zimbabwe of a friend to all and an enemy to none.  This is our position as Zimbabwe and because of that, we have promoted international relations.  Look at the position that we have taken with regard to our seat in the United Nations.  Belarus is supporting the membership of Zimbabwe in the United Nations Security Council and this is a plus for us as a country.

On the pillar of macroeconomic development and financial re-engagement in development we are looking at critical pillars.  Job creation, industrialisation and all those issues.  I wanted to refer to the mechanisation programme. The mechanisation programme is going to the centre of who we are.  We have been to ZITF and one of the issues that we discussed was industrialisation and we are saying in order to industrialise we need to mechanise our agriculture, value-add our agriculture, value-add in mining, promote innovation, promote manufacturing and all these are captured in the BIPPAs.

Investment promotion - whenever there is a BIPPAs, it makes investors confident in our markets.  If investments are not protected because of the competition that is there it becomes very difficult to attract investments and we are saying this agreement is setting us on a sound and strong footing where, as Zimbabwe, we are going to attract investments that are secure and the investments have got confidence in us as Zimbabweans.

From the presentation that has been submitted, the issue of expropriation. This is well covered. As long as the investment protection agreement is there, investors feel safe because they know that their investments are not going to be expropriated. Trade relations - it is not always the case that when we are dealing with trade relations, they should balance. Sometimes we benefit from the multiplier effect that comes when an investment is made. At face value, one may say there is a trade imbalance. But for us, we benefit from the multiplier effect of that investment.  It may not necessarily be in the form of exports but locally and domestically, we will benefit.  Where are the benefits? The benefits come from job creation, improved standards of living and also to our GDP. So, given those benefits, I feel that this agreement between the Government of Zimbabwe and Belarus will benefit Zimbabwe more.

Inclusive growth - I have spoken of industrialisation, the farm mechanisation programme. Nowadays, even if you go to the rural areas, you see the youth driving tractors written Belarus. This is where we are moving from archaic ways of farming to modern farming. We are looking at timely farming. Just imagine when we are using draught power, we use the cattle and donkeys. How many times would one go to a field to plow a one-hectare piece of land? When you have got tractors, we can timely plant, timely harvest and all this is critical for a country that is also having a competitive advantage in agriculture. So, I fully support this agreement and I think it is very important that as Hon. Members, we support this agreement that is in line with our foreign policy and with our development agenda as espoused in Vision 2030. I so submit.

HON. MADZIVANYIKA: Thank you Madam Speaker. I want to be very frank with this bilateral investment protection agreement, which is existing between the Republic of Zimbabwe and Belarus. The first point I want to make is that this report talks of reciprocity. If you look at it, it says Belarus promotion and risk protection. My question is, where is the reciprocity? Who are the Zimbabwean investors in Belarus? That is the fundamental question. It is very important. Let us not take it for granted. The investors that this agreement talks about are only Zimbabwean-bound. Let us be very clear, it is very important. I am hearing Hon. Members celebrating tractors, mechanisation and equipment. Is it coming to Zimbabwe for free? That is the fundamental question. The answer is no Madam Speaker. There is a payment in that effect. We cannot celebrate that we do not pay. It is just paid by you from anywhere else.

If you look at this agreement Madam Speaker, it acts as an indictment of the fact that our current investment laws are flawed and defective. Why should the Government of Belarus request for compensation on their investment arising from political problems? Assume that there is a problem in Zimbabwe, politically and there is violence or something else and their property gets damaged or destroyed, why would they seek compensation from the Government of Zimbabwe? Why? This is an investment, an issue that happens beyond the control of the Government of Zimbabwe. Why should we be punished in that manner? I do not agree with this point.

Secondly, we cannot undermine what Hon. Mushoriwa said in terms of the issue of trade balance. In some other countries, they now introduce tariffs. So there is a maintaining of a balance in trade so that both countries benefit mutually, competitively and also comparatively. It is not in doubt that if we continue importing a negative trade balance, then we are doing good; we are not doing good.

The article moves on to talk about the issue of corruption. I commend this part of the article, which says that investors shall not be complicit in corruption. But what does it mean Madam Speaker? It means that these investors from Belarus are always concerned about the corruption index in this country. That must be dealt with once and for all. So, it is very clear that our corruption leaves a lot to be desired.

Madam Speaker, let me talk about the issue, if you look at article 15 expropriation, there is a very big concern about the people from Belarus on expropriation. They went on to say that we need to expropriate under normal current convertibility circumstances. This means that our current circumstances, both legally in this country, are not ready for investment. Why should the investors from Belarus specifically mention this? It is a matter of fact that the Government of Belarus, what we call investments in Zimbabwe, are only finished products like tractors and mechanised equipment. What must we celebrate? I wanted a BIPPA that says Belarus should bring a company to start assembling tractors in Zimbabwe where our local people benefit in terms of employment. Where do our people benefit in terms of taxation? We cannot benefit anything from imports. Otherwise, if you look at Vision 2030, the document which we rely on, a policy document strives on the issue of import substitution as a fundamental to create a trade balance gap. So, I expected this agreement to promote a situation whereby this country will mutually benefit through foreign direct investments not this kind of arrangement of importing finished products.

Last but not least Madam Speaker, if you look at this obligation in Article 5, it talks about the obligation not to be denied administrative justice, criminal justice, as well as civil justice on its investors. Why did they craft it in this way? These people are aware that our country is a snare, our country is on an onslaught and assault on the criminal justice delivery system in this country. So, it is a clear indictment that must be addressed as a matter of urgency. I thank you.

HON. MANDIWANZIRA:  Thank you very much Madam Speaker. I want to fully support the agreement that has been presented by the Hon. Minister in this House. Before I go into detail on why I support this agreement, I just would like to let you know Madam Speaker and the House, that I just returned yesterday from a business trip to China, the Middle East and on arrival in Zimbabwe yesterday and the proof is here on my phone, I received this message. ‘Hello Mr. Supa, I have several inquiries from major companies in Belarus regarding the purchase of fruit puree and concentrates, specifically from companies in Zimbabwe. I am attaching official letters from two of these companies through my contacts. Around 20 companies in total are interested in these products. Could you please find out how such purchases and cooperation can be organised?’

I just would like Madam Speaker, to go briefly on one of the letters from the companies. The company is called Maloritta Canning and Vegetable Drying Plant inviting representatives from Zimbabwe

Hon. Madzivanyika having stood up on a point of order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Can we have order? Hon. Madzivanyika, can we have order in the House? Hon Mandiwanzira, can you please proceed.

HON. MANDIWANZIRA: I would like to thank you Madam Speaker. One of the companies is called Maloritta Canning.

HON. MADZIVANYIKA: On a point of order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Please, can you allow Hon. Mandiwanzira to debate? You were debating. I saw Hon. Members standing and I ignored them so that you are able to debate. So, can we allow Hon. Mandiwanzira to debate?

HON. MANDIWANZIRA: One of the companies is called Maloritta Canning and Vegetable Drying Plant, invites representatives from Zimbabwe to participate in the auction from the Belarusian Universal Commodity Exchange for the supply of the following goods according to costed lots – concentrated mango puree 200 000kgs, banana puree canned in acetic way. I can go on and on but I just wanted to demonstrate that agreements are not done simply because there is existing trade that is balanced. They are done in anticipation of trade between countries. At a particular point, the agreements will be done when there is no deal to protect those that will get into deals once we get into those deals.

This agreement protects Belarusians who are investing in our country. It also protects Zimbabweans who are going to invest in Belarus. First of all, they may not have the sufficient capital to go and invest in Belarus but they will have commodities to go and sell in Belarus. They are protected in terms of their agreement presented by the Hon. Minister in order to recover their money. They can go and get that money from Belarus based on this trade agreement that the Hon. Minister has presented.

The reason I just demonstrated this conversation yesterday is to show that trade is not a one way. In fact, what we should be doing as Hon. Members is to acknowledge the good job that the Ministry Foreign Affairs and International Trade is doing to create these platforms for business people to go and engage with other countries. Therefore, we should go to constituencies and begin to say, by the way are you aware that Belarus has a population of just under 10 million people. Their GDP is over USD70bn, are you aware that they export USD2bn worth of fertilizers every year? Could we in our constituencies or provinces benefit from that from Belarus? That is what we should be doing as Members of Parliament.

We need to be looking at the opportunity and not attacking the platform that the Government is creating to protect us and to protect those who are bringing their money to our country. There are people and countries who have classified us to be a risk to put their money. There are countries that are happy to put their money and Belarus is one of them. Therefore, if Belarus would like to be protected in terms of their investment, there is absolutely nothing wrong for as long as that protection is not exclusive to Belarus. It is also available to Zimbabweans who are going to Belarus. It is reciprocal. The question that was being asked on reciprocal – it is reciprocal on the basis that we are equally protected as Zimbabweans should we invest in that country.

Zimbabwe has signed many of these agreements with many countries where we do not even earn a single dollar as an investment. We have UK, USA, Australia, we do so in order to attract capital and to make sure that that capital feels safe in our country. As we have already heard in this House, Belarus is supportive of Zimbabwe’s economic growth prospects and it sees that opportunity. It has invested already in our agriculture because we are an agriculture economy. In my view, this agreement deserves the support of all Members of Parliament because we tend to undermine and view ourselves as underdogs always. We do not see ourselves as potential investors in other countries.

I want to challenge any Member of Parliament who can stand up and say we have no Zimbabweans who are running some of the most prestigious institutions in the United States. No one can stand up in this House and say we have no Zimbabweans who are running prestigious institutions in African countries, in European countries and North American countries. The fact that we have Zimbabweans, for instance we have a Zimbabwean from Dangamvura who is running MTN which is a global company from South Africa and it has got networks across Africa, including Iran. It is being run by a Zimbabwean. What that says is that there is potential of Zimbabweans investing in Belarus and therefore, the Government is creating a platform where their investments will be safe. It is not just about the Belarusian but it is about all parties who are entering into this agreement.

I want to give a very crude example. Agreements are never done when deals have matured. Zvakafanana neroora, nekuroorana.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: May I request Hon. Mandiwanzira to use one language?

HON. MANDIWANZIRA: I appreciate the guidance. When people get married and sign that wedding certificate, it is because you have not stayed together and do not quite understand each other. Ask those people to sign that marriage certificate several years into marriage, there will not be any agreements. No one is willing to sign.

This one is good. We have not done much with Belarus as Zimbabweans and the Belarusians have not done much into our own country, so let us sign the agreement now. When there are quarrels, you can never sign any agreement.

HON. MUSHORIWA: On a point of order.

         THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order, order, Hon. Mandiwanzira! Hon. Mushoriwa, you were given the opportunity to debate. If your point of order is to direct Hon. Mandiwanzira on how to debate, I am going to overrule it. Please proceed.

HON. MUSHORIWA: Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Hon. Member, in his debate, seems to undermine the institution of marriage. Primarily because maybe...

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order. Hon. Mushoriwa! Please, can you take your seat? Can we have order in the House? That point of order is overruled. Order Hon. Members! We want to be progressive. We are going to give opportunity for Hon. Members to proceed. I am not going to allow any points of order as to directing any Hon. Member on how to debate. Hon. Mandiwanzira, please can you proceed?

HON. MANDIWANZIRA: Thank you very much Madam Speaker. In conclusion, I just wanted to say this morning, I was watching television, ZBC. I saw a news clip by Ruben Barwe where he was reporting a visit by His Excellency, our President, Comrade...

HON. MADZIVANYIKA: Order, Order 85 does not allow reference to any social media or any other media. When you are debating, check that order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order Hon. Madzivanyika! You are undermining this Chair I am sitting on. You stand up unrecognised and you continue to shout using the mic. Can you please leave the House? Please leave the House.

HON. MADZIVANYIKA: My apologies Madam Speaker. My apologies Madam Chair. Please forgive me. Please forgive me Madam Chair. I apologise. My apologies, Madam Chair. Please, please.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Please, can you leave the House? I appreciate that but you cannot just stand, switch on the mic and start talking. Please can you leave the House? Order, order! Please can you be quick about it? Order Members on my right, order! Hon. Mandiwanzira, please proceed.

HON. MANDIWANZIRA: Thank you very much. I was saying, in conclusion, I was watching this morning a report on ZBC by Ruben Barwe who was reporting a visit to a dairy plant by His Excellency, President E. D. Munangagwa in Belarus just yesterday. In his remarks, His Excellency, our President said he had been amazed by the technologies that are on display at this plant in Belarus. He is coming back home to encourage Zimbabweans to go and get this technology from Belarus to bring it home because it is very advanced.

The President is well ahead of us. This agreement is important to make sure that that vision by the President makes those Belarusians who are investing in high technology come here and have a soft landing with their investment. I thank you, Madam Speaker.

*HON. MAPIKI: Thank you Madam Speaker ma’am. I would like to applaud the agreement and I support it totally because Belarus has always stood with us and it will continue to stand with us. The most important issue that many people are afraid of is the issue of exploitation of workers. When I realised the recently enacted laws, the countries, given terms and conditions when they come to invest, that is when I decided to totally accept this and support this. Looking at minerals, whether Belarus is going to extract and export raw minerals but the stock of beneficiation in Government is saying they are looking at all that.

I was afraid of several other things before I read this, for example, gold, how is gold going to be smuggled to Belarus when Government does not know like what others are doing? So, I saw a very good law that says Government gold must not be smuggled. I think those are some of the things that I think will be put in place. I would like to thank the Minister of Foreign Affairs and I encourage you to continue working with ZimTrade.

The most important thing is teaching people what we can do in other countries. In this country as Zimbabweans, in the whole of Africa, we are the ones who are at a till, all we need is to manufacture goods and export them. We have those things. When I went to Belarus, I realised that there are some goods that they want like cassava from here and we do not have the expertise for those things In Belarus we need commercial starch which is extracted from cassava and commercial starch is used in clothing textiles manufacturers. So all we need is to open warehouses where we can simply start selling those.

We have Amarula that is being worked on in Mwenezi, so all we need is the expertise to ensure that we process it and take it there because they really want it. We need a lot of education through ZimTrade. We have a lot of opportunities in Mozambique as well as Belarus, we are not sure of the opportunities. All we have is the expertise in building houses with wings but we do not have the expertise and the machinery. So this is an agreement that has the potential to take us far.

As Members of Parliament if you are no longer elected, learn to manufacture goods, I wish the Government would put a lot of funding into the manufacturing sector so that we manufacture and export goods. We have fish and free range of chicken because so many people actually like food from Africa because it is good, we should stop listening to all criticism. Before I was born my mother lost three pregnancies before me but she never lost hope until I was born. Crying about what you may have come across is not worth it.

We are Africans with our resources. We urge the Government to invest in research so that we know what other countries want and we come here, we manufacture those goods. There is lithium that is very topical these days. Countries are using lithium batteries so let us work with companies such as those in Belarus that we can actually send the processed materials and we will make a lot of money. We are talking of drones these days, be they military drones or the ones that are used in agriculture. We have all the raw materials that is what we want. If they give us those experts to finalise our manufacturing, there is no need for us to make industries there, we need to process here. All we need is the expertise.

I think it is now clear that we need to upgrade our technology, including the digital technology so that Zimbabwe will know how we can use it. If we continue arguing over things that are so open, it is not worth it. I thank you.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:  Thank you Madam Speaker.  I am heartened by the fact that from both sides of the House, the interest is to have cooperation between Belarus and Zimbabwe.  There is nothing wrong with cooperation but the clamour that I come with is for us to have a fair deal.  We do not want to be handed the short end of the stick.  Can we trade with Belarus without a BIPPA?  Yes.  Do we really need a BIPPA at this juncture where the trade is skewed toward Belarus?  Evidently, we have become a country where we sit with two risks.  The first one is, we could be a dumping ground for Belarus.  The second one is that they will come and extract the resources that we have been endowed with at very little recourse and have very little  to take home with us.  We do not want them to give us fertilizers.  We want to resuscitate Sable Chemicals.  If they are coming to collaborate with Sable Chemicals so that we have local fertilizer, I would support fully the BIPPA.  Are they coming to give us tractors to allow the old Dulys to manufacture tractors? Both sides would accept such a Bilateral Agreement.  Madam Speaker, there is no one holding a gun to us as Parliament to rush into a deal that gives us the short end of the stick. Fifty years later when our children will ask, would this be one of the deals that would help Zimbabwe to be a better place?  This is my question Madam Speaker. 

I appeal to the conscience of Members on both sides of the House as we are putting pen to paper to ratify this Agreement; what are we doing to this country?  Is it in line with making ourselves industrialised or a better people?  With what has been presented both by the Portfolio Committee and the Minister, I am not at home to say this is what we will achieve with the relationship.  The history that Hon. Mushoriwa gave makes us very reticent or very doubtful of the fruits of what the BIPPA seeks to achieve.  It is my considered view that with the advice from Zim-Trade and experts, we should look at this Bill without wanting to appease anyone other than the citizens of this country.  It is my submission that if we are worthy of our salt as this Parliament, we must think twice, measure twice and cut once.  So, I submit.

*HON. MALINGANISO:  Thank you Madam Speaker.  I had lost all hope because you were not picking me to debate.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Malinganiso, please may you withdraw your statement.

HON. MALINGANISO:  I withdraw Madam Speaker.  As alluded to by several Hon. Members seeking to disregard the Agreement before the House, especially housed in Vision 2030 and the backbones which are agriculture and mining while our current situation caused by the illegal sanctions imposed upon us does not allow us to bring in the tools of trade and production.  This Agreement seeks to bring in those crucial tools of trade.  It would be amiss of us to then seek to establish that national interests are not being promoted when we have about 60% of our youths unemployed.  Productivity and beneficiation will attract these youths and create the much-needed jobs.  What this Agreement seeks to do is to attract Foreign Direct Investment that we have not been getting for quite a long time.

Madam Speaker, the idea of a trade deficit in there is no parity or equality does not suffice because the whole objective of trade is to promote national interest and our national interest is productivity towards an Upper Middle-Income Society by 2030.  I liked the scenario that was proffered by Hon. Mandiwanzira.  You do not argue that you will sign the marriage agreement only when this woman has given birth to my three children.  You get into the marriage and then start living it.  You do not start by demonising before you live it. 

In my respectful view, the idea of guarantees seeks to protect all would-be business, be it in Zimbabwe or in Belarus, be they Belarusians or Zimbabweans.  Our current economic situation caused by sanctions is characterised by some as not conducive for business and anyone who would want to bring their money would need guarantees and protection.  So, this Agreement seeks to establish that and we are not currently getting loans from IMF or the World Bank as other countries are doing.  From the beginning, Belarus gave us the loans and I do not know what would be wrong in us having an agreement of doing business with them.  A lot of things that I would have wanted to say have already been alluded to by those Hon. Members from my side of the House.  So, it is only prudent that we support the Agreement in question and promote the business.  I thank you.

HON. KAITANO:   Thank you very much Madam Speaker.  I think as Zimbabweans and precisely as Parliament, we need to appreciate the reasons why countries trade.  If we appreciate that, it will help us to argue correctly and inform the citizens of this country on the correct position of these kinds of agreements that are entered into between countries.  It is not every nation that you trade with as a country and it is not in all scenarios that you always have a trade surplus.  It is not always the case that if you trade you have to get into a surplus because the mere fact that you are in a surplus means your trading partner is in a deficit. The USA, when it trades with other countries is in deficit, whether it is a trade deficit and sometimes USA does business even with a budget deficit of trillions of US dollars.  So, being in the negative cannot be the reason why we cannot sign a bilateral agreement with any country. A number of Hon. Members from this end have categorically and unequivocally stated the most important matters when it comes to a bilateral agreement. For me, what is very interesting is that when we trade with other countries, even if we are in a deficit, the fact that we have an array of products and services to either export or import is an important matter for consideration when we are entering into a trade agreement with other countries.

Most importantly and it is a point that has been repeatedly said by Hon. Members, transfer of skills is very critical. In as much as, yes, I agree, they can come in and join our old companies that are no longer operating but technology has since changed. The technology that was used 20, 30 years ago is no longer the same. So, if the Belarusians still want to come to Zimbabwe and establish assemblies for the tractors and other types of equipment, that in itself is a reason for us to trade with them.

It is my submission Madam Speaker Ma'am, that this bilateral agreement with Belarus is very critical for the growth of this economy. I have read many people and scholars alike, they talk about foreign direct investment and that this country requires foreign direct investment. Surely, these people in Belarus are a critical element in encouraging foreign direct investment in this country and we do business with friendly nations. We cannot go to countries that are not friendly. However, our President, Dr. E. D. Mnangagwa has stated that Zimbabwe is a friend to all and an enemy to none. So, every country in this world, Zimbabwe as a country is amenable to doing business with it.

 For me, it is an anathema to say that the reason why Belarusians want protection of their investment is because there is something wrong with us. Every deal is protected. Whether it is bilateral between countries or it is between individuals or between companies, every deal has to have some security in it. Indeed, we need to support this bilateral agreement with the Belarusians. That is my submission Madam Speaker Ma'am.

HON. MUROMBEDZI: Thank you so much Madam Speaker for allowing me to add my voice. As I rise to debate this, I am doing so with great caution and firm conviction against the blind ratification of the BIPPA (Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement) between Zimbabwe and Belarus. While I acknowledge the rhetoric strategic partnerships and technology transfer, we must resist the temptation to celebrate every treaty wrapped in diplomatic packaging without thoroughly scrutinising its implications for our sovereignty, economy and our people. Madam Speaker, this is not merely an agreement on investment. It is a document that potentially grants disproportionate power to foreign capital with little accountability to the Zimbabwean public.  I am concerned about Article 14 on the compensation of losses. Why are we exposing Zimbabwe to legal and financial liabilities for occurrences beyond our control such as natural disasters or civil unrest? This provision as the Committee rightly notes, is inconsistent with international best practice. Investors are now to be compensated even during the force majeure. This opens a legal trapdoor which we may never afford to close.

Secondly, Article 16 on the transfer of funds is worryingly broad. It lacks safeguards against capital flight and does not reflect the protections already embedded in the ZIDA Act. Why should this agreement override our domestic laws and allow the repatriation of funds without clear limits or oversight? Have we not learned from previous experiences where companies externalised millions while our economy bled? The Century Report and the Smoke and Mirrors Report taught us about all that was happening.

Thirdly, Madam Speaker, is the inclusion of investor State dispute settlement mechanisms, ISDS, through the controversial ICSID tribunal is reckless. Zimbabwe has been punished before through this system and notably it was highlighted in the report in the Von Pezold and Fennel Cotter cases resulting in devastating financial consequences for the State. Are we walking into the same fire again with our eyes open? Furthermore, while we appreciate the environmental clauses in Article 11, the agreement is silent on human rights, labour standards and corporate social responsibility. These omissions are not minor Madam Speaker. There are gaping holes in an edge where sustainability is no longer optional but essential. Why are we not holding the Belarusian investors to the same ethical standards that we expect from our own? BIPPAs should be mutual and not suicidal. We must avoid being so desperate for foreign capital that we sell the country short.

This Parliament must not become a rubber stamp for executive agreements lacking constitutional alignment and public protection. Madam Speaker, I therefore call upon this House to defer the approval of this agreement until the troubling provisions Article 14, 16 and ISDS are revised, and insert binding clauses on human rights, environmental accountability and corporate responsibility. Demand public transparency on the sectors targeted for investments to guard against elite capture and opaque mining concessions. Madam Speaker, my question to the Hon. Minister is, are the Belarusian investors going to partner Zimbabweans in their investments? If so, what is the policy framework that has been set?

In conclusion, to be pro-investment does not mean being anti-sovereignty. To be open for business must never mean being open for exploitation. Zimbabwe must be wise, not just willing. Point of order, Madam Speaker.

HON. MUDUMI: On a point of order, my colleague on the other side failed to understand that sometimes politics informs relations between the two countries. When they mention exploitation, et cetera, we are a notable example Madam Speaker. - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections] –

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order. Order! Can we have order? Can we have order in the House? Can we have order Hon. Mudumi? Order! Can we have order in the House? The Hon. Member had concluded her debate. Your point of order is a bit delayed. Allow me to recognise the last Hon. Member to take the floor and that will be Hon. Sapukwanya.

HON. S. SAKUPWANYA:  Thank you Madam Speaker.  Firstly, I would like to thank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for bringing together this BIPPA agreement which I fully support.  Madam Speaker, it is important to note that as we discuss these matters the first thing that must come to mind is national interest and national interest is guided in Zimbabwe by Vision 2030 for us to become an upper middle-income society.  The backbone for this is agriculture and mining.

Madam Speaker, when we talk about agriculture in its sense, we know that Zimbabwe was hit by illegal sanctions.  When illegal sanctions hit Zimbabwe, they targeted our banks.  AFC Bank which used to promote the farmers, their ability to obtain machinery for them to be productive and that resulted in us losing in terms of our yields of production, be it tobacco or maize.  Today, we talk about records in tobacco farming.  We talk about records in maize farming.   Where do we think those records came from? They came from production.  How was that production done?  Through machinery.  Madam Speaker, in this sense it has to be noted that when we talk about equipment coming into our country for productivity, when we are talking about tractors, they are not the end.  They are a means to an end.  So when someone says that you are importing tractors, you are getting tractors, we are not saying that tractors are a bad thing. We must look at the results of what those tractors have produced and as a result, we have records in tobacco and maize.  So it boggles the mind that one would criticise and say that we do not want tractors when they are the ones that result in us having records in tobacco, wis a major foreign currency earner in Zimbabwe.

Madam Speaker, if I were to look at the arrangement in the country that we talk about, Belarus, was mentioned before that it is difficult for Zimbabwe to access loans across the world, IMF, World Bank and others because of the fact that we were hit by these illegal sanctions but here we have a country which is extending a hand to say we will supply.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  On a point of order Madam Speaker.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Hon. Sakupwanya, please take your seat.  Hon. Hlatywayo, what is your point of order?

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Thank you very much Madam Speaker.  Madam Speaker, the Hon. Member must not lie to this House.  The reason why we cannot access – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.]-

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order! Can we have order? HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  The reason why...

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Can we have order Hon. Hlatywayo? 

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  But I have not said my point of order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Can you please take your seat? Can we have order?  Hon. Hlatywayo, it is wrong for you to say an Hon. Member is lying before you even listen to what he is debating.  Please, can you give him the opportunity to debate?  Switch off your microphone.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Madam Speaker, you did not give me an opportunity...

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order Hon. Hlatywayo!

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  I did not even say my point of order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order Hon. Hlatywayo?  I had to respond to your point of order because...

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  But you have to wait for me to finish before you rule.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order Hon. Hlatywayo!  Please, can you take your seat?  I had to interject because you had accused the Hon. Member of lying.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Because he is lying – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] –

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Order!  Can we have order?  If you are going to challenge my ruling, I will ask you to leave the House.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  But Madam Speaker, he is speaking to me, I have to respond.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Hon. Hlatywayo, please can you take your seat?

HON. S. SAKUPWANYA:  Thank you Madam Speaker for protecting me.  Madam Speaker, I think it is prudent that before someone throws accusations, they must read into the reports that we get from the Minister of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Resettlement when they say that we had record-breaking tobacco seasons, first of its kind in our country by black farmers who were able to achieve that through these said machineries that were acquired by the President.

So, Madam Speaker, as I continue, it is important that when we look at the aspect of trade, it is not feasible nor is it possible for us to expect Zimbabwe to have trade surpluses with every country.  The aspect that must be looked at instead is what comprises what we are importing.  Are we importing a finality or are we importing a means to an end?  Our arrangement with Belarus, as has been championed by His Visionary Excellency, Comrade Dr. E. D. Mnangagwa, is that of importing what we cannot produce ourselves.  The reality is because of sanctions, our ability to produce and manufacture tractors has been wiped away.  Our ability to be able to manufacture has been wiped away because of these sanctions that affected some of our manufacturing companies, including but not limited to some like the Zimbabwe Defence Industries which manufactured back in the day.

These things, Madam Speaker, is what we then look at to say when we are looking at a trade surplus or deficit, what is it that we are bringing in and what then is the extended benefit of what we have brought in?  I have given an example in that sense of agriculture.

If we are to further scrutinise in terms of these said machinery, Madam Speaker, it is common cause that Belarus is not the only country that manufactures tractors and they are not the only ones sold in Zimbabwe but if we were to even look at the pricing itself, the pricing is competitive enough against the traditional Case tractors and the traditional John Deere tractors from European countries.  That in itself should tell you that there is no sense of exploitation. What is more is the fact that the companies from Belarus, when they bring in the tractors and it goes to the young people or those who are farming, they have agreed in the sense that they will bring more skills and that skills will be transferred to the local farmers.  In a sense saying that where we are going is tractor assembly, this is the beginning.  You do not start from 100Ks an hour.  You start slowly and you build up towards the aspect which we are looking at assembly and finally tractor manufacture in Zimbabwe.  

So Madam Speaker, in our baby steps, this agreement is a step in the right direction to ensure that our farmers are well catered for, to ensure that Zimbabwe, in terms of agriculture, is well supported and is sustained.  I must also say Madam Speaker that as we look at our relations, yes Zimbabwe is a friend to all and enemy to none but the reality is there are those who stood with us through our toughest and darkest moments.  Sometimes Madam Speaker, it is important to note that when we have this agreement, actually my feeling is this agreement should have been done years ago, in recognition of the support we have had from such countries constantly through our toughest periods, where even some of us in our own country wanted to see the worst of Zimbabwe but yet Zimbabwe is still prevailing.

When we talk about these statistics, when we talk about our ability to farm, when we go out there and see a person with black skin farming properly with machinery, something that no African country has achieved, you will see some of us saying it is wrong because they are used to seeing the white person doing that but when Zimbabwe is doing it, all of a sudden it is a problem. Madam Speaker, we must note that all those who give us that capacity to be able to farm for ourselves, we cannot turn a blind eye to that.  It is not blind to say that we want to have an agreement with a country that has stuck with us.

Today if you go to the Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Resettlement mechanisation department in Hatcliffe, the tractors are there on display.  It is not false, it is not on paper, it is not smoke and mirrors.  It is reality and what we want is further agreement so that more skills transfer can be done.  If there is a possibility of opening a manufacturing plant in Zimbabwe, then let it be but it has to start from an aspect of an agreement first.  That protection not only protects them but it protects us.

The question we must ask in terms of national interest is, what is our benefit in terms of this arrangement?  Our arrangement over the years with Belarus has given the example to say without this arrangement we would have no tractors to talk about, we would have no record of tobacco production to talk about, we would not be able to feed ourselves as a nation, be it in wheat, be it in maize but because of our arrangement with them we are the bigger beneficiaries of these arrangements.  It is not like Zimbabwe is the only country they can trade with but our arrangement with them, some of which includes loan facilities, is such that we stand to benefit a lot from having that partnership and Madam Speaker, I commend the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Trade for standing strong in finding a way in which we can make Zimbabwe marketable.  We can make Zimbabwe the destination for investment.  We can make Zimbabwe the place within which we are given tools to promote ourselves and to be able to grow our country towards Vision 2030.  With that Madam Speaker, I would like to say thank you for the opportunity raised.

THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND INTERNATIONAL TRADE (HON. CHIKOMO): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. Before I make my comments, I would like to really thank all the Hon. Members who gave a very great thorough debate, which is very insightful from both sides of the House. Allow me to say Madam Speaker, in response to some of the questions that were raised during the debate, we are fundamentally guided by the Constitution.

To begin with, allow me to state that we are guided by Section 12 (1) of the Constitution of Zimbabwe, which sets out the foreign policy principles and general outlays in our interaction with other countries, particularly international countries. First, what is very key to mention, is that we are based on the principles of the promotion and protection of the national interest of Zimbabwe. Allow me to state that on this particular matter, the key questions to ask are; do we have an advantage as a country? Number two, is it aligning with Zimbabwe's objectives? Number three, what are the potential benefits that come with this particular memorandum? Madam Speaker, I am glad to state that this particular memorandum is a protection to all of us, both Belarus and Zimbabwe.

Madam Speaker, allow me to state that, of course, a balance of trade is expected when we trade, but it is inherently not always the case. Allow me to state that what is key when we trade with our foreign nationals is to look into the comparative advantage. Madam Speaker, do we have a comparative advantage between our partners? Countries can specialise, of course, in production and exporting goods where they have a comparative advantage and when I look into this documentation, I realise that we do have a comparative advantage of our mining area, the agriculture side, the energy side. I am proud to say that we speak of an upper middle-income class, value addition, industrialisation, sanctions and we speak of Zimbabwe as open for business. I was just thinking Madam Speaker, when such opportunity arises, it is an opportunity for all of us to grab with both hands and there is a need for clarion, of course as the other Members were raising different perspectives on how important is this to us.

Allow me to state, Madam Speaker, that it would be remiss of me not to point out the immense benefits for Zimbabwe resulting from the BIPPA with Belarus. I understand that there will be increased investor confidence if we sign this particular memorandum. One of the main goals of a BIPPA is to create a more secure and predictable investment climate. By signing this BIPPA document with Belarus Madam Speaker, allow me to state that Zimbabwe sends a clear signal to international investors that the country is committed to protecting foreign investments. Number two, Madam Speaker, there is also diversification of investment sources. The BIPPA opens up new channels of investment from Belarus and potentially from other countries that may be encouraged by this agreement and of course, the technological transfer.

When I am looking into this particular memorandum of understanding, I look at the access to Belarusian technology and the expertise that they have and Belarus has expertise in various sectors, particularly in areas of industry, technology, machinery and even renewable energy. Through this BIPPA, Madam Speaker, Zimbabwe can attract Belarusian companies with advanced technology. One of the Hon. Members highlighted that BIPPA is not suicidal. Of course, it is not. There is reciprocity where it is a give and take. It is a win-win situation and like I said, one of the other Hon. Members has highlighted that of course it is not always balanced. Nevertheless, with the projection and how we are looking into the investment protection, how we are enhancing the promotion of Vision 2030, the promotion of production and exports, the knowledge transfer and the innovation, I am delighted to clearly state that this is not a suicidal case. It is very important for us to consider this.

Allow me also, Madam Speaker, to state that this particular memorandum of understanding helped us to create jobs, the creation of jobs through the foreign investments, where I see that in agriculture,  mining, infrastructure and manufacturing, there could be a lead of significant job creation in this particular country. The growth of these industries can create new employment opportunities. It can even reduce employment and increase household incomes.

Allow me to also add Madam Speaker, that infrastructure development, through the BIPPA, Belarus can provide capital and expertise for developing Zimbabwe's infrastructure, including projects related to roads, railways, energy production and water management.

To add on to this, of course, it strengthens our bilateral ties and relations and through the strengthening of the economic and diplomatic relations between Zimbabwe and Belarus, we enhance mutual trust and cooperation, creating opportunity, joint ventures. So, like I said earlier, it is not only one country that is benefiting. It is all of us. Expanding trade relations. The BIPPA also encourages trade between the countries by enhancing ties. I re-emphasised this earlier and allow me to state that Belarusian companies might look for Zimbabwe for raw materials, minerals, agriculture products, which Zimbabwe can benefit from technology and manufactured goods from Belarus.

Lastly, as I conclude Madam Speaker, allow me to state that it is very key for us to look into the importance of how this particular memorandum will assist Zimbabwe to get into that upper middle-income country by 2030. Allow me to also mention the green investment. Madam Speaker, what Belarus brings to the table is more than tractors. Belarus has significant expertise, as I said earlier, in renewable energy, including solar, wind and hydropower. This documentation, as we are about to sign it, could provide encouragement in these particular areas, which are essential for a long-term development. So, to also respond to the other Hon. Member through you Madam Speaker, this is not a short-term development. It is a long-term development. We hope that the august House will look into this with more positivity as it is important to us. I thank you Madam Speaker.

Motion put and agreed to.

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER

DIPLOMATIC TRAINING WORKSHOP

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: I have the following announcement. I wish to inform the House that the Diplomatic Training Workshop which was scheduled for 15^th to 19^th May 2025 at Kadoma Hotel and Conference Centre has been postponed indefinitely. Participants will be advised on the new dates and venue once confirmed.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

HON. KAMBUZUMA: I move that we revert to Order of the Day Number 1.

HON. C. MOYO: I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

CONSIDERATION STAGE

PERSONS WITH DISABILTIES BILL [H. B. 2A, 2023]

Amendments to the Long Title, New Preamble, Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 17, 44, 48, 51, 54, 56, 57 and the new Clause inserted after Clause 57…

HON. MUSHORIWA: Madam Speaker, this Bill is fundamental. You will recall that during the Committee Stage, there were certain amendments that were agreed and not agreed. I wanted to raise two fundamental issues. The first thing is actually the integrity of this Parliament and also the process of making laws in this country. When this Bill was gazetted and the Portfolio Committee on Public Service went out, they went because it said the Commission, the Bill proposed to have a commission. You will note that the Minister during the Committee Stage changed the whole game plan to make sure that there is a board. The Third Reading of this Bill will be problematic given what has happened on the ground. The petition that we have seen from the Persons with Disabilities...

HON. TOGAREPI: Madam Speaker, point of order.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order Hon. Mushoriwa!

HON. TOGAREPI: Madam Speaker, I think we have a due process that we follow when we are making laws. We may not want to go back to what we have already done in order to satisfy other information or other people that we represent who are somewhere whom we do not know. We follow how we have been doing and we have been following this Bill. For the Hon. Member to tell us about a petition that has nothing to do with the debate that we had here in progressing with our Bill, I think it is misplaced. I think we are redoing and I do not think it is necessary for us.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Thank you Government Chief Whip. Yes, you are correct. There was a Committee Stage where we had a robust debate on all these clauses and I want to remind Hon. Mushoriwa that this is a formal adoption of the clauses. The time for debate is not now and I therefore request you to take your seat.

HON. MUSHORIWA: Can I seek a point of clarification, Madam Speaker?

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: No! Order Hon. Mushoriwa. As I indicated, this is not time for debates which were supposed to be held and you raised these issues during the Committee Stage. Can we have order in the House? Order! May I remind you Hon. Member that the debate that I asked if there is any debate is around the adoption of the clauses?

HON. MUSHORIWA: That is the case Madam Speaker. The debate is still there.

THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER: Order Hon. Mushoriwa! I think you have heard me loud and clear. Order, please can you take your seat? Thank you.  I had put the long title, the new preamble and the clauses I indicated and new clause inserted after Clause 57.

Amendments to the Long Title, New Preamble, Clauses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 17, 44, 48, 51, 54, 56, 57 and the new Clause inserted after Clause 57, put and agreed to.

Bill, as amended, adopted.

         Third reading: With leave, forthwith.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Madam Speaker, I wish that this Bill under consideration be not read the Third Time.  Specifically, Madam Speaker, if we pass this Bill as the National Assembly, we will have actually made a gross error.  The first one is the fact that it will be for the first time that we did public hearings of a Disability Commission and all stakeholders across the country participated thinking that we were talking of the Disability Commission …

         THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER (HON. TSITSI ZHOU):  Order, order Hon. Mushoriwa! You are taking the House back, therefore I request you to sit down – [HON. MUSHORIWA: We debated the other Bills in the same manner.] – Order, order Hon. Mushoriwa!  The debate should be about reading the Bill for the Third Time.  As I can see, you are taking us back and you want to take the entire House into the debate  - [HON. MUSHORIWA: With all due respect Madam Speaker, this is not the precedence that has been set in this august House] – Hon. Mushoriwa, please can you take your seat! 

THIRD READING

PERSONS WITH DISABILTIES BILL [H. B. 2A, 2023]

         THE DEPUTY MINISTER OF PUBLIC SERVICE AND SOCIAL WELFARE (HON. DINHA): Madam Speaker Sir, I now move that the Bill be now read the third time. 

         Motion put and agreed to.

         Bill read the third time.

MOTION

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

         HON. KAMBUZUMA:  I move that Orders of the Day Numbers 10 to 17 on today’s Order Paper, be stood over until Order of the Day Number 18 has been disposed of.

         HON. C. MOYO:  I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  I rise on a point of privilege Madam Speaker as per Standing Order No. 72 (d) as read with Order No. 73.  As a Member of Parliament, I need to formerly say that the procedure of the passage of Bills in this august House, especially the Third Reading of a Bill, we need clarification.   I want to put it so that the Hon. Speaker, when he comes - to simply say the precedence that has been set in this august House and other Parliaments where we share the same British system of Parliament, has it now been changed?  I think it is crucial and I want this one to be laid before the Hon. Speaker.  I believe that as a Member of Parliament, my rights have been infringed upon and I think this is not right.  I thank you. 

         THE TEMPORARY SPEAKER:  Well noted Hon. Mushoriwa.

MOTION

REPORT OF THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON BUDGET FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PROMOTION ON THE PETITION RECEIVED FROM ZISCO STEEL PENSIONERS

         HON. DR. MUTODI:  I move the motion standing in my name  That this House considers and adopts the report of the Portfolio Committee on Budget Finance and Investment Promotion on the petition received from ZISCO Steel Pensioners.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  I second.

HON. DR.  MUTODI: Thank you Madam Speaker. Section 149 of the Constitution, read together with Standing Order Number 195, provides the citizens and permanent residents of Zimbabwe the right to petition Parliament to consider any matter within its authority relating to its legislative, oversight and representative functions. In line with that provision, Parliament received a petition from ZISCO Steel Pensioners on the 4^th of March 2024 whereby the petitioners are imploring Parliament to exercise its oversight role on the Executive so that ZISCO Steel pensioners are paid fairly with “value retention” without any form of prejudice. The petition was referred to the Portfolio Committee on Budget, Finance and Investment Promotion. Upon receipt of the petition, the Committee conducted an inquiry into the issues and came up with this report for consideration by the august House.

Petition prayer, the petitioner beseeches Parliament to exercise its oversight role in examining the following; i. Non-payment of benefits to ZISCO Steel pensioners; ii.  To examine the exact value of debt taken over by the Government of Zimbabwe through the Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act, 2018; Disbursement of pension funds with value preservation.

3. Objectives of the inquiry-:

 The primary aim of the investigation was to review the request made by the petitioners and make recommendations for the desired relief.

4. Methodology

The Committee received submissions from the following stakeholders to understand the bone of contention between Zisco Steel Management and its employees; i. Zisco Steel Pensioners on 13 June 2024; ii. Zisco Steel Management on 13 June 2024; First Mutual Life (FML) on 7 June 2024; Zimbabwe Pensions and Insurance Rights Trust (ZIMPIRT) on 6 June 2024; Insurance and Pension Commission (IPEC) on 20 June 2024; and Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion on 8 July 2024. The Committee deliberated on the evidence submitted and came up with its key findings and recommendations that the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion must urgently address.

5. Committee’s Findings

5.1. Background of the Pension Fund ZISCO Steel pension Fund commenced in 1976 and is registered in terms of Section 5 of the Pension and Provident Funds Act, and administered by First Mutual Life Assurance (FML). The ZISCO Steel Pension Fund is a Defined Benefit Scheme where benefits are based on a predetermined formula at the point of joining the fund. The ZISCO Steel Pension Scheme covered all employees including those in their seventies, while some are now deceased or on deathbed and yet have worked all their life for ZISCO Steel. Its assets are registered in the name of FML Company through some pooled investment arrangements.

5.2 The Pension Scheme Arrangement, ZISCO STEEL stopped operations in 2008 due to cash flow challenges which affected remittances of pension contributions to First Mutual Life between 2009 and 2016. It last remitted contributions to the ZISCO Steel Pension Fund in 2007 but continued to deduct pension contributions from members’ salaries until 2016. Most pensioners who left employment from 2009 to the retrenchment date of 31 August 2016 had not been receiving any pay-out from the pension fund. The Pension Fund has a total of 5,956 members as of March 2024. All pensioners who retired before 2009 were getting a flat USD25 which never increased despite changes in economic environment.

5.3 The Assumption of ZISCO Steel Debt by Government. The Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act was enacted in 2018 with a view to address the settlement of specific liabilities accrued by the Zimbabwe Iron and Steel Company. The actuarial assessments conducted in 2016 projected ZISCO Steel’s liability to amount to US$39 145,930, with a total of 6 194 pensioners. The government assumed a total debt of US$39 145 930 in accordance with the 2016 Actuarial valuation report. However, petitioners argued that the 2016 Actuarial Valuation was flawed. IPEC, ZISCO Management and Pensioners agreed to the fact that the 2016 Actuarial Valuation was flawed. The parties noted that the Government was supposed to inject USD34.4 million plus USD30.6 million which was supposed to be amortised, taking the total funding gap to USD65.1million. The submission points out that the Debt Assumption Bill was supposed to inject US$65 million as of 2016.

5.4 Macroeconomic issues: In 2019, Statutory Instrument 33 of 2019, “Presidential Powers (Temporary Measures) (Amendment of Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Act and Issue of Real Time Gross Settlement Electronic Dollars (RTGS Dollars)) Regulations” was gazetted. The S.I was gazetted and from the effective date onward, the amounts were converted to ZWL at a one-to-one rate to the United States dollar. That meant the USD39.1 million debt was converted to ZWL39.1million. As a result, in November 2021, the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion disbursed a total of ZWL$39,145,930, the principal amount without interest, to First Mutual Life (FML) at a 1:1 ratio. This amount encompassed USD34.5 million for the ZISCO Steel Pension Fund, USD2.2 million for Buchwa Iron Mining Company (BIMCO), and US$2.5 million for Lancashire Steel Pension. On the date of payment, the exchange rate had shifted to USD1:90. In actuality, the payment amounted to USD434 954.80, resulting in an outstanding balance of USD38.7 million in real terms. The introduction of SI 33 of 2019 eroded the value of the pension benefits. Due to this exchange rate movement, ZISCO Steel pensioners are pleading for payment of their pensions with fairness and value retention. Further, since 2009, the pensioners were contributing pension premiums in USD but due to the S.I. 33 of 2019, payment of pensions were to be paid as ZWL in terms of the law. April 2009, Member after SI 33 of 2019 - USD25/ZWL25, Spouse/Widow - USD10/ZWL10, Child - USD5/ZWL5

5.5 According to the Pensions and Provident Funds Act, ‘pension beneficiaries should receive their pension pay-outs within 90 days from the date of employment termination’. Petitioners argue that the SI 33 of 2019 was applied in retrospect because if the pension funds were paid in accordance with the Pensions and Provident Fund Act, the ZISCO Steel pensioners were supposed to have been receiving their pension pay-out by 30 November 2016. Therefore, ZISCO Steel pensioners argue that the funds disbursed by the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion were supposed to remain in the USD currency given that contributions were made in the same currency and prior to S.I. 33 of February 2019.

6. Responses from Ministry and Regulators.

 6.1 Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion, it was noted that although the employee’s pensions were due in 2016, the obligation by Government to settle the pensions was after the enactment of Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act in 2018. The Ministry, through the Zimbabwe Public Debt Management Office, received information on ZISCO Steel from FML (actuarial valuation report) on 25^th  of October 2020. The Ministry informed the Committee that the payment was guided by SI 33 of 2019. The ministry confirmed that ZWL39.1million was paid at a rate of 1:1 despite the official rate having moved to 1:90. This suggests that the pensioners possibly have a legal case of prejudice in terms of value retention since they were paid on a 1:1 basis.

6.2 Submissions from First Mutual Life FML confirmed that the bone of contention was that some contributions were made in USD during the multicurrency regime and the pensioners argue that they should also be paid their pension payout in USD. FML acknowledges prejudice suffered by the pension scheme members due to SI 33 of 2019. FML confirmed that they received the payment of ZWL39.1million and proceeded to invest this amount in the Guaranteed Fund in order to preserve value and the portfolio value.

6.3. Submissions from Zimbabwe Insurance and Pension Rights Trust (ZIMPIRT). Submissions from ZIMPIRT pointed to the same direction that ZISCO pensioners have not been paid their lawful pension benefits despite the Government having assumed the ZISCO Steel debts.

6.4. Submissions from Insurance and Pension Commission (IPEC). The Committee found that IPEC is in constant communication with the pensioners and their concern mainly relates to the amount of debt assumed by the Government at USD39.1 million against the 2018 actuarial valuation of USD61.5 million. IPEC’s assessment of the rate was that the pensioners have a legal case based on the changes the economy has experienced. Further, several governance issues were raised by IPEC on FML, which called for a forensic audit on its operations. A forensic investigation of FML concluded in February 2023 revealed poor governance practices by FML which have an impact on its ability to meet claims such as one raised by petitioners. Other governance issues raised include violation of asset separation rules outlined in Section 29 of the Insurance Act and Section 16 of the Pension and Provident Funds Act. Other issues raised in the report include Management's failure to adjust to economic conditions.

7. Committee’s Observations

The Committee made the following observations;

2019. a) Workers - That Zimbabwean pensioners in general and ZISCO Steel Pensioners in particular have lost value in 2008 during the multi-currency regime and when the country moved from USD to the local currency (ZWL) in February 2019.
2020. b) That the ZISCO Steel pensioners suffered great prejudice by contributing in USD (2009 - 2016), yet government assumed the debt and paid in local currency in accordance with the Exchange Control Act.
2021. c) ZISCO Management - That ZISCO Steel in spite of deducting pension contributions (2009-2016), for the pensioners as provided for by the Pension and Provident Funds Act, failed to remit pension contributions to FML
2022. d) Trustees failed in their oversight function as a trustee of the pension fund. They were complicit in that the employer was not remitting to the pension house under their watch.
2023. e) That the board of trustees was not properly constituted. It was composed of former ZISCO employees who were pensioned at the company’s closure.
2024. f) First Mutual Life - There was poor governance in FML which impacted all pension funds including ZISCO pension fund
2025. g) FML did not implement the IPEC corrective orders to comply with Section 29 of the Insurance Act and Section 16 of the Pension and Provident Fund Act which obligates insurance companies engaged in pension and provident fund business to maintain a separate fund called "The Pensions Fund" to cover liabilities. They were supposed to keep separate accounts for this business's income and expenses.
2026. h) FML invested in long-term income generating activities implying that FML should be generating income in both USD and ZiG considering that the economy operates a multi-currency regime. This implies that the pension pay-out should ideally be a mixture of both USD and ZiG as informed by the ratio of USD to ZiG revenue generated by the company on a monthly basis.
2027. i) The IPEC's regulatory structure was found wanting and ineffective from 2009 to 2017. It failed in its duty to monitor and protect pensioners, allowing the loss of value for their pensions. Moreover, it did not ensure the preservation of contributions made in USD neglecting to guarantee payment or disbursement after conversion from USD to ZWL.
2028. j) Ministry of Finance,Economic Development and Investment Promotion - That the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion paid the US$39.1 million in 2021 using a rate of 1:1 in accordance with the law. However, the interbank rate had moved to 1: ZWL90 in 2021.
2029. k) The Ministry could only settle the pension fund after the enactment of Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act, 2018 despite pension’s funds having been due in 2016.
2030. l) The Ministry has put in place Statutory Instrument 162 of 2023, Pensions and Provident Funds which seeks to compensate for the Loss of Pre-2009 Value of Pension Benefits to actualise the Justice Smith Report’s recommendations of March 2017. However, the Statutory Instrument is gathering dust in terms of actual implementation.
2031. m) General Observations - That COVID-19 pandemic issue of reconciliation of figures and lists cannot be cited as justification for non-payment.
2032. n) The Government had assumed 2016 actuarial valuation debt of USD39 million, but the 2018 actuarial valuation revealed a total debt of US$61.5 million, indicating a shortfall of USD22.5 million. Pensioners, FML, IPEC, and ZISCO Steel management have reached an agreement on the USD61.5 million.
2033. o) The 2018 Actuarial report came after Parliament had passed of the Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act.
2034. Committee’s Recommendations

The Committee, therefore, recommends that:

1. a) The Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion and IPEC should actualise the implementation of Statutory Instrument 162 of 2023 by December 2025;
2. b) Given the fact that the Ministry of Finance released ZWL39.2million when the rate was 1:90, it means that the Ministry of Finance owes US$38.7million which should be paid to the pensioners at the prevailing rate by 31 March 2025;
3. c) Parliament and the Ministry of Finance should amend the Zimbabwe Iron and Steel (Debt Assumption) Act [5] of 2018 to take into account the findings of the 2018 Actuarial Valuation Report, by 31 March 2025;
4. d) That the Ministry of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion must immediately actualise the implementation of the Justice Smith Report guided by SI 162 of 2023 with respect to the 2008 occurrences, SI 133 of February 2019 and occurrences in the macro-economic environment;
5. e) IPEC as a regulator, should act against all its omissions and commissions as well as strengthen the commission as a regulator by 31 March 2025.
6. Conclusion

ZISCO Steel pensioners, and if not all pensioners in the various sector of the economy, have suffered prejudice in the form of loss of value upon retirement. This loss of value has mainly been attributed by the currency reforms undertaken in 2009 and 2019 as one of the measures to stabilise the economy. However, the pensioners have cried foul for receiving pension pay-outs that have not been commensurate with the national duty performed, hence the call to have the pensions be awarded with fairness and value retention. Therefore, the Committee fully acknowledges the Justice Smith Commission of Inquiries and calls for the implementation of the recommendation in line with SI 162 of 2023 to address the current challenges being faced the ZISCO Steel pensioners and other pensioners in general within 90 days. I thank you.

         *HON. MUSHORIWA: Thank you Madam Speaker. I am standing here to support the Bill which was read by Hon. Dr. Mutodi in connection with the pensioners who used to work at ZISCO Steel. We all know the importance and how strong ZISCO Steel Company was. Also, we know the city called Red Cliff in the Midlands. It was a city which was dominated by workers from ZISCO Steel. What actually happened is that workers from ZISCO Steel worked very hard and ensured that ZISCO Steel was known in the spotlight.

Most of the houses that you see here in Zimbabwe were built using the steel which was extracted from ZISCO Steel. Simply because ZISCO Steel was not actually managed well to an extent whereby that company got broke up to the point when the Government discovered that there was quite a lot of funds which had been invested into that company, they had a lot of credits. Some of the credits included the wages and salaries for the workers. All the workers used to, whenever they received their salaries, they could receive their payslips written that there was a pension deduction. That pension was not channelled to the correct position called First Mutual.

Secondly, the workers from ZISCO Steel in 2008 and 2009 thereabout when we had our economic downfall, which included the local currency that we used,  the Zimbabwean dollar, when it was devaluated, it simply meant that ZISCO Steel workers and those other workers in this country, up until 2008, their money was actually eroded, which then led to those who had contributed to their pension losingThey had  trust in the pension to say whenever I retire, I will receive some payments.

You still remember our Minister of Finance in 2009 when there was an introduction of a multi-currency system, workers from ZISCO Steel and other workers on the same salary were contributing to the pension funds. They had deductions to say of these US dollars which you are earning, we are taking a certain percentage to channel towards your pension. All those funds were not channelled to First Mutual Life.

Most of the workers from ZISCO Steel are now old. Whenever you grow old, that is when you encounter different chronic illnesses, which include BP and now they do not have anywhere to access funds. They used to be paid USD25 US  and then they changed it to 25 Zimbabwean dollars before the ZiG. It simply meant 25 Zimbabwean dollars is  around close to 2 cents of current ZiG, which cannot even buy even a sweet.

The ZISCO Steel management is saying, that when the Government took those credits from ZISCO Steel, they did not cater for their pensions. Then the funds which they were entitled to which they could have paid to the workers should have been close to 70 million dollars and they were not given. Even if the ZISCO Steel Act which then took over the credit for ZISCO Steel was passed in 2016, you discover that there is no one who was paid and no one from ZISCO Steel got paid. The funds were released in 2021 after the Statutory Instrument 133 of 2019 was there, which then led to workers from ZISCO Steel and other pensioners here in Zimbabwe whoshould be benefiting from their pensions lost a lot of hope in their lives..

As we speak, we have workers who died. If you go to Red Cliff, you will discover that some of the houses where rich people used to stay and the type of life that they are surviving now is not that good. Our Government and we as legislators must work together. We have to unite, support and strengthen what was read here from the Committee of Budget. It simply said that the workers from ZISCO Steel who are on pension must receive their dues. The funds should actually be channelled from the Minister of Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion.

Firstly, they injected limited money at 1:1 but the rate has actually moved. So, they must ensure that they have to deposit funds using the same rate which we have. Simply to say, if it is 38 million USD, it has to be at 1:30 and be channelled towards those ZISCO Steel workers. Secondly, simply because after the actuarial evaluation on the pension for ZISCO Steel, people discovered that there was mismanagement and there is something close to 30 million USD. All those funds should actually be taken back and paid back to those workers of ZISCO Steel.

The Committee continued to say there was a Commission which was set aside, which we used to call the Justice Smith Commission in connection with these pensions. They came out with recommendations on what should be done. You will discover that what was said by this Commission, just a little bit of it was actualised.

We are simply saying the Government, may you kindly do it as fast as possible and ensure that the recommendation which was put in place should benefit those pensioners. You will discover this issue will never end in ZISCO Steel only. If you look closely to some of us who were once Members of this august House, you will discover that the payments which they are earning every month is not actually sufficient. It is simply because we need to adjust so that we go forward. The other issue is that as citizens of Zimbabwe, we must closely look into the elderly. For us to be here, to be standing right in this august House, for us to be happy, be it in which city, be it in Harare, Bulawayo, Kwekwe, Gweru, Masvingo or anywhere else, whenever you see all those buildings there, it is  the power and the energy which was put in place by our elderly, our parents. Let us avoid and ensure that we safeguard them. Let us avoid channelling them to have those different chronic illnesses. This is simply because these elderly are the ones who are now in charge of those who are using those drugs.  Those are the responsible persons who are taking care of those who are using drugs and other substances. I am kindly requesting for this document which was put forward by Hon. Mutodi.  Let us all take it and ensure that everything goes well.

Before I sit down Hon. Speaker, there is something in this Bill which we should actually say Justice Smith's Report should be done.

 

You know the company called First Mutual Life - it once paid pension funds for most of the companies even other insurances. They were actually given funds way back up until 2008. They were being paid, deducting funds from the pensioners. They used to contribute, they used to buy properties, buy houses and the like but when this mishap happened, they now started to pay people using those devalued funds and they now own all those buildings but those are the funds from the pensioners and all those people used to contribute towards their insurance. If you look into Justice Smith's Commission, it says those companies in pensions and insurance took a lot of funds from these workers. We should do a deep research and survey and ensure that those people should benefit from those companies because they benefited from funds which do not belong to them.

It is the funds which should be channelled to those people who are suffering. They must not take advantage of the poor.  I am kindly requesting Madam Speaker Ma’am, to say this august House should support this report from the Budget Committee in connection with the plea from those workers from ZISCO Steel. I thank you.

         HON. DR. MUTODI: I move that the debate do now adjourn.

         HON. C. MOYO: I second.

         Motion put and agreed to.

         Debate to resume: Wednesday, 14^th May, 2025.

On the motion of HON. KAMBUZUMA, seconded by HON. C. MOYO, the House adjourned at Twenty-One Minutes to Six o’clock p.m.